Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[adxwasere] 09/12/2021 20:25

@Johnswan193
"Michaels, out of all the regular posters on this BB I’m absolutely sure you must have the lowest IQ."

Actually your incorrect its me. Sorry

[scot126] 09/12/2021 19:59

No, Pinnacle Boy, 65% means that your post #20323 was factually incorrect.

For other consumers of Rabito79's analysis, his 65% risk is the midpoint of Bob Rosenthal's answer in the August webinar when he assessed the chance of development to be "60% to 70%".

[johnswan193] 09/12/2021 19:52

Scot, 65% COS suggests your statement is even more misleading than it was at 60%.

[scot126] 09/12/2021 19:32

Fact check for john "The Pinnacle" swan193, post #20323: Rabito79 is using a 65% chance of development success. His model accepts Bob Rosenthal's statement that PANR's existing data supports the understanding that the geological CoS is now 100%, ie. that threshold has been met.

Just as I thought, incapable. You'll never see a valuation model from Pinnacle Boy because he's incapable of constructing one. Readers would do well to note when challenged repeatedly on the fundamentals, Pinnacle Boy runs a mile. He's out of his depth. Fact.

[johnswan193] 09/12/2021 19:29

Michaels, out of all the regular posters on this BB I’m absolutely sure you must have the lowest IQ.

[michaelsadvfn] 09/12/2021 18:50

Will we see your valuation model in one of your future blogs swanny?

Don’t forget to post a link to it again.

[johnswan193] 09/12/2021 17:55

Using a model like Rabbits (I’ll call him that for now as don’t remember his name) and splitting it into 8 horizons. What is the fair value, the current market cap or the risked valuation (noting he’s using 60% COS on each zone)? Scot is referring to traditional fair value techniques so let’s use the risked valuation, plus it means we are making like for like comparison.

Now look at the total risked valuation and compare that against the unrisked valuation of the smallest horizon on success. Does that equate to a number >2x the current risked valuation? No, not even close. Is it even higher than the current risked valuation?

In fact, if you are applying a >50% COS then no horizon at all could have an unrisked valuation >2x it’s risked valuation. Basic maths and no need to even compare against the total risked valuation to prove the point.

Finally, look at the unrisked valuation of the smallest horizon. Is that even worth >2x the current market cap? And what about the risk that a horizon may prove commercial but at a lower recoverable rate than what is being used in the model?

And that is why Scot’s statement is typically misleading rubbish.

Over to you Scotty.

[ngms27] 09/12/2021 17:10

Agreed that's my opinion.

So Q1 interest is paid on 100% holding, Q2 interest is paid on 95% of original holding, Q3 90% of original holding thus reflecting those bonds no longer owned.

[dhb368] 09/12/2021 17:06

ngms, I get $5.775m interest payable on borrowing of $55m so 10.5%, but lets move on...

cezuan, I may be wrong but my understanding of an amortising bond is interest payable is reduced by amortisation payments.

[redhill9] 09/12/2021 16:59

johnswan193, scot126 has a point. You're happy to throw mud at other people's calculations of potential value but I don't recall you submitting any of your own?

[johnswan193] 09/12/2021 16:41

Ok, so you don't understand fair value in that case. Seriously, what a stupid statement to make.

[scot126] 09/12/2021 16:25

Doesn't work that way, Pinnacle Boy. It's about time you got into the long grass of the fundamentals. Nope, it's time for *you* to do some work or see your credibility, such as it is, erode even further.

Which is it, Pinnacle Boy? Incapable or too lazy?

[ngms27] 09/12/2021 16:19

dhb, I've done the sums with 5% amortisation and 4% interest paid quarterly and by my calculations which are a slight under approximation, CB's get 14.69% per bond in interest.

[bit coin] 09/12/2021 16:18

Good post - I'll bet we get positives from more than one horizon imho

[scot126] 09/12/2021 16:13

Dear All -

1) All us shareholders wanted loads of activity this coming Alaskan winter season, correct?

2) The company is now financed to *complete in full* the anticipated programme. Fact.

3) If *none* of the minimum of 8 intervals (and maximum of 11) being flow tested during the anticipated operational programme provides data proving commercial oil then, frankly, we'll have far more to worry about than how many shares the bond holder receives and at what price over the next 5 years.

4) On the other hand, if *just one* of the intervals being tested proves commercial oil then the fair value, using traditional O&G valuation techniques, will more than double the existing fair value at time of writing. At which point we won't be caring two hoots how the BoD elected to fund the winter programme, the main thing is that it happened. [PoS - have you spotted that we're yet to hear from Pinnacle Boy the horizon he has identified which, if flow tested successfully this winter, would *not* result in an upwards fair value adjustment of a minimum of $1200m, being double yesterday's mkt cap and equal to the house broker's current fair value? Doesn't do modelling, does he? Not capable or too lazy? I'm thinking incapable. He doesn't have the sector experience or front office training, you see. He's lazy too, of course. Prefers obsessing and sending dirty DMs as opposed to rebutting the article he himself posted on the thread yesterday. A twisted soul.]

5) It's simplistic, I know, but the BoD has just ensured the anticipated winter + spring programme will be going ahead. In terms of sheer *scale*, that was IMHO a far larger risk to the share price over the short to medium term than any cost associated with the CB. Once this news is digested and the flippers are gone it's then my turn to anticipate something. I *anticipate* US regional and national press together with the O&G sector press will pick up on the operations being conducted by wee AIM-listed PANR. In turn, that will attract the interest of "traditional" professional investors who are incredibly experienced at absorbing the implications of the risked/unrisked O&G valuation technique. Professional investors can plug their personal assumptions into the model and see what numbers are spat out. Either which way, I contend that a miniscule fraction of the addressable investor market is even aware of PANR and Theta West right now, today. This will not, IMO, be the case come late January.

6) Perhaps not a probability but certainly a possibility is that a farm in agreement is signed between now and late January. I think there is broad consensus on this forum that Canaccord is on the more conservative end of the NOMAD spectrum, agreed? If those negotiations were *not* ongoing you can be certain, repeat *certain*, the NOMAD would have used yesterday's news of a successful CB + equity raise to inform shareholders all negotiations had ceased. The opposite was the case. Therefore I stand by my observation that a farm out *could* be agreed between now and the end of January. The potential partners will know they will have to pay a very different (far, far higher) price if the data arrives from Talitha and Theta West confirming even one successful flow test never mind multiple successful flow tests. The external party/parties will be crunching the numbers right now, especially if they were quasi calling PANR's bluff. The bluff tactic, if indeed there was one, has been seen off and PANR will be going ahead with the winter programme with or without a partner.

[cezuan] 09/12/2021 16:10

@dhb I don't have time to look it up, but the amortization doesn't reduce the coupon payment, or?

[the count of monte_cristo] 09/12/2021 16:00

If you are into copper take a look at XTR, their Bushranger project could be the next Cadia-Ridgeway. It has a long, long way to run and they have an option to sell to Anglo American if they prove up 2mt of contained copper, which after todays RNS is looking more than likely....and some.

[dhb368] 09/12/2021 15:57

ngms #20291 , I believe your numbers are wrong.

'The 20% risk free is in the interest payments or when they convert'
The actual interest on the $55m over the period is approx $5.5m i.e. 10% of the borrowed amount. The interest is only due on the outstanding debt and therefor reduces over time.

The bondholders risk is if everything fails, they are better off than shareholders but probably still out of pocket. I doubt that they consider it risk free.

But yeah, normally 'Better than having equity'. I would love to be able to buy call options at 78p right now.

To me the terms, low coupon rate and repayment schedule, suggest to me that PANR had plenty of options re debt financing.

[michaelsadvfn] 09/12/2021 15:37

Non-trading Agreement: Bondholders agree not to sell Shares nor engage
in any short sale transactions in Shares during
any relevant calculation period

Ah fink tiz too doo wif dem VWAP fingies, non?

[probabilityofsuccess] 09/12/2021 15:36

🤣 nice one rabito