Pantheon Resources Share Discussion Threads

[johnswan193] 17/12/2021 15:18

POS - as stated, I'm just comfortable with a risked valuation of at least that level. The good news is that not only the COS could be higher, but so could the amount recoverable and $ per barrel. I'm very much in!

[jscowi] 17/12/2021 15:15

To be far once the drill is turning in the ground there will either be success, failure or something in between. To be spending hours, days, weeks of your life arguing the toss on bb's aint gonna help that drill bit.

Each to their own, life is to short for splitting hairs your either in or out simples.

[probabilityofsuccess] 17/12/2021 14:59

He’s posted his view to be fair. Rabito and Scot have shared theirs. There’s a huge disconnect on the risked view - up to readers to take a view (if they want to) on the underpinning assumptions for all parties and place relevant weighting to those views.

Looks like you’re not of the same view as Johnswan, Mike!

There’s so much sensitivity around the cos driver (and what appears to be limited underpinning information around the quantification of it) that it just remains a ‘wait and see’ job I think.

If js moved from 20% to 30% cos on LBFF, risked share price goes to £1.55. Convince him around that extra 10% and there’s 34p of extra value!

Johnswan - go on, go up to 30% 😉

[mike290] 17/12/2021 14:49

johnswan's "I'm fairly comfortable with" figures (as posted by PoS in post 20599) seem to include double or treble discounting at every stage of the calculations.
The calculations seem to be nonsense/bs, written by a non-industry expert, to me.
I'm surprised that johnswan's own bs detector isn't freaking out ;-)

[johnswan193] 17/12/2021 14:04

Yep, even a conservative risked valuation based on only the targets with greatest potential upside results in a value 60% above the current fully diluted market cap. I’m happy to stand by that.

[probabilityofsuccess] 17/12/2021 13:30

“Of course it supports my view” - consider confirmation bias johnswan.

Thanks for your reference to 20451 though. Here’s that post as a reminder to other readers:

Here is a risked valuation I'm fairly comfortable with.

SMD B - risked $540m
200m @ $3 x 30% COS = $180m
200m @ $6 x 30% COS = $360m

LBFF - risked $720m
1200m @ $3 x 20% COS

Total risked - $1260m = £955m @ 789m shares fully diluted = 121p.

[officerdigby] 17/12/2021 12:45

So F only sold < $2m in December then.

[johnswan193] 17/12/2021 11:45

POS, of course it supports my view. When asked about individual COS he declined to answer. When asked about probability of commercial success for the project he gave an answer.

Refer to post 20451. That's what I'm working with to justify my own continued investment. That may be a lot more conservative than what others are using and my feeling is generally that COS are just too subjective to be reliable.

Overall I prefer to reverse engineer a market implied COS based on the current market cap, and then take a view on whether standalone conservative COS numbers result in a materially higher value.

Any model is just far too sensitive to the variables, so important to determine a range, and that should include using more conservative assumptions to establish the lower end of it.

[madd_rip] 17/12/2021 11:37

Usual mm trickery

[brian boru] 17/12/2021 11:32

Buys appear to be much greater than sales so why are we hovering around previous close?

[probabilityofsuccess] 17/12/2021 11:22

Hi johnswan - I don’t see how that does support your view. It doesn’t rebut your view, but equally it could support the opposite view.

It’s all a moot point because only Bob knows, so instead of trying to infer what he has said, why not put forward your view, on a target by target basis?

This is a great opportunity to be proactive in sharing your model, not just looking to rebut someone else’s.

[johnswan193] 17/12/2021 11:08

Going back to the webinar - Bob *was* asked specifically about COS of individual zones. See below. Again this supports my view that the 60-70% probability of success he later referred to was in reference to the project as a whole, and not individual zones.

"Question for you Bob and that is that we've never ascribed probabilities of success on outcomes for each particular zone. I know you have views on this Bob is that something do you want to talk about?"

"Well the way I would put it is we've drilled it and we have found hydrocarbons in the in the zones that that we've described today. We've got hydrocarbons in the Theta West fan and the upper part of the Theta West fan and Shelf Margin and the two lobes that are in the Slope System, so how those individual wells will perform we'll find out when they're tested".

[johnswan193] 17/12/2021 10:32

Excellent news this AM re ice road construction.

As mentioned before I'm really interested to see how the price reacts around the 78p level and how the strategy of the convertible bond holder plays out above that.

Between Farallon and them there's potential for a lot of supply to put the breaks on a sustained run pre-testing, so will be extremely impressive if demand is strong enough to resist it and keep pushing the share price forward.

Expect a favourable flow result from testing of the LBFF at Talitha (being the first of the flow tests) could see £2+ even before TW has completed drilling.

[ngms27] 17/12/2021 10:30

Rabito79, as a suggestion it might help if we stop being so hostile to each other and impulsively think the worst. I'm game if you are?

[rabito79] 17/12/2021 10:27

Ngms looking back I had misquoted you so apologies for that.

[dan de lion] 17/12/2021 10:06

Looks like the ice road started earlier than last year as it will be very near completion in relation to the RNS date last year of 30/12/2020!

[michaelsadvfn] 17/12/2021 09:51

Why would it break out on that RNS tmmalik?

I get the impression you don’t understand the history.

[tmmalik] 17/12/2021 09:36

Another RNs for today -RT-1 notification of major shareholding 4.5 percent .It should breakout 80p now Dyor

[probabilityofsuccess] 17/12/2021 09:21

Thought - to avoid confusion/misinterpretation of what he or she said, why not each propose an unrisked and risked value, showing workings a la Rabito’s method, for EACH of the 5 targets?

Not a detailed model per se, but a common baseline which everyone can consider.

[ngms27] 17/12/2021 08:07

Rabito79 once again you quote me entirely wrong so I will have to correct you again.

Sure at present $1 per barrel sits comfortably to me, but where you are going wrong is assuming $1 per barrel After a successful flow test. If you actually read and absorbed what I've said I actually agree that your $3.1 per barrel will be suitable post a successful flow test.

Therefore my upside using your sum is approximately a five bagger from here. Ie 1.2 billion x 3.1 on a valuation basis.

However allowing for the normal market discount I'd expect the shares to trade North of 200P perhaps even 250p

[scot126] 17/12/2021 07:23

"...already commenced construction of the ice road..."

While we have been focused, understandably, on financing the company it is reassuring to read the operational side of the company has clearly been preparing for the winter programme for months. Witness the permitting process being far advanced and ice road construction *already* having commenced. It's actually very impressive when you think about it.

Wishing all the personnel and contractors involved a safe and successful season.

The market ought to be buoyed further by this update. Great stuff.