Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Pantheon Resources Plc LSE:PANR London Ordinary Share GB00B125SX82 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.15p +0.80% 18.98p 60,683 08:30:56
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
18.72p 18.98p 18.98p 18.80p 18.80p
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 1.01 -8.75 -3.72 86.3

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Latest News

More Pantheon Resources News
Pantheon Resources Takeover Rumours

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Share Charts

1 Year Pantheon Resources Chart

1 Year Pantheon Resources Chart

1 Month Pantheon Resources Chart

1 Month Pantheon Resources Chart

Intraday Pantheon Resources Chart

Intraday Pantheon Resources Chart

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Discussions and Chat

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
08:57:1218.983,135595.02O
08:34:0318.751,700318.68O
07:04:2518.9820,0003,796.00AT
07:03:3418.9817,0323,232.67AT
07:01:5818.9815,0002,847.00AT
View all Pantheon Resources trades in real-time

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
22/5/2019
09:20
Pantheon Resources Daily Update: Pantheon Resources Plc is listed in the Oil & Gas Producers sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker PANR. The last closing price for Pantheon Resources was 18.83p.
Pantheon Resources Plc has a 4 week average price of 18.10p and a 12 week average price of 17p.
The 1 year high share price is 29.30p while the 1 year low share price is currently 14.50p.
There are currently 454,530,466 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 1,540,712 shares. The market capitalisation of Pantheon Resources Plc is £86,269,882.45.
21/5/2019
17:32
gorgeousgeorge01: From the dictators board, emphasis mine: "A couple of things are CERTAIN, however. If the P50 number for Alkaid/Phecda moves up to circa 100m barrels the PANR share price will be NO WHERE NEAR 20p *and* PANR will have no shortage of potential farm in partners with deep pockets looking to develop this play. Truly exciting times for us PANR shareholders *if* this scenario plays out. GLA" Certain? No where near 20p? Why not? We are still talking about P50 resources, not reserves. There is a long way to go yet. Mind you, as Scotty knows perfectly well, a thesis doesn't have to be true, merely widely believed. There is little evidence that it is widely believed currently - that may change. However, I want to see the company outline its strategy and a clear timetable for production and development. Then the story might stand up to serious scrutiny. That said, I am looking forward to the promotional activity and expect to profit from it, though perhaps not by as much as scotty's "nowhere near 20p" certainty would suggest.
21/5/2019
13:42
scot126: Dear All, Can't believe I'm typing this out (!) but Davidblack's post #2891 is well worth reading and factoring into the range of possible outcomes which we *may* be hearing about in the next RNS. How so? 1) There is a general consensus the RF at 10% in the current model is conservative, and for fair reasons. We know the RF for the Brookian formation runs as high as 40%-60% elsewhere in ANS but admittedly in long established fields closer to Prudhoe Bay which are using horizontal drilling and fracking techniques not available to the original operators back in the 70's, 80's and 90's. I agree with Davidblack in his interpretation that the inclusion of the description of the Brookian reservoir being "greatly superior" in yesterday's RNS was telling and it is decidedly not unreasonable to expect to see the RF number upgraded in the next RNS. Upgraded to 20%? Definitely a possibility IMHO. Higher than 20%? That would be awesome, no question. 2) Davidblack also highlighted in his post above (#2891) that the Board has now, *in the last two RNSs*, pointed shareholders towards the possible implications if the analysis of Alkaid suggests the adjacent Phecda sector is an extension of the same Brookian play discovered in Alkaid. The very fact the Board has alerted shareholders to this possibility in the last two RNSs, *published 6 weeks or so apart*, suggests to me that; this thesis is very much still alive, that they're testing this thesis by sending the data to external consultants and thus is in the range of possible outcomes we *may* be hearing about in the next RNS. Davidblack is quite wrong, however, when he states, "Though no doubt they (Halliburton) will have six months or so to decide on whether to take up their 25% once they get the full detailed reports". In practice, the decision period is far shorter (more like 30-60 days in such agreements) as these contracts are drawn up to permit the operator to move forward with alternative plans for future operations, seek alternative sources of funds, etc. should the holder of the back-in rights elect not to take up their option. A couple of things are certain, however. If the P50 number for Alkaid/Phecda moves up to circa 100m barrels the PANR share price will be no where near 20p *and* PANR will have no shortage of potential farm in partners with deep pockets looking to develop this play. Truly exciting times for us PANR shareholders *if* this scenario plays out. GLA
11/4/2019
18:24
scot126: Dear All - a few thoughts in no particular order. 1) Full disclosure: I completed another Bed & ISA exercise at 1.09pm today, circa 96k shares....both marked as sells but we know that cannot be the case, lol. I realise many others have warned readers to treat with caution the buys v's sells descriptions on the various trading platforms but I just thought a concrete example might be practically illuminating? 2) As part of my whole investment process throughout my career I would sometimes ask myself the following question: "If the company was to magically wind itself up overnight, what would shareholders be left with in pounds and pence?" I completely accept some may view this approach as a bit naive, perhaps whimsical, so feel free to read on or ignore as you see fit. I guess what has prompted me to put these thoughts in writing was when I reviewed the market's reaction to the hard data from the Alkaid well through the lens of the "efficient market hypothesis". I'm sure many of us have raised a metaphorical and/or physical eyebrow whenever takeovers are announced at "an 80% premium to last night's closing price" or some such eye-watering premium? Sometimes that eyebrow remains raised but more often than not, as the bid rationale is explained by the bidder and Board of the target company, I'm left thinking: why didn't I spot the disparity? What did the bidder spot that I didn't? What did the bidder understand about the asset or the company that stockmarket investors didn't, perhaps due to the technical inability to value the stock OR lack of knowledge OR lack of expertise OR lack of patience, etc, etc? To be crystal clear, I am not for one minute expecting PANR to be bid for in the short term, no way. Having said that, I'm going to have a stab at the "winding up" scenario to which I referred above. Confirmed fact: The Alkaid well is sited approx 2 miles from the Dalton Highway and the TAPS. The Horseshoe discovery is located 45 miles from the Dalton Highway and TAPS. Confirmed fact: When Oil Search made the announcement of its intention to invest in Alaska on 1/11/17, Brent was trading at c.$60 and today it is trading at c.$71. The Oil Search transaction which completed in February 2018 effectively valued each barrel in the ground at US$3.10 The results from the recent Alkaid flow test of the Brookian ZOI supported Great Bear's seismic and geophysics work leaving the company standing four square behind its 250mmbl Oil in Place estimate, its 10% Recovery Factor and thus 25mmbl recoverable estimate. PANR has a 75% W.I. in Alkaid (yes, this may move to 100% if Halliburton don't exercise their option for c.$6m but for the purposes of this exercise, I'm content to use 75%). Back of the envelope calculation, employing the price paid per barrel by Oil Search, leads to the following: 25m (barrels) x 75% x $3.10 = $58m / shares on issue (560m) = 8p per share. Variables a) Price per barrel in the ground. The oil price has appreciated by c.18% since the Oil Search transaction was announced. Let's be conservative and not grab that full appreciation and increase the the price per barrel by c.10% to give us $3.40 per barrel in the ground. Moves the implied value to 8.8p per share. b) Is the value of a barrel in the ground situated 2 miles away from the Dalton Highway and TAPS likely to be higher than the value ascribed to a barrel in the ground situated 45 miles away at Horseshoe? I would argue yes. Sure there will the the economies of scale argument for Horseshoe but I contend they would be more than matched by the opex + capex "savings" from Alkaid's proximity to infrastructure. I've been in communication with a couple of Alaskan veterans who together can justify a price per barrel in the ground of closer to $10 per barrel for Alkaid but, like Davidblack (!), I'm content (for now) to move it up to $5 for the purposes of this exercise, thus $3.40 in paragraph a) moves to $5, which moves the implied value per share calculation to 12.9p (to repeat, from the Alkaid sector alone). c) Potential upgrades to OIP, Recovery Factor and thus estimate of recoverable oil. It is in examining these variables where I firmly believe the market has not properly appreciated the positive implications of recent events. Regular readers will know that throughout my career I was involved in writing and interpreting hundreds, thousands of RNSs. The vast majority are written with real and genuine care and attention, I promise you. It is my contention the management of PANR are giving us shareholders as clear a signal of impending upgrades to these numbers as they possibly could. Have another read of the following excerpt from the RNS dated 2/4/19: "The Brookian ZOI Is estimated to have 400 feet of gross pay and 240 feet of net pay. Flow testing and data received exceeded expectations and have material positive implications for reserve and production potential for the Alkaid project..." and "The better than expected results in the zone of interest will also impact the pre drill P50 Technically Recoverable Resource estimates which will be assessed in the near future." I would contend the initial interpretation by Bob Rosenthal and the Great Bear team of the flow test results on the Brookian has given them sufficient confidence to inform Jay Cheatham and Justin Hondris that there is a high probability the OIP and/or RF numbers are going to increase following the completed analysis. It is my belief the language used in the RNS was specifically chosen to indicate to the market to expect, in all likelihood, an RNS upgrading the P50 Technically Recoverable Resource for the Alkaid project. I don't know when that analysis will be completed and announced to the market but I now believe the stock is pregnant with an upgrade to come to the recoverable number in the coming days/next few weeks. We shall see. Let's just plug in an increased RF of 15% to my calculations: 37.5m (barrels) x 0.75 x $5 = 19.3p per share. Hmmmmm. d) Another clear message from the RNS date 2/4/19 which hasn't, in my view, been properly digested by my fellow shareholders, nor the wider market, concerns Phecda. Have a re-read of the following excerpts: "....as well as for increasing probabilities of success of other Brookian targets on the acreage, most notably Phecda, the adjoining prospect" and, "In particular, the Alkaid result is believed to have MATERIALLY POSITIVE IMPLICATIONS for the ADJOINING Phecda prospect which is now UPGRADED and considered a step out APPRAISAL from the Alkaid location." Short of the directors hitting us all on the head with a hammer, I would argue this is another clear signal the data from the Brookian formation in the Alkaid sector has been sufficiently positive that the Great Bear team believe it has immediate implications on the OIP/RF/P50 recoverable resource estimates for Phecda. Let's therefore have a look at the existing published numbers for Phecda. OIP is 345 mmbl, RF is 10%, P50 recoverable is 34 mmbl and PANR has a 75% W.I. As we've been informed, "These two projects will now likely be part of a single development plan, favourably located adjacent to the Dalton highway and TAPS pipeline". I'm happy, therefore, to stick with my $5 per barrel in the ground valuation for Phecda also. Using the same formula as above to examine Phecda with an RF of 10% and an RF of 15% gets me to a range of implied value for Phecda ALONE of between 17.8p - 26.6p. Phecda hasn't been flow tested so what Chance of Success (CoS) ought I to attach to an upgraded STEP OUT APPRAISAL of the the selfsame Brookian formation in a contiguous acreage? Shall we say 50%? Is that fair? That gives an implied current valuation for Phecda ALONE of 9p - 13p. e) Putting all the above together, 19.3p + 9p = 28.3p Meaningless number? Perhaps so. But go through all the variables and see if you disagree? $5 per barrel in the ground.....not unreasonable IMHO. RF factors increasing from 10% to 15%? Not unreasonable when re-examining the language in the 2/4/19 RNS and with the added knowledge this formation has produced RFs in excess of 40% elsewhere in the Alaska North Slope, again IMHO. Is it fair to add Phecda's numbers into this exercise, which remember is to imagine the company shutting up shop overnight and doing a quick sale of the readily defined asset base? I'd say so, bearing in mind the language used in the RNS which pointed out, "These two projects will now likely be part of a single development plan, favourably located adjacent to the Dalton highway and TAPS pipeline." 3) So am I arguing the share price should be trading at 28.3p? You're damn right I am, at a minimum. Look what shareholders are getting "for free" if you accept the logic of my calculations above? Answer: ALL of the East Texas assets in Polk and Tyler (and remember there's some production there, not much admittedly for now, but still.....), CASH on the balance sheet including the possibility of Halliburton writing PANR a cheque for c.$6m, AND $80m of 3D seismic across 1000 sq miles AND between 12 and 40 identified prospective targets on the 250k acres of leased acreage in ANS. 4) What are the short term catalysts which would see the above scenario playing out via share price appreciation? Well, we've been told to expect, "The better than expected results in the zone of interest will also impact the pre drill P50 Technically Recoverable Resource estimates which will be assessed in the NEAR FUTURE" and "The Company will immediately set about reworking and analysing all key data from our Alaskan programme which will include reviewing the pre-drill conceptual development plans on Alkaid as well formulating plans for future FARM OUT discussions. ......The Company will update shareholders as to timing expectations once analysis has been completed." I therefore anticipate an incoming RNS detailing the advanced analysis on the successful flow test of the Brookian in the Alkaid sector and to hear of the implications to the Alkaid and Phecda P50 recoverable resource estimate. We're also been told to expect guidance on the potential sidetrack or re-drill of VOBM#1. Putting my broker hat on once again, it would seem to me highly likely the management will seek to engage with the market over the coming weeks to explain the recent results from Alkaid, to outline why the Alkaid results alone underpin the current valuation of the company and to describe their plans for operations in Texas over the summer AND farm out plans to advance their Alaskan project. Yes, some may very well wish to wait for definitive guidance to be published via an RNS, for news of a farm out, etc, etc but I believe the company has already released sufficient signals indicating the direction of travel to permit shareholders to discern, in advance of the wider market, if the stock is cheap today, or not. GLA
26/3/2019
12:51
dlm2602: Malcy's comments. In my view Malcy's views are jaundiced with regards PANR. Having been spectacularly wrong in his £2 share price prediction, he eventually ejected PANR from his bucket list so that he wouldn't have to continually report and explain this underperformance to his followers. The problem for him was that in hindsight he seems to have called the bottom of PANR's share price when to sell, and now that the fortunes of the company seem to be improving has yet again got to justify the timing of his sell. I suspect he is not alone in this regard. Michael Walters advised subscribers to sell PANR at about the same time having been incredibly bullish about the company for years before. Its a tough game being a share tipper!!!
04/3/2019
17:05
scot126: Dear All - I'm clearly labelling the following as my best guesstimate. Having asked around a few people who have operational experience, the consensus is that we will *likely* be hearing from 88E about the progress (or not) of wire line logs in Winx-1 towards the end of this week or early next week. I post this merely to provide a small amount of guidance on likely timing, no more than that. Totally agree with other posters above and must admit to being somewhat baffled by the PANR share price performance today v's others in the Winx-1 consortium. Like Davidblack, legacy sentiment is the best explanation I can come up with. GLA
15/2/2019
11:18
scot126: Dear All - I think it's worth analysing the potential newsflow over the coming weeks as I'm seeing a strain of thought which appears to be gaining orthodoxy without much merit or pushback, IMHO. Winx-1 spuds in the next 24 hours, drills for 3-4 weeks or so and we know there are three formations which the operator will be seeking to flow test. I think it's reasonable to assume our RNS-happy fellow consortium members will likely keep the market posted on the result of each separate flow test for each formation, agreed?! Thus from mid-March through to mid-to-late April there are likely to be at least three RNSs related to Winx-1 which could have a meaningful impact on the PANR share price. I don't think this is too contentious a description of what we're likely to be hearing from progress on Winx-1 - fair? And yes, happy to note the approx 70:30, failure:success CoS as published by the operator and other consortium partners. Moving to the flow test of the completed Alkaid well. During January's AGM, Bob Rosenthal guided flow testing operations to begin "at the start of March". We haven't received formal confirmation of a workover rig being contracted (PANR directors - if you're reading this, formal confirmation on this and updated guidance on the work schedule for Alkaid would be appreciated) but for the purposes of this post, let's assume the guidance remains intact. We know from Bob that the Alkaid also has three formations to flow test and he stated that ideally they would flow test each formation for c. 2 weeks. Another unknown is PANR's attitude to RNSs over the 6 week testing programme on the Alkaid well. Will PANR adopt the strategy of RNS-ing the results of each flow test in turn or will it wait for all activities to be completed before informing the market? Personally, I would argue that PANR ought to inform the market by publishing distinct RNSs after flow testing each formation as each result could be interpreted as being of a material nature. We're not Repsol or Oil Search or Conoco (quite yet!) so waiting until all testing on a well has been completed, as large cap oilies can do, is not appropriate for an AIM listed small cap E&P stock, IMHO. Again, for the purposes of this post, let's say PANR adopts the "RNS per formation flow test" model. In that case, there will be six different RNSs published between mid-March and late April, each of which could have a meaningful impact on PANR's share price. We know the CoS ratio for Winx-1 (c.30% CoS). I would contend the CoS for the Alkaid is far higher than for Winx-1 as we know Great Bear side-cored the ZOI and this is the asset Great Bear *didn't* farm out during its cash-strapped last 3 years or so. Unfortunately we don't yet have Arden's initiation note to refer to for risked/unrisked values per share, thus setting a fundamental value based on accepted sector-wide valuation techniques. We do, however, have Cantor Fitzgerald's note on 88E which, to my eyes, followed traditional O&G analyst valuation techniques. I fully accept the following may be a leap too far for some readers, perhaps even two or three leaps too far? In the same way Rabito79 has attempted to describe traders' current mentality, I'm going to have a stab at reaching a valuation per share based on fundamental analysis techniques *plus* external data points from parties whom, by their experience and long term success in the sector, deserve weight attached to their assessments and opinions. 1) Riverstone/Great Bear valued PANR *pre-deal* at c.$250-300m, which now equates to an "as is" value for the Texas assets in a "post-deal" PANR of between 44.6p - 53.5p per share. 2) Readacross from Cantor Fitzgerald's note values PANR's *20%* of Winx-1 at 15.4p risked and 66.8p unrisked. 3) I am using an aggregate figure of 65% CoS for the three intervals in the Alkaid well. I haven't plucked this number out of thin air but have arrived at this figure having communicated with two sources who have vast experience in Alaska and who are aware of locally available data from the initial operations on the Alkaid in 2015. The well is targeting 549m barrels of oil and PANR owns 75% of this lease acreage. Thus PANR's risked/unrisked target for the well is 268m barrels of oil/412m barrels of oil. Using Cantor's macro assumptions, this would equate to an NAV valuation of 57.4p risked, 220p unrisked. So the base valuation "as is" using external data points and industry standard valuation techniques is 117.4p per share and the top end "as is" valuation is 340p per share. To be clear, this is not my blue sky valuation for PANR 2.0, nowhere near it. I would have greater sympathy for Rabito79 and others' interpretation of the way traders may be approaching the coming 6-8 week period of newsflow if the share prices of the consortium members, and more specifically PANR's share price, had exhibited the historical pattern of trading in the run up to significant operational newsflow. These historical patterns would normally see traders recognising, at least in part, the risked NAV value per share published formally by stockmarket analysts. I 100% accept the operational history of PANR in Texas; the relative lack of knowledge on the part of UK investors of recent discoveries and subsequent massive investment in Alaska; the paucity of published research on PANR will be factors in the apparent departure from traditional trading patterns. This post is merely an attempt to outline the potential upside available to PANR shareholders over the coming 6-8 weeks. GLA
30/1/2019
12:08
davidblack: I think the reasons for the current share price are: Firstly HD’s view that the stock is pretty unknown by funds due to a lack of research. Secondly at a market cap of £150m it’s below a lot of funds size requirements which is then compounded by liquidity issues for those funds. Thirdly the Pantheon directors have not been out “Selling”; the company story. The website reflects none of these changes. Obviously this is completely understandable as they are focusing on getting Alkaid tested and doing all the US paperwork re changing licences etc. We need that well tested in the next ten weeks, so we don’t want anyone focusing on roadshows. Lastly Texas at the AGM in 2016 was overly promoted and this has left a unbelieving and suspious shareholder base especially given the subsequent share price collapse. But it’s clear from the recent AGM that while the directors were happy to explain the new upside it was also very obvious that they will only start to heavily market this company on the basis of delivered results, not just hope. That’s the right way round. So factor in all that and yes the current share price is “Screwed.̶1; But did we expect anything different until the market sees results? My personal back of the “Fag packet” number is fair value 75p ish, but the truth is that isn’t going to happen without those results. Now that last bit is the good news because if we get any success at Winx or Alkaid then this story will get marketed by the company happy to repeat the results on the new acreage. So we should see the stock “Rocket” from here hopefully, but based on substance. Oh and the current market is looking for a well success. But we unlike most of the market know that Alkaid hit hydrocarbons in three zones, that the Pipeline 1 well hit hydrocarbons in multiple zones and the first two stratigraphic wells that GB drilled hit three hydrocarbon zones. The market thinks Pantheon is chasing “Moose pasture” with four discoveries in four wells this isn’t “Moose Pasture!” Oh and if Winx comes in, just how many more wells will be needed on that 35 square miles inside the four western blocks? It will be interesting. Check out the last Red Emperor video presentation on the additional targets at Winx if well 1 comes good, if it comes good being the emphasis.
11/1/2019
16:19
scot126: Hi All - I thought I'd have one final stab at explaining why, in my opinion and seemingly in the opinion of other posters such as hiddendepths, the nodding through of the merger with Great Bear and the issuance of all the extra stock next week OUGHT NOT to lead to a share price reversal. I believe quite the reverse will happen, that the share price will increase. 1) The stock issued to the Great Bear shareholders will be subject to a 12 month hard lock in, followed by a 12 month orderly market arrangement. In plain English, all that stock cannot be traded for at least 12 months. That said, when attempting to place a valuation on the equity, we must shortly all increase our denominator, ie. the number of shares (and options/warrants for some analysts?) on issue. 2) The placing stock associated with the attendant fundraise of c.$21m. Yes, that stock can be immediately traded, and as others have pointed out, as soon as the stock was allocated by Arden any sophisticated investor worth his/her salt could have used derivatives/long dated settlement arrangements to "stag" the 15.25p shares from 21/12/18 up until today. I have informed readers here of the FACT the vast majority of support for the placing came from Great Bear founders/early funders (and their associates) together with some UK small cap instos who know the management of PANR very well. Why in the wide wide world of sport would this class of investor sell next week when their entire motivation is to get the Great Bear and Texas assets recapitalised and recommence operations?????? 3) Let's just say that c.$4m of the book went to "trading style" investors....what's that, about 20m shares? Have a look at the vastly increased trading volume over the last 10 trading sessions or so. Those "traders" who were allocated stock have had ample time to flick their stock out at a trader's profit, a few pence here or there. I contend that rather than the market being overwhelmed with a deluge of fresh stock next week, it'll be the exact opposite. How so? Because at the EGM/AGM on Monday morning those shareholders who are able to attend will be able to listen to management from both PANR and Great Bear present on their respective assets, the potential upside (especially from the former private company which was Great Bear which MUST now be more transparent due to it merging with a listed entity) of the asset base, the schedule of operations for Q1 '19 and, vitally, the motivations of both "sides" when deciding to go ahead and merge. Hope that's useful to some on here, and on lse where a number of investors don't appear to have understood the process. GLA and see many of you on Monday morning.
06/8/2018
11:40
thatsmart1: From LSE board, suggestions of a drop to 4p!!! ay Cheatham is highly incompentent and has destroyed and shareholder value in PANR. Riddler, all you need to know about PANR is that it is a company RIDDLED with problems caused from people who do not know what they are doing, they have consistently messed up for 24 months+, this is reflected in the share price dropping 180p to 17p, its also likely to go alot lower. Many shareholders in this forum bought PANR because they tried to catch a falling knife - IE they saw the drop and assumed PANRS luck/problems would reverse and that share price would eventually go back up, this was done by many at around 60p, only to goto 45p to 18p... soon sub 4p The share price hasnt gone back up, because its not due to luck but due to an idiotic CEO called Jay Cheatham. If you want more info, tweet Malcom Graham Wood from malcysblog and ask him why did he throw PANR out of his famous "bucket List", Even he will tell you because they have far too many problems and an embaressment. Docisacoc Posts: 810 Opinion: No Opinion Price: 16.34 RE: newToday 10:12People have been anticipating vos1 production, vob1 sidetrack and a farm in for quite a while and the share price didn't go up, so on the balance of probability I can't see it happening
04/6/2018
00:08
hpcg: PANR listed in 2006 to explore around South Padre, which is ironically a year after gas production in the area ceased. There had not been any significant oil production. Their proposition was that drilling deeper targets would tap new and unexplored reserves. Which sounds kinda familiar. Is it factual enough to say that in the twelve years since they have achieved sweet FA. The company is not running out of money as a going concern but it doesn't have enough to drill another well. The current wells aren't going to make anyone rich; I think we can safely say that is factual and not speculation. The share price is going down as much as anything because why would anyone back an asset team with this record of success? The question I would pose is why did the share price ever go up to where it did in the first place? And it did it during a period of collapse and chaos in the industry - one where people are still being laid off. Crazy. In my opinion the company is worth its cash and the discounted cash flow of its one flowing well. If that is the opinion of potential providers of new funds then the share price has a long way to fall. At the end of the day nothing that I write, or Scot126 writes. makes even the smallest difference, the long term share price is governed by the performance of the company. I'm short because in my opinion the share price has further to fall. If I'm wrong I'll take my losses and move on, or even reverse my position. The only right or wrong for any investor is the value of their portfolio. That is the one and only true measure and any other measurement is delusion. So fair play to the people that bought in at 30p and sold above 150p of which there is at least one because I know someone that did. Ultimately other people's successes and failures don't effect the value of my own portfolio so my message is make your own decision and take responsibility. What I write is for my own benefit as a record to call myself to account on my thought process. Hence what I suggest about the probability of a farm-out on any terms which are not effectively a significant dilution, but more likely not at all. Here's another fact to base that proposition on - in Dec 2017 PANR increased its interest in VOBM5 for bearing the cost of drilling that increased interest. That is a real commercial transaction where someone sold there interest for a million or so bucks. So if they farm out on that measure the best they will get is drilling costs. If I'm dramatically wrong I'll lose money which will be the one and only pertinent critique of my analysis.
Pantheon Resources share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
PANR
Pantheon R..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20190522 09:13:35