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
  0.00 0.0% 16.50 0.00 00:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
16.50 17.48 0.00 0.00 0.00
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 1.01 -8.75 -3.72 83
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
- O 0 0.00 GBX

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Latest News

More Pantheon Resources News
Pantheon Resources Takeover Rumours

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Discussions and Chat

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Pantheon Resources trades in real-time

Pantheon Resources (PANR) Top Chat Posts

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 16.50p.
Pantheon Resources Plc has a 4 week average price of 15.44p and a 12 week average price of 14.52p.
The 1 year high share price is 29.30p while the 1 year low share price is currently 14.52p.
There are currently 502,758,713 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 0 shares. The market capitalisation of Pantheon Resources Plc is £82,955,187.65.
spangle93: STTG - let's hope so As I see it, going back to 2008, PANR has spent a decade largely serially underachieving as a non-operating, funding partner. Circumstances changed fundamentally over a relatively short period towards the back end of 2017, with the unfortunate death of Bobby Gray and the merger with Great Bear, propelling PANR into a position of operatorship, with a much enlarged company, a second major area of interest, and a stronger board. Although much is now in place to make this company highly successful, if you were looking objectively, not much tangible progress has been achieved in the last 12 months. Nothing has materially happened in Texas, presumably while the estate of the late Mr Gray is unwound. There are purportedly large recoverable volumes there, according to Art Berman, but this is his view, not reserves, and so far Vision/PANR has been unsuccessful at demonstrating their viability. That's not to say they can't be commercially good, because the analog fields in the area show the potential. In Alaska, the new entity got off to a poor start at Winx, confirming the views of the nay-sayers, even though PANR interest was minor, and carried. The well test at Alkaid was the shining light of the year, but somehow its importance hasn't made it through to the market. Maybe like the lower 48, it needs a formal CPR? Maybe it was because the two potentially larger zones were written off. And now we're in the data room to try to conduct a successful farm out which will set PANR up financially to participate fully in any development. Today's announcement is another RNS that adds to that potential, but cannot in any way be valued at this stage, other than by accountants as a chunk of money going out. If PANR can start to put building blocks of delivery together - not necessarily shoot the lights out but just start to move forward by saying they will achieve something and then actually successfully doing it on time - small steps to generate confidence, like e.g. PTAL - then hopefully, in 2020 as you say, we'll see some confidence return. Until then, Jay can be in ecstasy but really it's not going to affect the share price until there is tangible delivery of success that affects the bottom line. That's just my thoughts, with no *fact* whatsoever ;-)
senttothegallows: In my opinion Pantheon is quite simply wrongly valued. At this time the most sensible way to value Pantheon is based around barrels of oil equivalent multiplied by price per barrel. At which point the questions are how many barrels do we feel we currently feel we have and at what price are we going to value them at. I will put forward $3.1 as the price per barrel based on what Oil Search paid for Amstrong. I could make a play for higher due to proximity to the pipeline and all year round drilling but will leave that for others to express a view on. Https:// Currently we are valued at circa £90m $116m we have $11m cash so effectively $105m At $3.10 the market is valuing us at 33mmboe Initially lets just look at appraisal/development and ignore the rest, I find it very difficult to argue we don't have 100 million barrels of oil equivalent. At which point a current share price of 45p would be reasonable especially given:- The latest company presentation suggest's we have 200mmboe appraisal/development share price 90p? Now lets look at what we might have on top per recent presentation that is 1bboe to 1.1bboe upside for exploration. Over $3b upside The current share price is a once in a life time opportunity IMHO. I can only say I am very excited to watch this unfold. Once it starts to move it will motor
scot126: nametrade - "Anyhoo" was 100% deliberate....the clue is in my moniker. You are indeed a numpty looking to talk down the share price for your entry/re-entry/timing of top up. Either that or a complete buffoon. How else would you justify seeking to insert doubt/confusion into the discourse by urging readers repeatedly to consider the total capex required to develop out the Alaskan asset, and to consider any attendant dilution? These questions are best directed towards the likes of Conoco, Exxon, Oil Search, Repsol, Hilcorp etc....they'll be self-selecting potential farm out partners as, if the PANR geological model is correct, such enormous costs will *have* to be borne by them (per their W.I.). The very premise of the question is inexplicable as it has no effect whatsoever on the current valuation of PANR's equity. None, nada, zilch, nil. Dilution for PANR? The only dilution which matters right now in 2019 is the farm out itself...any post-farm out equity fund raise associated with our Alaskan operations will, by definition, mean there will have been a formal confirmation of a sizeable commercial oil field and be done at many multiples of the current share price. GLA
gorgeousgeorge01: I thought it was a good update and most welcome. Shareholders need to be kept in the loop and today's RNS accomplishes that. I cannot fault the company at the moment - the work with shareholders has been superb. Long may it continue. Turning to the share price. I was watching the activity yesterday and thought to myself: "I reckon there's an RNS afoot - worry not." And sure enough... The fact is that there are myriad interpretations of "value" - we will get an idea of the reality when the farm-out is concluded. Until then, long-term holders are lobsters in a pot. We must be patient and roll - or should that be boil - with the process. Even today, the volumes are low and we have been here before. I haven't sold any shares in recent months and I have no intention of selling. On the other hand, anyone who says they know which way the price will move on any given piece of news is really talking nonsense. The share price is not a reflection of discounted future earnings but rather is a reflection of what we think the future share price will be. Our views are biased one way or another and the reality is likely to diverge from our own expectations. The efficient market is a sham and financial markets are inherently unpredictable - even technical analysis is art rather than science. Fundamentals are the object of guessing - a combination of information and our own bias. No one can know with any certainty how the share price will respond and the share price can even reflect conflicting possible outcomes at different times - Zig, Zag!
gorgeousgeorge01: "It appears that Halliburton views the Pantheon acreage as having no value at all, in fact being more of a liability than an asset." I see the benefit to Pantheon shareholders in terms of the increased working interest. Simply because Haliburton has passed up the opportunity does not mean that the acreage will not be of some interest to another party and it is premature to infer otherwise. What really matters is the detail of any farm-out, then we will see whether or not the share price enjoys support. I believe that there is the potential for tremendous value realisation in Alaska. I say that it will take time and that it is too early to write the company off in this way. Folk are sometimes hung up over valuations. Certainly fundamental valuations are important but I have to say that they are but one factor of many. No one likes to overpay, indeed most prefer a bargain. However, market valuations are very often in error and there is usually a reflexive relationship between the share price and the fundamentals supposedly reflected by the share price. Then we have the participants biases to consider and the prevailing trend. I contend that any farm-out deal could mark an inflection point and my working assumption until that point is that the market valuation is indeed in error - to the downside.
done deal: PANR share price 'feels like' its going to blow 50p being the obvious next level.
scot126: metalbee - I understand why you're posing these questions. I also accept fully some of these farm out deals take an extended period of time to negotiate and finalise. I do, however, disagree with your "feeling we are talking several months before anything is to occur." It's not an unreasonable feeling, it's just that I think it's incorrect in this particular case. How come? 1) Davidblack has outlined the motivation for Oil Search/ENI in particular to advance a deal swiftly. The Repsol/Oil Search land 45 miles to the west of Alkaid is almost certainly going to require they talk to PANR for right of way over PANR's acreage to access the Dalton Highway and TAPS. If a speedier path to cash inflow from Alaska becomes more important to OSH's shareholders/Board (who would otherwise have to wait until OSH's guidance of "late 2023" for first production from Alaska), then PANR's highway-adjacent operations may/will permit cash generation as early as next summer, 2020. In addition, the data supplied by any wells drilled in Alkaid/Phecda will be of great value to the Repsol/OSH partnership further to the west. 2) The PANR Board has flagged they'd like to drill at least one well in Talitha in the next tranche of wells, agreed? I am fairly certain, but happy to be corrected, that this activity will *have* to occur in the winter drilling season as Talitha is situated outside the 5 mile wide corridor surrounding the Dalton Highway, where all year round activity is generally permitted to occur. If this proposed Talitha well is to be drilled this coming winter season, I would submit the farm out negotiations will have to be concluded more swiftly than may be the norm in the sector. It can and does happen when there's an imperative on both sides of the negotiating table. I'm imagining contracts/deposits for equipment and support services crews will have to be finalised some time soon-ish if a winter well at Talitha is to go ahead? 3) I was looking at some figures on TAPS recently. When it was constructed in the 1970s, the throughput capacity was 2.1m bopd. Its current throughput is 500k-600k bopd. I recall posts on this bb where people have accessed articles about TAPS discussing the possible requirement for the construction of more pumping stations (I *think* there are 12 pumping stations now?) and to heat the crude at various points in the pipeline. We know as a fact that BP is a 48.4% shareholder of TAPS, Conoco 29.2% and Exxon 21%. We know Conoco has been active in the recent wave of discoveries and investments in Alaska (to the west and north of PANR). However BP and Exxon have not yet bought into any of the recent discoveries, as far as I'm aware? Is there an extra incentive for these two companies in particular to examine the PANR discovery? I would submit it's not unreasonable to expect they'd at least wish to examine PANR's Alkaid data on the Brookian? For the record, I still think Oil Search is my favoured pick (*speculation only*) but let's face it, if any of the companies mentioned in this post are announced as the preferred candidate for a jv or the jv is actually finalised and announced at 7am one morning, IMO the share price will be a multiple of its current level. How so? The attachment of an industry name will immediately validate PANR's guidance on the scale of the Alaskan discovery and it will more than answer any concerns about the ability to generate project finance when it comes to full field development. Yes, I do certainly follow the argument that there may be time to buy stock in the days ahead, of course I do. Personally, I'm not willing to take that timing risk and wish to be fully exposed to any such farm in announcement. I've read enough, and investigated enough, about the massive wave of investment currently going on in Alaska to believe that a new discovery of a minimum of 100m barrels of oil (remember the PANR Recovery Factor guidance is *exceedingly* conservative v's RFs for the same formation being 30-60% elsewhere in the region) WILL result in a successful farm out in short order. In addition, no other recent discovery has the Dalton Highway and TAPS intersecting their acreage with the implications on opex & capex per barrel in the development model. I'm in, and wish management all the best in their negotiations - they may already have started, who knows? Remember they've already told us officially via RNS that they've received unsolicited approaches *before* the data room is formally opened. GLA
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.
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
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: " 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
Pantheon Resources share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
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:20200124 17:07:40