We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Serica Energy Plc | LSE:SQZ | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B0CY5V57 | ORD USD0.10 |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3.50 | 1.92% | 185.60 | 185.60 | 186.00 | 187.20 | 181.30 | 182.20 | 1,508,875 | 16:35:15 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs | 812.42M | 177.8M | 0.4578 | 4.06 | 721.16M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
08/10/2018 18:54 | Still holding. | circles of stone | |
08/10/2018 18:52 | Still holding....might be just one of the delights of AIM..:-(...perhaps an Erskine update tomorrow..? | sawney | |
08/10/2018 18:51 | Dunderhead that is why the sale will go through because they are complying with what the American's want. Then BP can say they have no partnerships with Iran | reallyrich | |
08/10/2018 18:37 | Not sold any. | robo175 | |
08/10/2018 18:31 | Ironically oil has dropped today due to the perception that US Iranian sanctions may not be as severe as anticipated which has driven many O&G stocks down. | bountyhunter | |
08/10/2018 18:13 | Still holding here also. | captainfatcat | |
08/10/2018 17:58 | I (foolishly) sold out when the sanctions were first reported in May (for a nice profit). Bought back in and have been adding ever since. Not sold any, but my average is much higher than first time round! | goldry | |
08/10/2018 17:57 | I've not sold any. Thinking of adding if it goes any lower. The wider markets have fallen quite a bit recently. Suppose the traders need their profits from time to time. | fardels bear | |
08/10/2018 17:39 | This is a hold for me. I'm in the same boat. Yes no risk no gain, but by it's nature when there is a risk of course there is no guarantee. You pay your money and take your choice! | bountyhunter | |
08/10/2018 17:38 | Are any of us 'secret' sellers? Come on admit it - a profit's a profit. The way I see it I've crystallised my profits already with sqz so if it drops to 20p or whatever I'll hopefully be break-even anyway and as they say, nothing ventured (gambled lol) nothing gained! | dunderheed | |
08/10/2018 17:33 | Would it though? That's just the general deadline date. | fardels bear | |
08/10/2018 17:32 | If BP would were not to qualify for a licence from the OFAC to operate beyond 4th November surely this would have been surely communicated to BP & SQZ by the OFAC and all partners in the licences would have been informed? | captainfatcat | |
08/10/2018 17:31 | Yes DH I agree, so on that basis BP would want to get rid of Rhum whatever it takes. | bountyhunter | |
08/10/2018 17:27 | FB, yes but I think this is the point, they'd rather close down the reservoir (temporarily - but really never to come back on to production being realistic) rather than run the risk of being "Iran tainted" in the states (post Macondo etc) and post Nov 4th. All imho of course. | dunderheed | |
08/10/2018 17:23 | DH......Thanks. Guess its plausible . | pineapple1 | |
08/10/2018 17:22 | Would BP. qualify for a license to run after the Nov 4 deadline though? | fardels bear | |
08/10/2018 17:16 | pineapple - yes I'd say the general consensus would be as the reservoir 'ages' it will potentially become more susceptible long term shut-ins. There is no hard and fast rule on this but it is a risk that I would be less than happy to take. If 'forced' to of course then obviously but the preference would not to be... All imho of course and not a G&G expert lol! | dunderheed | |
08/10/2018 17:06 | As I understood it, OFAC haven't finalised Sericas License yet therefore BP applied for an extension (as operator) and it was granted. If Rhum qualifies for a license with BP as operator - why are we even worried that it wont with Serica as operator? | almsivi | |
08/10/2018 17:01 | Rhum ceased production for some time previously i believe . Was there any formation damage on that occasion. If none was apparent on resumption then ,how can this be used as a reason now. Has production for the last few years made the well integrity more susceptible to long term shut ins. | pineapple1 | |
08/10/2018 17:01 | ffs getting fed up | reallyrich | |
08/10/2018 16:42 | I also think that it is extremely unlikely they will shut in Rhum because of reservoir formation damage and other (potential) production impacts with regard to this. almsivi strange, re licence not being ready - was that "sqz" not ready i.e. had not convinced relevant authorities they were not ready or, some other administrative 'muck up'!? | dunderheed | |
08/10/2018 16:39 | So it is the OGA not getting the licence ready? Once this is done the waiver should be forth coming? | general george | |
08/10/2018 16:30 | Money coming out of the sector. Got a few on my monitor down 5% plus | pineapple1 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions