ADVFN Logo ADVFN

We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now

Toplists

It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for charts Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.

SQZ Serica Energy Plc

185.60
3.50 (1.92%)
03 May 2024 - Closed
Delayed by 15 minutes
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
Serica Energy Plc is listed in the Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SQZ. The last closing price for Serica Energy was 182.10p. Over the last year, Serica Energy shares have traded in a share price range of 166.00p to 271.00p.

Serica Energy currently has 388,345,933 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Serica Energy is £721.16 million. Serica Energy has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of 4.06.

Serica Energy Share Discussion Threads

Showing 18051 to 18073 of 35275 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  727  726  725  724  723  722  721  720  719  718  717  716  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
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
Chat Pages: Latest  727  726  725  724  723  722  721  720  719  718  717  716  Older

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock