Touchstone Exploration Share Discussion Threads

[spangle93] 23/1/2019 15:50

I look forward to hearing full details of your bull case, rossannan... It will be a treat to be spared the bear case for a while ;-)

[ileeman] 23/1/2019 14:37

And like clockwork rossannan has bought back in and is now leaning more and more bullish in their posts, I did say lol

A lot of devious tactics at work in the markets so nothing new, as I always say ignore the noise and focus on fundamentals.

This market cap is a gift and recent presentations + RNS just solidiifes that breakeven significantly below $40 + can fund from cashflow was a key factor some have missed.

[che7win] 23/1/2019 14:25

Interesting that TRIN leaves out EPS from their fact sheets.I guess that conveniently gets them around the 25% equity dilution.

[spangle93] 23/1/2019 08:34

Hi Rossannan -
Ah, I get your context now - if it was in response to the poster that felt 10,000 bbl/day was derisked, then I would agree that there's a lot more derisking necessary. I didn't capture exactly what Paul Baay said in this regard, but my recollection is that he said "with Ortoire I can see a way of getting us to 10000 boepd" which is different.

It's only once, really, since "exploration block" is effectively its formal surname.

The situation at Ortoire is quite similar to the recent CPR on UPL's Tunisia exploration acreage, in that the latter has old legacy data but overall is less explored that Ortoire. It also contains a variety of maturity of structures, from tested wells to gleams in the geologists' eyes. At least here, GLJ made the distinction between contingent and prospective, which I think talks to your point. At UPL the CPR ranks everything prospective, so unless you go beyond the headlines, it can be easy to think "Wow 2 Tcf".

[spangle93] 22/1/2019 17:13

Rossannan -
Sorry for the minor correction, but in fact Ortoire is a licence, containing, in order of maturity, prospective acreage, leads, prospects, and tested discoveries, the latter of which GLJ estimate have a 95% chance of commerciality. So there's a wide range of confidence in the targets identified, between rank exploration and appraisal/development [from what we heard in the Q&A, the Corosan well later this year will be drilled with the intent of producing from it]

[mr. t] 21/1/2019 15:35

Thanks once more for the insight Spangle.

And at least you didn't call her Shane :)

[captainfatcat] 21/1/2019 13:10

Spangle cheers and a thumbs up from me 8-)

[mr. t] 21/1/2019 13:09

Spangle, thanks for your comments. I appreciate your perspective. As you say the independent verification is helpful...not just for TXP investors, but also for possible JV partners.

My ongoing inability to look at/write the correct numbers is a little worrying - quite a handicap for investing....I meant to write 2022. In the 8 March 2018 reserves report Brent is assumed to be $69 in 2022, and in the Ortoire report its $73.

[captainfatcat] 21/1/2019 12:47

The share price will catch up soon enough, just requires a little patience.


Tick Tock

[ileeman] 21/1/2019 12:37

My GKP holding is flying on the back of oil, just need TXP to do catch up aswell.

I was impressed by the recent RNS, CEO stated if all goes well it could add upto 10000 barrels a day and that report basically confirms that.

Tangeble asset not pie in the sky and drilling Q2.

[spangle93] 21/1/2019 08:20

Mr T, ref 3642
TXP's 2P post tax NPV10 was $157m in the 31/12/17 reserves report. The Ortoire best case net risked NPV10 is $108m, so a 60% uplift. The Ortoire report has a more aggressive price curve (e.g. $73 Brent in 2020 cf. $69 in the 31/12/17 reserves report) so the % NPV increase is a little less than 60% in reality.

Actually it's $73 in 2022 and $68.50 in 2020. according to page 6. ;-)

The other factor is that a number of the leads and prospects are gas, for which there is a completely different pricing structure, a simple route to market, and a shortage.

Unless the contingent gas in the CPR is restricted to Corosan, then it's a challenge to compare the volumes in-house presentation with the CPR.

Overall I must admit I thought the numbers would be larger. But at least, as investors, we have had someone independent to state on the record that Baay and his colleagues aren't blowing smoke.

[mount teide] 20/1/2019 19:07

zho - post 1465 is one example and also on the Trinity and JTC threads.

The global shipping fleet which represents 5% of global oil consumption is currently the last outlet for low cost, high sulphur 'dirty' oil.

Although shipowners have two options regarding compliance, the least expensive over the short/medium term is likely to prove the capex free route of switching over to low sulphur fuels.

[zho] 20/1/2019 17:11

>>Zho - i have been writing about this since the shipping industry early last year ..>>

This is the first I've heard of the new rules - I must have somehow missed your posts.

[zho] 20/1/2019 16:12

From "Jan. 1, 2020, new clean fuel rules go into effect for all cargo vessels and ships mandating that they switch out dirty bunker fuel for cleaner low-sulfur fuels"

... which will boost the oil price, according to: