Lansdowne Oil & Gas Live Discussion

sobeit 30 Oct 2015

Re: what a farce Even bigger farce.Somebody bought £200 of these shares and so they have to put out a FORM 8.5.When will this ridiculous situation end?Lansdowne is now trading in the land of the "green shield stamps" where the shares are nearly worthless and still they spend money putting out these ridiculous forms.Surely it is time for somebody to either put up or shut up.

Phonner 21 Oct 2015

Lansdowne is also up twenty percent today.

sobeit 21 Oct 2015

what a farce Somebody sells £2,000 of these shares and Cantor Fitzgerald have to put out a Form 8.5.Not only that, but the RNS news feed is full of them.What a waste of time and effort.

forwardloop 07 Sep 2015

Lansdowne Oil & Gas still has substantial asset [link] is useless to pretend that the plugging and abandoning some weeks back of the 49/11-3 well on the Midleton field in the Celtic Sea is anything but a great disappointment for Dublin-headquartered Lansdowne Oil & Gas.(LON:LOGP).The well is close to Kinsale Head, which is Ireland’s only producing gas field.The oil explorer has a 20% stake in the Midleton concession but once owned 100%. It is some consolation that the operator Kinsale Energy, which farmed-in for 80% of Midleton, fully carried Lansdowne’s share of the drilling costs of 49/11-3.It is, nevertheless, a blow to Lansdowne at a time when it hoped that a new discovery would re-ignite the company’s share price, which had been becalmed for some time because of a perceived lack of activity.This operation is very much in line with Lansdowne’s core business model, which is to acquire licences that usually have proven reserves not yet exploited.It then gets a major company to farm in, because it has the financial muscle and technical wherewithal to develop potentially high impact fields which could then become company-making for a minority shareholder like Lansdowne.Lansdowne has interests in six other licences in the Celtic Sea, including Helvick where there is a 10% interest, Amerigen with a 100% stake and Barryroe where there is a 20% involvementMidleton has been estimated to contain 268bn cubic feet of recoverable gas resources, so it seemed like a major prize to go for. The company’s own literature said that a success at Midleton could be worth a multiple of its current market capitalisation which is £4.65mln.But the fact that the well found non-commercial amounts of gas meant the share price, which had almost doubled to 7.7pence on expectations of good news fell back to 3.13p when the not-so-good- news broke, and today is at a 52 week low of 2.37p.Speaking to Proactive Investors, Lansdowne chief executive Steve Boldy said at the time: “Yes, the Midleton well result is very disappointing because a successful well could have added a lot of value for shareholders, but we still have substantial resources in the Celtic Sea via our 20% interest in Barryroe”.A discovery was originally made on Barryroe back in 1973 by Marathon, but nothing was done about it. Providence Resources (LONVR), another Dublin–based group that became the operator with an 80% stake in Barryroe, acquired a 3D seismic survey over the field in 2011 before drilling the 48/24 - 10z well, which tested 4,000 barrels of oil equivalent (boepd) in 2012.Independent reservoir engineers Netherland, Sewell & Associates Inc. (NSAI) has estimated the Basal Wealden zone contains contingent resources of 290mln barrels of oil equivalent (mmboe) while RPS Energy, another independent assessor, put the figure for the Middle Wealden at 49 mmboe, thus establishing a potentially very substantial resource.Hats were thrown in the air in delight in Dublin. Providence announced the flow rate because it seemed the venture (JV) partners had made a world class discovery, which would not only reward the companies greatly but also benefit Ireland’s economy. Barryroe is so far Ireland’s only known potentially commercial oil field.Unfortunately, the excitement surrounding the prospect has faded because Providence has found it difficult to find a farminee to develop the project.After more than a year of casting around for a farm-in partner Providence confirmed in February that it had, at last, reached agreement on commercial terms with a proposed farminee, but that the closing of the deal was conditional on the would-be partner raising funds.The Dublin-based company reminded shareholders that there is no certainty that the farm-in will be concluded with the proposed

Spuddy 24 Aug 2015

Interesting Analysis: Dr Moors. Would hold onto shares ShareTweet+ 1Mail The conflict between OPEC and U.S. shale/tight oil producers has entered a new phase. And the result has been an accelerated decline in oil prices. Last November (on Thanksgiving no less), Saudi Arabia led an OPEC decision to hold production stable, followed by a later significant increase in volume. For the first time, the cartel had opted to protect market share rather than price. This certainly did not serve the interests of some OPEC members – Venezuela, Nigeria, Libya, Iran – who require much higher prices to balance unwieldy central budgets The primary opponent was the new source of oil in the market – unconventional production from North America, the U.S. in particular. Thereupon began a tug of war that has largely determined the range of oil pricing variation over the past eight months. This is what is strange about all of this. Essentially, the same market conditions prevail today as existed a year ago when crude oil was exceeding $100 a barrel. In fact, global demand is higher now than it was last July and accelerating. The price, on the other hand, has been cut in half. To be sure, there is excess supply on the market (thanks to the remarkable recovery of American production, now at levels not seen in 40 years), and a correction was in order even without any OPEC move. But that correction was more in the order of a decline to the low $80s or mid $70s. That has gone down much further because of what outside pressures have done to the trading environment. Here’s my take on the international scheme to keep oil prices down… The Big Players Still Play Dangerous Shorts As I have noted here in Oil & Energy Investor on a number of occasions, the interchange between “paper barrels” (futures contracts) and “wet barrels” (actual consignments of oil) has been undergoing some major changes. It is the financial contract, not the allotment of crude, that drives the market. When prices begin showing weakness, the manipulation turns to shorting oil. A short is a bet that the price of an underlying asset will decline. Control of a commodity (or stock shares, for that matter) is acquired by borrowing from a dealer. What is borrowed is then immediately sold. The short seller later returns to the market, buys back the asset, and returns it to the original owner. If the short seller is correct (or has manipulated the market through huge positions to make it correct), a profit is made. Take this simple example. A futures contract in oil is obtained at $70 a barrel and sold at market. When the contracts are reacquired (i.e., the short seller buys at market to return the contract to its source), the price of oil has declined to $62. The transaction makes $8 a barrel (with the contract usually for 10,000 barrels), minus whatever small fee is paid for the right to use (temporarily) an asset actually held by somebody else. Now, shorting is a component of the market. It remains quite dangerous for the average investor because there is theoretically no limit to how much you can lose if the value of the underlying asset goes up after the initial sale. It still must be bought back and returned, regardless of how much it has appreciated in price during the interim. Some shorts are even more dangerous and are now limited or prevented by regulators. These involve running a “naked” short, a short contract without actually having the underlying commodity or stock to begin with. Big players can sometimes do this by stringing together options and other pieces of derivative paper. Nonetheless, a really bad move here can bring down a trading house. For the individual retail investor, it is a direct way of losing the farm. Two SWFs Have Been Shorting Oil… But what if the underlying asset upon which the short is constructed – both its availability and amount – is under your control? What if you are shorting your own product? Normally, this would be considered insane. Why deliberately reduce the price charged for your source of revenue? Why guarantee that you are going to be receiving less? This makes sense only if the short is run for a different objective, one for which the short seller is prepared to take a price hit short term for more market control longer term. Well, this is what OPEC nations have been doing at least over the past three weeks. Indications have surfaced from the volume and direction of paper makers in Dubai and on the continent that at least two Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) from OPEC members have been shorting oil. This is the latest stage in the competition with shale producers. By driving the oil price to below $58 a barrel, sources are indicating between 8 and 12% has been shaved off the Dated Brent benchmark price. Brent is one of two major benchmarks against which most international oil trade is based. The other is West Texas Intermediate (WTI). Brent is set daily in London; WTI in New York. …Depressing Brent Prices Statistics for what shots are run in the U.S. are transparent. This is not the case in many other parts of the world. There, indication of movement is gained by what financing middlemen do. As of Tuesday of this week, sources confirm that oil shorting contracts beginning on June 15 have increased markedly from Persian Gulf interests. Brent prices have declined 13.8% in the six weeks that followed. According to sources cutting the paper, primary among the short contracts sold and purchased has been action sponsored by two of the largest SWFs in the world: SAMA Foreign Holdings (Saudi Arabia) and the Kuwait Investment Authority. In each case, financial intermediaries are used for the actual transactions. Other SWFs are suspected. It is certainly possible that an SWF may short oil merely as a revenue-gathering device. After all, such funds are investing excess capital to gain a return and they exist all over the world. But short sales are rather uncommon with these huge outfits; they would rather have longer-term returns from less volatility instruments. Both of the SWFs identified obtain their funds from oil sales. The shorts constitute undercutting their own profits. However, the objective here is not to gain a return. They are, after all, assuring a reduced revenue flow from the very asset providing their own funding. Why the Funds Are Playing This Game This is a policy decision, not a fiduciary one. It is intended to drive the price down, prompting the closure and/or reduced operations of primary oil production competitors. And it is likely to have the intended affect as we move into unsustainable debt loads for many American shale producers, rising bankruptcies among smaller operators, and a resurgence in the M&A curve. The shorts guarantee a loss of income but are orchestrated for other reasons. Obviously there are other shorts being run by interests having nothing to do with OPEC. In fact, as the major short positions emerge, it makes it that much easier for others to follow suit. OPEC is proving a point by (at least in the short term) shooting itself in the foot to clear out competitors. Short positions need to be unwound and settled. This will happen quickly. The Saudi Oil Ministry announced yesterday they expected the dip in crude prices to be ending soon. Easy enough to say when major crude providers have been driving prices of their own product down all along.

alphabravo321 18 Aug 2015

Whats the Aviva RNS about?

alphabravo321 15 Aug 2015

What next for the Ocean Guardian? Currently 5 supply boats along side her, getting ready to move but where?

sobeit 15 Aug 2015

Interesting RNS I note the latest Cantor statement issued yesterday is very interesting and relate to the day before when the announcement was made.Purchases 1,304,955 high: 7.26 GBX low: 3.7 GBXSales 292,500 high: 7.25 GBX low: 4 GBXIf Cantor was trading in such wide ranges what does this tell us? I suspect somebody is shorting this share with a view to making a killing and, by implication, the same goes for Providence.

SlagChops 14 Aug 2015

Re: RNS - Failed - Slagchops Stuart has been pursuing this and I believe it's still ongoing. I sold my entire SEA holding shortly afterwards. Decided it was better to call it a day.

alphabravo321 14 Aug 2015

Makes a lot of sense Sobeit, only time will tell...any day now

mimbrit 14 Aug 2015

Re: RNS - Failed - Slagchops I saw on the Seaenergy board you were planning to take JAW to task (quite succinctly).Did you in fact do so and what, may I ask, was the result? Thanks,mim

sobeit 14 Aug 2015

Re: RNS - Failed The only benefit here is that the drill did not cost Lansdowne anything. Petronas via Kinsale Energy had taken the costs as part of the farm out.There is of course another side to this failure and that is the reason why it was drilled. Kinsale drilled this to increase their gas reserves since those in their other fields are running out. Those other ones are the Kinsale Head, Ballycotton, Seven Heads and Southwest Kinsale Gas Fields. Midleton would have tied in very nicely to those.Remember this which did not, in the end take place,[link] where is Petronas now going to look to find more gas? Well, Barryroe has, if we believe the hype, got tons of the stuff and according to the spiel "Barryroe is an oil and gas field discovered in the Celtic Sea due south of Cork. Close to the exhausted Kinsale Head gas field, it is as close as 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) to the Kinsale Head existing pipeline."So, with the Midleton failure, Kinsale Energy, now that Kinsale Head is also exhausted, would be better off getting its gas from Barryroe rather than from another speculative drill in the Celtic Sea which could result in another dud.

Omaha man 13 Aug 2015

Re: RNS - Failed Unfortunately I think the Providence share price tells you everything you need to know about the prospects for Barryoe. Difficult to see anything other than receivership or a series of ever cheaper rights issues here to fund its continuing existence.

sobeit 13 Aug 2015

Re: RNS - Failed I was right.It was clear from the share price movements that the "insiders" were here before us as usual.Never mind. When Barryroe comes good we will all be in clover or, if that too fails, that stuff the cows leave behind when they eat the clover.

SlagChops 13 Aug 2015

RNS - Failed 13 August 2015Lansdowne Oil & Gas ("Lansdowne" or "the Company", the independent oil and gas company focussed on offshore Ireland, announces that drilling has reached target depth at the Midleton exploration well in the Celtic Sea (Lansdowne 20%) and the logging programme has been completed. Designated 49/11-3, the well spudded on 29 July 2015 and reached total vertical depth of 3,480 feet below the rotary table (3,393 feet TVDSS below sea level). Good quality reservoirs were encountered in the Greensand and Upper Wealden formations of the Lower Cretaceous. Some gas was present in the Greensand but the volumes are not considered commercial and the Upper Wealden was water wet. The well will be plugged and abandoned.The Midleton well was operated by PSE Kinsale Energy (80%) using Diamond Offshore Drilling's Ocean Guardian drilling rig. Stephen Boldy, Chief Executive of Lansdowne Oil & Gas commented:"The results from the Midleton exploration well are disappointing but we retain substantial resources in the Celtic Sea via our 20% interest in the Barryroe oil field. We will continue to work hard to move forward with this project and to unlock its value for our shareholders."