Tweet
Need a likkle help fram yu... Write up yu street... Dis is Serious...... And mi money his involved...
Back in 1996 I invested in a company called Desire Petroleum...... I bought in at 125.. Desire prime focus was drilling in the Falkland Islands....
Now there a consrtium of oil companises took a rig the Borgny Dolphin to Falkland Islands and punched a number of holes... An aquantiance of mine described the recovered cores as soaked in oil. ( Frankly I have never seen cores soaking in oil so doubt it.. Especially as drilling usually takes place overbalance).. Desire share soared to 450... I stupidly did not take profit.. But bought more... then the the bubbled burst... I should have taken profit... It fell to 25 ....
I held on for a number of reasons.... That make sense to me but I need some of your extertise....
Any way this year there was a rights issue I went at it again... it was 10... I bought in over my basic subscription.... Then early this year it happened the price soared to 64.... I took profit of my original stake... Invested in less speculative stock.... But I still have some significant holding in Desire.. (for me that is...)
Now the reason why I stuck was there was a report from Shell and the British Artic survey... which had the intriguing comment... While drilling encountered was the seacond best source rock ever seen.....
Back then I was involved indirectly all of this.... A friend of mine was working on a propoasl....And we discussed it over a number of beers...
here are my questions... As he was an engineer and I am not ah geologist..
1) One the oil companies were not interested in the data from South America. Rahter they were interested in data from South Africa.... Could it be possible that the hydroccarbon source rock was laid down before South America seperated from South Africa ??? If this is happened then the source rock in the Falkland Islands could have generated the hydrocarbon off South Western Africa.. And I am holding dead's man hand..... Or is the geological times not compatible and I am holding a royal straight flush.....
2) I confess that I have lost all the data I had on this over the years.... Most was got off the internet....
But why I stuck was that in 1996 I saw the sciesmic maps and was impressed with the size of the structures investigating.... I also know that Shell was prediciting at the time the price of oil would bottom out, as it did in 1999....So
This year more 2 D siecmic was shot... by a new company Falkland Oil and Gas. (This is what drove up Desire.)... This time on Tranche to the East of Falkland in Deep water... The siesmic was so promising the company stock rose..... I used money generated from another profitabel investment to invest..... These are all high risk ventures... and is money I am prepared to lose...
But I am intruged that there are people who think this stock is that valuable in light that no well has been drilled to the east....
Any comments apriciated....
Back in 1996 I invested in a company called Desire Petroleum...... I bought in at 125.. Desire prime focus was drilling in the Falkland Islands....
Now there a consrtium of oil companises took a rig the Borgny Dolphin to Falkland Islands and punched a number of holes... An aquantiance of mine described the recovered cores as soaked in oil. ( Frankly I have never seen cores soaking in oil so doubt it.. Especially as drilling usually takes place overbalance).. Desire share soared to 450... I stupidly did not take profit.. But bought more... then the the bubbled burst... I should have taken profit... It fell to 25 ....
I held on for a number of reasons.... That make sense to me but I need some of your extertise....
Any way this year there was a rights issue I went at it again... it was 10... I bought in over my basic subscription.... Then early this year it happened the price soared to 64.... I took profit of my original stake... Invested in less speculative stock.... But I still have some significant holding in Desire.. (for me that is...)
Now the reason why I stuck was there was a report from Shell and the British Artic survey... which had the intriguing comment... While drilling encountered was the seacond best source rock ever seen.....
Back then I was involved indirectly all of this.... A friend of mine was working on a propoasl....And we discussed it over a number of beers...
here are my questions... As he was an engineer and I am not ah geologist..
1) One the oil companies were not interested in the data from South America. Rahter they were interested in data from South Africa.... Could it be possible that the hydroccarbon source rock was laid down before South America seperated from South Africa ??? If this is happened then the source rock in the Falkland Islands could have generated the hydrocarbon off South Western Africa.. And I am holding dead's man hand..... Or is the geological times not compatible and I am holding a royal straight flush.....
2) I confess that I have lost all the data I had on this over the years.... Most was got off the internet....
But why I stuck was that in 1996 I saw the sciesmic maps and was impressed with the size of the structures investigating.... I also know that Shell was prediciting at the time the price of oil would bottom out, as it did in 1999....So
This year more 2 D siecmic was shot... by a new company Falkland Oil and Gas. (This is what drove up Desire.)... This time on Tranche to the East of Falkland in Deep water... The siesmic was so promising the company stock rose..... I used money generated from another profitabel investment to invest..... These are all high risk ventures... and is money I am prepared to lose...
But I am intruged that there are people who think this stock is that valuable in light that no well has been drilled to the east....
Any comments apriciated....
Comment