reserves, metrics and gas prices, page-23

H,

The subtlety is extraordinary - is "back on I" what I think it means ?

Some of the BR Crew has quite a few of us on the "I" as dealing with cognitive dissonance can be a mental chore.

It makes no difference to me or to Buddy or any other rational poster just who have capitulated and resorted to the "I". I wouldnt think of putting anyone to the "I" as all posters have a viewpoint which together sets the Sentiment in this ESG Clinic. But the "I" is a good HC feature. Occasional removal from the "I" in order to keep Watch on those put to the "I" is an intelligent usage.

I posted before the AGM that I reckoned if there were no "goodies" thrown to the troops then a cliff jump for the sp would be likely.

I argued today that ESG still has significant value but others argue on the hidden intent of certifiers or others to somehow cloak the denominator in the metric equation and thereby the Metric is not the "Real Metric". Reversion to the old Conspiracy theory again.

Whatever Takeover Valuation Metric makes you feel good should be used. The Shell- AOE IER of 3/6/10 Section "6.3 Industry rules of thumb" Page 53 is a good read to get some perspective.

Real world transactions have no meaning in the ESG misty valley.

As for Holy, the fact that he is now mostly rational means that even he sees that the time for giving ESG the "Hard Stare" has come.


We have a management which treats shareholders like mushrooms and prognosticates about all sorts of hook-ups without clarification of their freedom to actually make an independent deal.


Lets have some real results for a change.



Cheers