A lot of very critical people on here making all kinds of assumptions based on overconfidence in themselves, and a lack of confidence in an experienced team. I think for every criticism I've read, there's a fairly obvious explanation behind why certain decisions were made. The two I hear a lot of us are:
Why did they take so long to sample?
They didn't, they had multiple tool failures from the get go and were cautious in not repeating the mistakes of the first hole. The hole was challenging from the beginning. They seemed to do their best by having multiple replacements on the way, and have been sensible in changing tact to ensure they get all the data they can from this hole.
Why don't they go straight to flow testing?
A combination of risk and funding. If the sensible approach (as they're taking) means a short term dip in the share price, then unless there's a cap raise required to complete the next steps, there's no issue
Why aren't they marketing this better / Why no discovery announcement?
Many people have done well to explain why this doesn't constitute a discovery (these explanations certainly helped me understand). In terms of "marketing", again, unless a CR is necessary in the short term, there's no reason to pump, and I think being humble helps in the long term as when there's a price-positive announcement worth hyping, it'll carry far more weight. I've seen stocks over-sell themselves in the short term, causing people to lose faith and trust in the company long term. It's bad for long term sentiment in my opinion. I'm glad IVZ's behaviour doesn't seem to be dictated by a concern for the share price.
Ann: Hydrocarbon gas recovered & evaluation program forward plan, page-820
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
