Oil Investment Big Discoveries, low stock price.
#16
Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:11 PM
#17
Posted 11 February 2012 - 05:25 PM
Shame I only invested 500 because it is high risk.
Are people holding to buy out or waiting for a target price?
#18
Posted 11 February 2012 - 10:43 PM
#19
Posted 20 February 2012 - 08:20 AM
NOHPC, waiting for full buy out of the company.
This little beauty helped me buy my current home first time round
This post has been edited by OzzMosiz: 20 February 2012 - 08:23 AM
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#20
Posted 06 March 2012 - 04:54 PM
Hope no one got hit by margins. Keep holding tight.
#21
Posted 07 March 2012 - 01:05 PM
bulltraderpt, on 07 March 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:
It touched the gap at £2.23 so where it goes next is anyone's guess although the next (lower) Fib level is £1.73.
Be careful, I have no position currently.
I am long at 180 and am holding as an investor, for the takeout.
I do have a very small margined position long at 290, which I shored up till 80p. I would otherwise have been margin-called at 190 and that caused me jitters yesterday. At that low level of leverage I may as well just buy the damned shares.
You are utterly right about where it'll go next. I am crap at predicting short term movements so am sticking to my strengths.
This post has been edited by Laguarde's Companion: 07 March 2012 - 01:06 PM
#22
Posted 07 March 2012 - 04:41 PM
I'm holding till it either kicks off and gets me a mansion or disappears and i keep renting a shoebox, either way doubt much would make me sell up early.
Edit - average 195p. In spite of making me nearly lose the contents of my bowels repeatedly yesterday, it's still done better in 6 months odd than i would have taken in savings accounts in a few years.
This post has been edited by rw42: 07 March 2012 - 04:44 PM
#23
Posted 13 March 2012 - 02:08 PM
"HSBC saying 280p target due to risk" - no risk to the other oilers in Kurdistan though, eh?
"Exxon are out of Kurdistan" - followed by Exxon confirming they are committed to both South and North
"CNN interview of Todd saying no short term takeover, announced by Seymour Pierce" - turns out that CNN interview was from 2009!!!! How bad is that!!!
Then we have an amazing RNS confirming that there is a new reservoir and hinting all the blocks could be connected - one huge sea of oil!
Edit: I topped up below 250p, rude not to.
This post has been edited by OzzMosiz: 13 March 2012 - 02:08 PM
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#24
Posted 22 April 2012 - 07:32 PM
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#25
Posted 23 April 2012 - 03:11 PM
Nice 10% rise today about time. Everyone was saying how BOR was going to be todays sweetheart, that didn't turn out too well!
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#26
Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:54 PM
bulltraderpt, on 23 April 2012 - 03:18 PM, said:
23 Apr 2012 SELL BPC LSE 25063 8.55 2132.89
23 Apr 2012 BUY BPC LSE 25063 7.94 2000.00.
LOL I bought some BPC on Friday and sold it for a quick 5% profit on Friday too. Was kicking myself this morning when I saw it hit 9p
Well done
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#27
Posted 15 May 2012 - 11:50 AM
bulltraderpt, on 10 May 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:
When it dipped to 183p I actually put a buy order in for 177p incase they took it further, it didn't and wasn't filled.
I was pretty sure that rumour of a placement was BS, and the company confirmed it. I think we will start to get some good news flow in the next week onwards.
I think SH5/6 should be completed by now. So news not far off and it was good to see the company mentioned several "BIDDERS" for AB
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#28
Posted 28 May 2012 - 06:50 PM
bulltraderpt, on 27 May 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:
İ shall buy just in front of the gap 1.70 ish if it gets down there ie İll get my limit order in.
GL.
Limit buys on CEY and CHAR much lower than current places.
This post has been edited by OzzMosiz: 28 May 2012 - 06:50 PM
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#29
Posted 06 June 2012 - 09:54 AM
That is a possibility, but this is one of the biggest finds in the last 30 years. Can you really see an oil major not trying to acquire it?
What if GKP prove up more oil, any oil major may have to pay a lot LOT more.
Of course GKP may decide to try and go it alone, they will need to raise funds for this, but imaging the market cap if they do.
They are currently valued at around £1.5billion. I could see it being 30 times that!
There are 10^11 stars in the galaxy. That used to be a huge number. But it's only a hundred billion. It's less than the national deficit! We used to call them astronomical numbers. Now we should call them economical numbers.
~ Richard Feynman (1918 to 1988)
#30
Posted 14 June 2012 - 08:22 AM
Sign In »
Register Now!
Help


Back to top
MultiQuote