Shouldn't be too long before hearing the outcome of the study.
Article by Greig Cameron, Scottish Business Editor writing in The Times on the 8th of February.
"In a further sign of its confidence in the Greater Perth development, the company has commissioned a reservoir study from AGR Tracs International to see if there are ways to improve the flow rates and recovery levels from the area. The engineering study will run for the next ten weeks and look at ways to connect to the Scott platform, which lies six miles to the southeast of the Perth area. Mr Cross said that using the existing production facilities on the Scott field would make the Perth development more commercially attractive by reducing the upfront and operational costs."
amazing/strange close for this stock today.. ending up nearly 20% on day.. maybe a rumour of some sort.. whatever, it has now passed it's one year high and even if it steps back a bit tomorrow - could easily do after such a finish - I'm getting confident that this is now in process off breaking out.. DYOR as ever of course...
It seems that the FPSO plan has been put on the back burner in favour of the tie-back to the Scott platform. Given the lifetime of the fields and platforms, in this area, expressed in the article you would assume that it's really in Nexen's interest to work with PMG on this project.
News on the Nexen investigation, a TRACS update or some service agreements could really give this some momentum. Over 50p at this time... so hopefully this is just the start.
I wish I did more topping up around 35p Ripley.. it brought my average down a bit thankfully to around 43p now.. so at least I'm back in profit, at least.. it's but a small profit on a mid sized position for me.. I have been patient and will remain patient as I can see this going meaningfully higher from here in due course.. hopefully and whenever that may be ( their recent update was a little underwhelming imho but defo. on right path and Tom Cross should be different gravy.. if past performance is an indicator..)
5 April 2018 - DNO ASA, the Norwegian oil and gas operator, today announced that it has acquired 8,487,838 shares in Faroe Petroleum plc at a price of GBP 1.25 per share representing 2.32 percent of the outstanding shares in Faroe Petroleum.
This follows the separate completion on 4 April 2018 of a reverse book building process through which DNO acquired 10 percent of the shares in Faroe Petroleum at a price of GBP 1.25 per share and the acquisition of 15.37 percent of the share capital of Faroe Petroleum from Delek Group Ltd. at a price of GBP 1.25 per share.
Following the three transactions, DNO will own 101,503,663 shares representing 27.68 percent of the outstanding shares in Faroe Petroleum.
Investors are starting to warm to the investment case of Parkmead Group (PMG:41p), a small-cap oil and gas exploration and development company led by 19 per cent shareholder Tom Cross, the founder and former chief executive of Dana Petroleum. The share price has risen by 10 per cent since I included the shares in my 2018 Bargain Shares Portfolio, and recent developments only reinforce my positive stance.
Hi nice to michu.
In hindsight good decisions in late October you must of topped around bottom @ 35p.
25% up now @ 43.75p
Thought id looked at this before buy can not see a post in last year.
Interesting link on trin bb buy lady Jennifer 9.3.18 "CJ Exposure Research" this being there top oil pick. ( Any one familiar with CJ exposure ? )
Others on that list SQZ.. PMO... RKH. ( this and trin of course which i do not have )
The facts are, oil saturated in the sandstone reservoirs underground don't have a very great asset value at all it is when it is recovered to the surface that the value increases. Parkmead have crude and plenty of it, tens of millions of barrels proven and many more times probable, maybe a billion in time. Shareholders are hopeful, The Government want it to happen it brings jobs back to the North Sea, along with Taxes and helps with energy independence for the UK. This is not a Wildcatter requiring intense financing in a new frontier the oil and gas is there in a proven oil province. We will maybe soon have an export route out. We now need a favourable deal to be struck with whoever the partner maybe to bring the oil to the surface profitably.
Aberdeen oil firm Parkmead says it is aiming to unlock substantial value from the Greater Perth Area (GPA) in the North Sea, after narrowing its first-half losses for 2017.
The London-listed company, with operations in the UK North Sea and the Netherlands,posted an pre-tax losses of £4million in the six month to December, down from £4.5million in the same period in 2016.
It comes after the firm took full control of the Greater Perth Area (GPA) in the central North Sea last month, including the Perth and Dolphin fields, following a deal with Faroe Petroleum.
The deal lifted the companys net reserves to 46.3million barrels of oil equivalent, a 67% increase on the previous year
Parkmead says a detailed study is being carried out into whether it can be tied-back to the Nexen-operated Scott platform nearby.
Executive Chairman Tom Cross said: I am pleased to report excellent progress in the period to 31 December 2017. The Group has doubled gross profit, through a combination of Parkmeads increased gas production in the Netherlands and the proactive cost reduction programme in the UK.
We are also pleased with the major progress made with the Greater Perth Area project. By increasing our stake in the Perth and Dolphin oil fields, Parkmeads oil and gas reserves grow by some 67%.
The study with Nexen will examine one path to potentially unlock the substantial value of the GPA project for the benefit of the UK and Parkmead shareholders, as well as providing further value for the existing infrastructure partners.
The team at Parkmead is working intensively to evaluate and execute further opportunities which could build value and provide additional upside to the Company. Parkmead is analysing both oil and gas, and wider energy related opportunities, which could broaden and enhance the Groups revenue stream
I don't read it that way but of course I could be wrong.
The shareholding in FPM is listed every year as 'available for sale financial assets' The shares could be sold at any time to free up cash, as far as I am aware there is no lock in agreement.
Last year the shares were worth £4.0m, this year they are worth £4.1m.
Parkmead are simply stating their current value.
I tend to agree with you on the assumption that the market has built today`s value into the price over the last weeks . Looking forward on a risk reward scenario it looks a good 10¬1 shot for the long term assuming everthing plays out. I don't do favorites.
A resounding buy signal on that results address. The gateway to be passed is the crucial GPA tieback report to the Scott platform in 2-3 months time. There are plenty of "Lookers" at the proposals on offer , some with "Cash" . If a JV partner on the GPA project finds it viable and is contracted all risks regarding the matter of the fraud allegations and other issues would have been evaluated before a go ahead is given y that party. Couple of hurdles yet though! Come on Tom!!
Ha. I think Trump had you in mind when he coined the term fake news. If you read the entirety of my posts you will see that actually I was right: there have already been opportunities to buy in cheaper.
Look- you seem to you know your stuff and take a balanced view but you posted a gratuitous criticism of me that, when considered in context, I would hope you can see was unwarranted; irrelevant to what I had posted; and added nothing to a genuine and helpful discussion about the merits of holding PMG. Hence why I felt the need to provide the correct context.
No one gets every decision and judgement right, least of all me. So I disagree with your opinion that people should be called out when they get it wrong- unless (perhaps) they repeatedly give no explanation for their beliefs on which people can judge them and just repeatedly spew out nonsense.
However, if people should be called out how's this howler from you on PMG from a few years ago :
"Topped up again this morning at 180p after topping up a month or so ago at 210p. Today I added an extra 10% to my holding after adding 5% last month. Obviously both buys now look a bad move but I am confident that over time they will prove to be extremely cheap....I would say that now is a gilt edged opportunity to accumulate." You also said you would be topping up further if it fell further- I hope you didn't.
Gilt edged? That's as bullish a recommendation as I've ever seen! As I say we all get it wrong so I only mention it because by your own standards I'm entitled/obliged to. I disagree and think genuine detailed opinions are helpful- and some the most helpful I've seen on various boards have been well constructed views that disagree with my own. Obviously some will be wrong- but the thought process behind them can still be insightful
As for my response to your initial criticism yesterday I only replied because the context of my sell recommendations at 35/36p was IMO very important and made your summary misleading. The crux of those latest sell recommendations was either correct or else too soon to be called wrong.
Yup, In November I did have a "weak sell" recommendation on PMG OVER THE LONG TERM because it's COMPARATIVE RISK/REWARD metrics meant, IMO that there was better value elsewhere. I still believe that at 43.25p. Also I suggested selling because I thought ( a key word) and explained that I suspected there would be an opportunity to buy PMG back cheaper. And there has already been !!
If anyone had followed my earlier advice to sell much higher they wouldn't still have held their shares in PMG. Am I to be responsible for those who ignore my much more strident sell recommendations at circa 56p , only to sell on a 'weak sell' 35p when it was a more nuanced COMPARATIVE recommendation. ( Tho depending on what they switched into they could still be doing better than retaining PMG even with it's rise). Surely anyone knows that once a price has tumbled the judgment call is that much harder and margin for error much greater when selling? My posts were balanced and not pure negativity- just giving information for people to factor in to their own consideration.
Below is just one small extract from one of those "sell" posts you mention but is the theme of all of them . Just because- in the last few months ( for the first time for years) PMG has actually gone up does not make it's COMPARATIVE performance OVER TIME good. Time is needed before we can know. I'm not a trader and most amateur traders lose money.I invest for the long term (3-5 years usually). My opinion- which was all it was- was for the medium/long term. Judge me on that time frame not a different metric which you choose to impose.
EXTRACT ( highlighting is from the original):
"When considering other opportunities in the market that I think are much better, that reinforces my view that PMG COMPARATIVELY is a sell, to redeploy the capital elsewhere.
You neglect to mention the three SELL recommendations you posted in November 2017, the shares were trading throughout that month in a range of roughly 34-37p.
You got it wrong, get over it, the need to be right is one of the investors worst enemies.
If you are must issue BUY and SELL recommendations be prepared to be called out when you get it wrong.
No question marks,
Your observation of my historic posting is misleading. I apologise to anyone who thinks that anyone on this board can guarantee that their opinions will come true. No one has a crystal ball. My posts explicitly said that PMG may well rise over time. My observations were consistent that on it's merits BY COMPARISON TO OTHER INVESTMENTS I perceived PMG to have high risk and less likely reward to justify that risk over the medium term than other high risk stocks. For example the risk associated with the HBOS fraud is simply ignored. It may well not manifest, but if it does it could on its own destroy the company . Hence it is a risk that, in my opinion, should be factored into the risks of holding PMG .
Contrary to what you say I think that even with hindsight my posts stand the test of time reasonably well ( and certainly better than callsignzulu, who has been advocating people buy PMG since it was above 200 and all the way down. Over the last few months he has been right a few times but even a broken clock is right twice a day). As well as repeatedly comparing PMG to the market as a whole I said:
1. On 3rd Feb 2017 to sell PMG ( when it was 56.5)
2. 2/3/ 17 to sell PMG at 56
3. 20/4/17 sell PMG at 47.5
4. 26/4/17 to sell PMG at 49
As regards the particular high risk company (IQE) I suggested that PMG holders swap into, I first mentioned this on 25/7/17 when IQE were 112p and PMG was 40.5. At today's close PMG can be sold at 42.1 and IQE at 132.2. a profit before dealing costs of almost 4% on PMG and 18% on IQE.
As to the later - and only - post you have referred to you have got the prices of the companies wrong. IQE was 130p ( not 160-170 as you say : that's where it went after my recommendation, and even above 180....within months) and PMG was 140. So neither has - as at today for those who continued to hold and not take the huge profits that IQE offered - delivered a sufficient return for the risk. But then my post did EXPLICITLY say that I thought IQE would out perform PMG OVER 12 MONTHS. So it's a bit unfair to judge me with 5 months to go, and where for a lot of the time since my posting IQE has materially outperformed PMG
Also, you fail to mention that on 12/1/18 I said there were indications of signs of life in PMG's share price at 38p. On balance I thought it was too early to call it as a buy. But that shows I'm not overly negative- just realistic.
So, I feel that on balance and on the evidence of what I actually said rather than what you mistakenly think I said, most of my posts have been remarkably prescient. Anyone following almost any one of my posts would have avoided significant losses on PMG ( and probably made money elsewhere) and if invested in IQE would have had plenty of chances to take exceptional profits . If they remain holders of IQE (as I am- sitting on a very substantial % gain even at 132)then I believe that over several years they will be well rewarded. There is risk, but then so does PMG- not least the oil price, which is what is currently supporting it.
I am of course not saying my opinions will always be right- but think your inaccurate and distorted review of my opinions creates a very false impression for people on this board who are trying to assess whose views are worth giving thought to. In short, if people had followed my first , second third or 4th advice to sell PMG they would be far richer today. If they had followed my other advice I still believe they will be more likely to get a better return.
In view of your reference to an apology being due from people who are wrong I wonder whether you think one is due?
I give my opinions honestly and without confirmation bias, which is so prevalent on this board. Some of them will with hindsight be right and others wrong. But you have sentenced me before the jury is even back in. As I have previously posted, even Warren Buffet makes howler mistakes. the difference is that he doesn't delude
You were issuing sell recommendations when Parkmead were trading at 35p.
You were suggesting that shareholders should sell up and invest in another company that you had an interest in, the 'other' company was trading at around 160-170p at the time.
Parkmead is up 20% since your sell recommendation.
The 'other' company is 20% down.
You were wrong, an apology to may have followed your advice may be in order don't you think?
With regards to Governance.
I had read the annual report and was aware of the loan. I can't disagree that with hindsight it should have been disclosed by RNS
This is the reality of the AIM market, the Wild West was better regulated.
There are some really shocking companies valued in the hundreds of millions and into the billions trading on AIM that I personally wouldn't touch with a barge pole.
Parkmead are far better than most and will move to the main market when the time is right. TC and the board have been FTSE directors before and will be so again,.
Just in my opinion etc etc.
Which of the facts on which my opinions were based do you think are codswallop? Both are easily verifiable from public records and undeniable. Suggesting otherwise- as you do- just makes you look childish.
You are entitled to your own opinions- as am I- but only a fool chooses to ignore inconvenient facts. Which may explain why you have lost so much on this share over the years .
Friday's after hours RNS indicates something about the balance of the Board. Not only does the company have various dealings with other companies in which Tom Cross is interested, but they don't comply with the obligations on disclosure to the market about them. The original statement about one (of several) connected party transactions was lost on the last page (page 70) of their last accounts back in November, and it's taken until Friday to realise they should have drawn specific attention to it.
And there are other related party transactions.
However positive your view about the future price of oil, TC's capabilities as an oil man, and the hidden value of assets on the balance sheet this should cause you to pause. The Board just doesn't seem to have any real independence ( see their past connections with TC) or ability to say no to a CEO who wants to use Parkmead money and assets to benefit his other business interests.
In my experience such things usually don't turn out that well in the long run.
And there's still the chickens to come home to roost from the ripples from the largest banking fraud in this country's history- £245 m. Parkmead's subsidiary and executive director were central to the conspiracy. I'd be surprised if they get off scot free.
The Dell. The note says that the oil in place is the figures you seem to be saying will be produced or recovered. 197m for Perth Core and 498m including northern areas.
Your post says increase recovery to these same figures. 2p reserves now stand at 46.3m.
THE outlook for investment in the North Sea is brighter than it has been for years and more than 50 per cent of firms expect to increase employee numbers according to a closely watched report.
The latest Business outlook report by Oil & Gas UK highlights a big improvement in conditions in the North Sea where recent crude price rises have boosted confidence.
The industry body said firms are also feeling the benefit of efforts to increase efficiency made amid the deep downturn that started in 2014, which have resulted in thousands of job losses.
Our sector is leaner, more efficient and more optimistic than it has been in recent years and 2018 looks set to be a better year, said chief executive Deirdre Michie.
She added: More projects are taking place and investment is happening because of the sweeping changes made to adapt to the challenging business climate. This has helped make the United Kingdom Continental Shelf one of the most attractive mature basins in the world.
Oil & Gas UK noted official estimates North Sea production taxes should generate an average £1 billion annually for the Government over the next five years.
The North Sea cost the Treasury £0.3bn in 2016-17, as many firms made losses on their output in the area following the slump in the oil price that started in June 2014.
The partial recovery in the crude price since late 2016 has left firms in a much stronger position than they were in the depths of the downturn.
Oil & Gas UK reckons North Sea firms generated £5.5bn cash in 2017, the highest figure since 2011.
However, the industry body said many areas of the supply chain are still struggling with the impact of the downturn and have yet to benefit from any upturn in activity.
It warned that billions of barrels could be at risk unless the slump in exploration activity in the North Sea seen in recent years is reversed. Drilling activity failed to pick up last year.
Production is set to fall again from the early 2020s following deep cuts in spending on new developments since 2014.
Coming weeks after Royal Dutch Shell announced plans to redevelop the giant Penguins field north of Scotland, the report provides further evidence oil and gas firms have rediscovered their appetite for investing in North Sea developments.
Oil & Gas UK said between 12 and 16 oil and gas developments could get the go-ahead this year unlocking investment of around £5 billion.
This would be more than the total value of oil and gas field developments approved over the last three years combined, promising a boost for the hard-pressed supply chain.
Projects worth up to £25bn in total are at earlier stages in the assessment process.
Oil & Gas UK said: The project landscape for 2018 is the healthiest the industry has seen since 2013.
It reckons total spending may increase slightly this year as companies commit to new capital projects and return to deferred activities.
Total spending in the North Sea fell from £16.9bn in 2016 to £15.7bn last year. That was less than half the level recorded in 2013, amid the boom in investment which ended after growth in global supplies ran ahead of demand.
Oil and gas firms have cut the costs of production from $30 per barrel in 2014 to $15/bbl boosting profitability but putting pressure on the services sector.
Supply chain revenues are expected to be flat this year, after falling from £40.9bn in 2014 to £27.4bn in 2017.
The number of jobs supported by the industry fell by 15,000 last year to 300,000. A third of firms reduced headcount.
Oil & Gas UK said this year the outlook is far more positive with 56 per cent of firms expecting employee numbers to rise against 6% forecasting reductions.
However Total said yesterday it plans to shed around 250 jobs in Aberdeen following the acquisition of Maersk Oil.
There could be up to nine billion barrels yet to be found in the UK North Sea according to Oil & Gas UK. It thinks there is a major
Interim results were released on the 24th of March last year so I suppose we can expect them to be reported in the next couple of weeks or so.
Share price is moving up quickly and quietly, 35p gone, 40p gone and now attacking 45p.
I can understand why longer term investors in Parkmead Group (PMG) may be somewhat unimpressed with the performance of the share price recently, but the company itself is continuing to make good progress. I hold shares in the company myself, and whilst the share price has generally been trading in the mid-30p to low-40p range, in spite of the strength that the oil price has been showing in recent months, Im happy to remain invested and see how things unfold in the coming months and years.
With any oil and gas company, things always take much longer to come to fruition than people originally expect, but if a company does have a major project which it is working towards taking into production, and as long as you see a realistic chance of that actually happening, then often the best thing that you can do is nothing at all, or even add more shares whilst the price is supressed.
Parkmead is a company which operates offshore in the UK, as well as having gas assets in the Netherlands, and is run by a team which has form in the oil and gas sector for building a company into something big, with executive chairman Tom Cross having done it all before at Dana Petroleum. Past success isnt necessarily proof that the next business will perform so well, but I would definitely place some faith in him given what he has previously achieved.
The company has just announced that it has further increased its interest in the licences which make up the Greater Perth Area (GPA), one of the largest undeveloped projects in the North Sea, and with oil prices more buoyant it could well be the perfect time to have done so. Parkmead now owns 100% of the Perth and Dolphin licences, and of the GPA area, and has also signed an agreement with Nexen Petroleum to carry out an engineering study to explore the potential for a subsea tie-back to the Scott platform. Additionally, AGR Tracs has been commissioned to undertake a reservoir study looking at fracture stimulation which could increase both flow rates and the overall recovery factor, and would also mean a reserves upgrade. Both Perth and Dolphin have achieved production test results of up to 6,000bopd from a single well.
The increased stake in GPA has also added significant amounts to the 2P reserves of the company, which now stand at over 46 million barrels and with plenty of upside potential as the whole area could have as much as 500 million barrels of oil-in-place, with the core Perth area alone estimated at 197 million barrels.
Obviously that all sounds very good for a company valued at just £41 million currently especially when you take into account its other development licences such as the Platypus gas one alongside the GPA hub, plus all of the exploration blocks.
But to unlock any of that value it needs to reach production, and the company is making progress with the FEED (front end engineering design) for the field. At some point it is going to need to find significant amounts of funds to reach production, but with the option of possibly using the Scott tie-back (depending on whether that can be adapted to handle the higher hydrogen sulphide levels) that may now be a lot less than had been expected had the company gone down the FPSO route a FPSO may still be the only option, depending on whether the existing facilities can be adapted to the type of oil at GPA. I would also expect some form of debt funding rather than anything that diluted equity by a significant amount for current shareholders. The studies currently being undertaken should give a clearer picture on all of this.
Aside from GPA, the Dutch gas assets are enough to keep the company ticking along without burning through its cash reserves too quickly those stood at circa $34 million at the end of June 2017 and it is also debt-free. But it has been loss-making on a net basis and everything really revolves around the GPA area and the potential from that, if and when it starts producing. For me, given the amount
Panmure Gordon research note 7thFeb 2018:- Parkmead have commissioned AGR Trace to undertake a reservoir study that could lead to substantial increase in recovery of oil for core Perth field to 197 mmbbl and 498mmbbl including the northern areas of the field. Tenders for commercialisation in place. Despite many uncertainties it is believed these announcements will materially bring improved chances of GPA moving to commercialisation. This is a short text of the full document.
it seems way past time this s/p woke up .. it has barely participated on the ongoing POO/G rally so far.. mad is meaningfully too low now imho.. but there are plenty of others out there that are meaningfully too low imho - eg Amerisur, SDX - and so it remains a tricky O&G landscape now .. eg there is a lack of trust in the sector still .. may be shale - and renewables- related but may also be that companies might still be slow to grow nett profit for a variety of reasons and until strong figures are written in black and white in interims or finals more Instiutional money will not get switched back in etc.. so please PMG give us strong NETT profit figures this time !
Some months back Tom Cross stated, "The Parkmead Group was well ahead of Dana Petroleum in terms of development within the same timescale". The "buzz" lately and the share price showing positive signs today will maybe herald "onwards and upwards" come the mid terms to come in a week or so!!!
Reuters) - Oil prices rose on Tuesday, supported by a weaker dollar but U.S. crude's gains were limited by expectations for a weekly rise in U.S. crude stockpiles.
Brent crude LCOc1 futures rose 25 cents to settle at $65.79 a barrel, a 0.4 percent gain. Brent reached a low of $65.30 a barrel and a six-day high of $66.16 a barrel during the session.
West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude CLc1 futures rose 3 cents to settle at $62.60 a barrel. WTI notched its own six-day high at $63.28 a barrel.
Oil prices fell in post-settlement trade after data from the American Petroleum Institute showed U.S. crude inventories rose by 5.7 million barrels last week, a bigger-than-expected rise.
Oil drew support as the U.S. dollar fell to its lowest in more than a week against a basket of currencies on news from South Korea that North Korea was willing to hold talks with the United States on denuclearization, and would suspend nuclear tests during any discussions.
South Korea also said it would hold a summit with North Korea for the first time in more than a decade.
The news led investors to sell the U.S. dollar and instead buy riskier assets such as commodities.
The dollar index last was down by half a percent. A weaker greenback makes dollar-denominated commodities cheaper for holders of other currencies.
"If you reduce geopolitical risk in the world, it might be a better place to do business and that could be bullish," said Phil Flynn, analyst at Price Futures Group in Chicago.
U.S. oil prices were under pressure from expectations that weekly crude inventory data from the U.S. government, due on Wednesday, would show a second straight rise.
Analysts polled by Reuters ahead of the data on average expect U.S. crude stocks rose by 2.7 million barrels in the week ended March 2.
Inventories are rising during the seasonal maintenance period for refineries, when shutdowns mean they need less crude.
A surge in U.S. crude production to more than 10 million barrels per day (bpd) has helped the country overtake top exporter Saudi Arabia.
Output hit a record 10.057 million bpd in November, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration said in a monthly report it expected fourth-quarter U.S. crude output to reach an average of 11.17 million bpd, up from its forecast a month ago of 11.04 million bpd.
The continued growth of U.S. shale has been a theme at the CERAWeek conference in Houston this week, said John Kilduff, partner at investment manager Again Capital in New York.
Brent had dipped closer to $65 in earlier trading, pressured by the International Energy Agency's (IEA) warning on Monday that U.S. oil output was set to surge over the coming five years.
The prospect of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and non-member producers, including Russia, maintaining crude output cuts in the face of a boom in U.S. shale production helped lift Brent back above $65 a barrel this week.
April U.S. gasoline futures RBc1 rose as much as 0.50 percent to hit $1.9443 a gallon, the highest since Jan. 30, before retreating.
Important message from the Financial Conduct Authority:
Posting inside information that is not public knowledge, or information that is false or misleading, may constitute market abuse.
This could lead to an unlimited fine and up to seven years in prison.
If you have any information, concerns or queries about market abuse, click here.
The content of the messages posted represents the opinions of the author, and does not represent the opinions of Interactive Investor Trading Limited or its affiliates and has not been approved or issued by Interactive Investor Trading Limited.
You should be aware that the other participants of the above discussion group are strangers to you and may make statements which may be misleading, deceptive or wrong.
Please remember that the value of investments or income from them may go down as well as up and that the past performance of an investment is not a guide to its performance in the future.
The discussion boards on this site are intended to be an information sharing forum and is not intended to address your particular requirements.
Whilst information provided on them can help with your investment research you need to consider carefully whether you should make (or refraining from making) investment or other decisions based on what you see without doing further research on investments you are interested in.
Participating in this forum cannot be a substitute for obtaining advice from an appropriate expert independent adviser who takes into account your circumstances and specific investment needs in selected investments that are appropriate for you.