Member Info for investor33

Ray ; but for me the million dollar question is ; ' what is causing the delay in the district land access signing given that the district committee voted in favour of MATD more than 2 months ago now ? '

The tripartite agreement IMO will take ages to resolve - so we need to know how what is going on with the district committee's paperwork to officially grant access.

Did nobody ask this question ?

Where's Professional today ? He missed a great short from 4.4p down to 2.5p straight after the RNS which would have given him a 40% profit, and has been going on every day for weeks now about buying in on an imminent raise....Guess he got it wrong again.

If you want dividends, then look at Card Factory, which has just restored it's dividend, and is now going great guns again.

A question about a divi in relation to MATD shows that some ' investors ' have their heads in the clouds...

Master82 ; and also surely, what has been holding up the land access paperwork signing, given that the district committee voted in favour of MATD over 2 months ago now ?

I still think that this is more likely to be the way ahead, whereas the special purpose tripartite agreement would need the signature of the intransigent governor.

What exactly has he said about the land access signing off contract ? I have read that it's 'going to take a bit longer ' but what has he stated has held it up ? For me that's the most important point of all.

To give an idea of the current trading range ;

- Mid Dec 23 the price rises from 2.8p to 4.5p by late Dec 23.

- By 12/01/24 it falls to 3.5p and then rises back to a double resistance top of 4.5p on 17/01/24.

- It then falls to 2.6p by 1/03/24 and then rises yet again to the resistance top of 4.5p on 18/03/24.

- It then falls to 3.5p by 09/04/24.

- It then rises to 4.4p by 12/04/24.

- It then falls to 2.5p on 25/04/24 and then 2.9p at today's date.....

Cybertron another one who knows nothing about how algorithmic trading bots kick in with small cap penny shares on news catalysts, and then when certain parameters are reached which they are programmed to act on, they dump the shares. Or conversely, if the news catalyst is analysed as being 'negative' they immediately short and then buy back.

Why do you think we had that small bounce following the sharp drop on the open straight after the last RNS ? Nothing to do with a mass of shorts buying to close their position then ?

For now this is a trader's stock, and it's range bound. Computer bots and human short term traders work with technical analysis, and particularly with support and resistance levels.

Cybertron ; nope, it's because for years it's been a trader's share, but I don't expect that you know much about that.

NicetoMichu ; I would have to say that after years as a LTH of MATD, you are 100% correct when you say that range trading is the way to play such shares. Foolishly, for most of the time that I have held shares I have not kept a close eye on charts - I only started doing this about a year ago. That was a big mistake, because it has been range bound for years.

Over many years the share price has bounced around between pretty well defined support and resistance levels, and frankly if I had traded those levels over the last 4 years then I would be massively in profit by now.

Back last May I briefly sat on a fat profit when it hit 7 or 8p, but foolishly just did nothing. And of course at such times the rampers create lots of FOMO sentiment ; ' jump in now guys this is soaring, and it will be 20p next week ' etc. In reality there have been lots of spikes on news catalysts, but every time the share price has plummeted back down to some kind of support level.

Roxy ; I think it will turn around, but as you say, a raise is pretty well inevitable now. The question is how much will the raise be for, and at what price ?

I think there will be more clarification by MB during the AGM about what is now actually holding up the land access paperwork, so all should become a lot clearer than was apparent in the typically rather cryptic RNS release.

Aeschylus ; there are some typos on the PM website I notice - so I don't have massive confidence in the integrity of the proof reading, whoever is responsible for it. It's not a good look.

To simply call an Isle of Man or UK incorporated company a ' parent company ' makes no sense to me - a parent company of whom exactly ? It's terminology used when talking about having a subsidiary company.

Doc83 ; at the end of the day we are both investors and hopefully it will still work out for us. It has been a very frustrating ride though. What I have learnt most from this saga since I first invested in 2019 is the wisdom of some advice that I recently read in a book about small cap biotech or exploration companies. If there's a sudden price spike on a news catalyst then take out your initial capital and keep the profit invested. That way even in the worst case possible scenario of the company going bust, you are only risking your paper profit. If I had know this at the beginning, and stuck to that advice then it would have been a far less stressful and low risk experience.

Doc83 ; well both can't be true. The Petrovis Group claim on their website that MATD is their subsidiary, whereas the Petro Matad website claims that the Isle of Man company is the parent company. If you are incorporated, but not part of a subsidiary, then you would not describe yourself as ' a parent company ' so that makes no sense to me. I would hazard a guess that the MATD site is incorrect.

We know that Petro Matad is incorporated in the Isle of Man - but as I said before, in order to list on the LSE it would have been necessary to create a subsidiary, though clearly it's not a UK incorporation.

Professional ; see what Aeschylus wrote. Seemingly he has done some homework into who was behind what may well be fake news, rather than just automatically taking it on board because it fits in with a narrative of wanting to portray MATD's immediate prospects in the worst possible light on here.

Doc 83 ; it's a subsidiary - so if a UK company created a subsidiary in say France, then it would have to incorporate an entity in France, and then be subject to French subsidiary laws regarding the subsidiary and the parent company. It doesn't alter the fact that it the UK parent company which funds the French entity, runs it and funds it.

Clearly in order to list on the LSE ( the first Mongolian business to do so ) Petrovis had to create an entity over here - and for tax purposes the best option was an Isle of Man incorporation. Isle of Man company or not - the parent company of the Isle of Man subsidiary is a private Mongolian company which has sold oil and fuel in Mongolia for decades.

Aeschylus ; thanks - that's a good observation.

BP : Like I said - the Petrovis Group are keen to trumpet their subsidiary on their website. It's not surprising, as it's massive kudos for a company which has imported its oil for decades to become an oil explorer and then produce from within Mongolia. They set it up 20 years ago, and have invested heavily in the subsidiary. Why would they let it run out of funds ?

And the activists seem unaware of who MATD are - all this nonsense about being ' Canadian owned ' or whatever. Presumably this nonsense has been typical of the hysterical falsehoods which they have recently been peddling at the district committee offices and online, and which MATD have had to spend time and energy correcting - as per what was stated in the RNS.

Notpleb ; Thanks for the sarcasm - however given that some people on here ( Docs83 for example ) seem to frequently raise panic by giving the impression that MATD is some kind 'foreign enterprise, ' which the Mongolians are keen to sabotage, it's not a bad idea to remind some people that it was founded by the Petrovis Group, is a subsidiary of the Petrvis Group, and is majority owned by the Petrovis Group.

This also has a bearing on funding, and whether the company could ever go to the wall. Are Petrovis likely to let their subsidiary which they have invested heavily in go bust/run out of funds ? As others have mentioned on here, a raise is not the only option for funding, as Petrovis may decide to provide a loan to its subsidiary in order to protect its existing investment.

It also has a bearing on this new law that's ben passed, which people are panicking about. Presumably a Mongolian subsidiary which is majority owned by a Mongolian private company would not be such an easy target as a foreign owned oil company ? Petrovis must be very well known and generally held in high esteem in Mongolia, and their executive staff must hold a lot of sway with the government one would presume.

Doc83 - you are losing sight of the fact that MATD is predominantly owned by the largest privately owned oil and fuel company in Mongolia. And MATD is actually a subsidiary of Petrovis - look at their website.

It may be listed on the LSE, but as per the Petrovis website, it is has ' predominantly Mongolian ownership. '

Has everybody seen this on the Petrovis website ? ;

https://en.petrovis.mn/subsidiaries

I hadn't realised that PM is actually a subsidiary of Petrovis. Frankly I'm amazed that senior people at Petrovis don't get more closely involved with sorting issues out for MATD. And do the activists even realise that MATD is a subsidiary of the biggest Mongolian privately owned oil and fuel company ? They seem to make xenophobic remarks about ' foreigners ' exploiting the natural resources of Mongolia. Contrast this with PetroChina, who are a Chinese state owned company.

So the RNS read ;

"Petro Matad has been working to correct misinformation about the Company from local activists and protesters that have been critical of oil production operations in the area for some time, protesting online and in person against the committee's decision. "

Staff at PM are almost certainly closely monitoring anything that the activists post online - after all, people on here do it. However the reference to 'in person ' must relate to angry activists turning up at the district authority offices, and probably confronting members of the committee which voted in favour of MATD. However, MATD presumably wouldn't have known about these ' in person ' protests when they happened.

The RNS also stated ;

"Petro Matad has been working to correct misinformation about the Company from local activists and protesters. "

I am guessing then that when the activists aggressively protested in person at the district offices, that they may have handed over written falsehoods /allegations about MATD and verbally made allegations too. Presumably the district officials have felt duty bound to look into these false facts/accusations. MATD would then probably have been contacted by the officials, and asked to respond to the claims of the activists - hence what was stated in the RNS. All this will have taken time, especially with the sclerotic Mongolian bureaucracy at work.

So let's see what MB says in the AGM - but I'm guessing that this is what has held up the land access docs from being signed. I find it hard to believe that activists can reverse the decision made when the district committee voted in favour of MATD. Could you imagine a planning committee in the UK changing its mind about a planning decision because some nimbies got upset about the decision and remonstrated loudly at the local authority's offices ?