We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Returns look better with a man who actually knows what here is doing. Worth a punt if fed up of JW and GC
Everything I say in this post is hypothetical and there is no suggestion of impropriety on anyone's part, I'm not an expert on AIM. Company and Takeover rules (they are all different) so I'm not accusing anyone of anything, just interested in some answers to a puzzling Formal Sales Process and BoD actions.
But I am aware that parties acting in concert need to declare, begs the question, if one was to surmise that GC was indeed approached or threatened with withdrawal of support (i.e. as per allegations in the press, times article) and subsequently agreed to pursue a sale to the preferences of certain shareholders; then are they not then working in concert? I am aware that BoD members have very clear duties to shareholders above and beyond AIM
First question is I suppose - is it normal for certain shareholders to be consulted on a bid in a formal sales process when other shareholder are being provided information that many believed suggested a far higher offer price is possible.
As I say I'm not sure on the rules and not accusing anyone of anything except getting us a poor deal which is of course subjective, but especially under a potential takeover situation things have to be done right and I feel we need/deserve a credible explanation especially as to why potential buyers were rebuffed , it seems strange to me and many others have raised concerns that we were led to believe the offer price would be much higher. That is an important factor as no action was taken by the many perhaps mis-informed shareholders to suggest an alternative course of action or curtain the process based on a false premise, remembering we supposedly have a great business someone could possibly have been done.
I also believe the NOMAD and NED's have responsibilities in this area.
On the morning of the RNS many shareholders where stunned If II's where consulted during this process, then one might argue it may bring into doubt the validity of the process, as one might allege other equally important, shareholders e.g. Me, You and other II's may have been disadvantaged or even deceived to satisfy a small subset.
If anyone has experience of the rules or has a mate working for a NOMAD - your opinion would be welcomed even if it's to tell me the comments are rubbish.
Duncando
Please email moneylender@gmx.com with the number of shares you own.
I pledge my 176,414 for No vote, do I need to notify anyone of my pledge
As an aside for the BOD to accept the current offer I suggest GC probably needs to offload his shares to meet his current large liabilities elsewhere, just a thought.
I appreciate the time and research for informed comment on this site
Agree with your view re other cash/share offers however don't see how PIs could get this.
Therefore only approach is to ensure prospective counter bidders recognise PI shareholder dissatisfaction and let it be known whether share/cash alternatives would be welcome.
Other alternative, for those convinced by the value of the assets is of course to invest in Geopark
Too shocked to comment last week.
For me, the very fact that this BOD could endorse such as offer after the "materially undervalued" RNS re M and P eliminates all possibility of continuation of current management: they are dishonest and incompetent, not fit for office.
That leads me inevitably to the conclusion that a sale/merger has to take place and it leaves me with a single question: was there any offer for the whole that was part share/part cash which was better than the 19.21p (including any alternative part share offer from Geopark)?
It is wholly wrong that all shareholders have not been treated equally: PIs should at least know what other offers have been received from those multi well funded parties and without disclosure of that information, I would argue that we have been substantially disadvantaged.
For anyone seeking to overturn this deal, I would suggest that it is an absolute imperative to extract that information. We need to know if there was a better alternative and get behind that: we should not replicate the Brexit style folly of voting down what we don't want, but failing to precisely identify what alternative is both realistic and acceptable.
To all LTHs who have ended up in loss territory, I sympathize: this is a bitter pill to swallow.
Sold after 3 years of misery and lies Looking at PMG but and it's a big but oil companies are out in the cold big style.PMG are a bit more gas than oil now
Superdad.
Thank you for the courtesy of your response
Unfortunately, I no longer share your belief, or confidence, in the Board – quite the contrary!
Much of their “considerable stake in the company” has been acquired by means of – in the view of many investors - over-generous share options; and some key players apparently have little ‘skin in the game’.
Nor do I share your faith in “trusting ‘experts’ to determine the fate of my investments” over considering the views of well informed and experienced investors on this , and other, BBs. I have paid the price of trusting experts!
It is important to remember that this is not a distress / fire sale!
Amerisur is producing at over 6,400 bopd and has significant infrastructure ownership. Between the estimated value of the CPO-5, Platanillo, OBA, Oxy carry, and cash, the net asset value of Amerisur roughly comes to the neighbourhood of US$670 million. By paying US$315 million, GeoPark gains the control of assets at an implied discount of over 50%.
And when you strip out the $60m cash balance, the offer is actually worth 16p a share.
There seems little doubt that ONGC have been deliberately dragging their heels on COP-5 – with the consequent negative impact on the SP - and the reason for this could be a post-sale redistribution of assets.
To quote the CEO of GeoPark “"GeoPark and ONGC…the operator of the CPO-5 block, have a long term strategic alliance to acquire a portfolio of projects across Latin America. ONGC brings significant operating knowledge and expertise to the CPO-5 project. "
https://www.geo-park.com/files/releases/GeoPark_Announces_Amerisur_Acquisition__Final_002_EN_1.pdf
You go on to say: “What you are doing is voting down and probably removing the board.
Who will then run the company and how will you realise more value than the best offer anyone has given for the company?”.
I really find it hard to believe that the Board, which has a long established history of enlightened self interest, would walk away and forego any share awards that are performance related. Just doesn’t run true to form!
I also find it hard to believe that a group of IIs, faced with a potential 2x – 5x relatively short-term ROI could not recruit an effective team to effectively manage and fully exploit this outstanding investment opportunity. In fact, given the appalling operational track record of the current management, a change would be highly desirable.
I therefore strongly urge all investors – and I include IIs who may be reading this - to support ML’s campaign and ensure that this lamentable offer is robustly rejected, so that we can, in time, realise the full value of our investment.
Did anyone expect anything different from Giles Clarke? This is the guy that threw everything in with “Sir” Allen Stanford after all, that’s the type of guy historically he’s transacted with.
Looks like it went via Investec the house broker.
Bought 11,218,037
Sold 11,218,224
Big sale of 10,443,037.
They aren't sticking around
Whilst I have never posted on the BB, I have followed the various comments with interest. I have held Amerisur shares since the Chaco days and have a similar number to Superdad. Like many I have been appalled by the Board recommendation which I feel has been pushed on them by the likes of Michinoko.
Like Superdad, JTD and others I have a number of questions on why "on the face of it" this offer is recommended. The Board have themselves substantial holdings in the company so they will suffer their greedy selves for such a low share price sell out.
Is the price offered by Geopark right? If so over the years has there been some "creative accounting" by the Board. I was an MD of a small Plc and understand how it works.
The deals done to increase asset value over the last year appear commendable, but it must be remembered the jewel in the crown COP 5 is not operated by us and as shown we are merely "puppets on a string".
Why to date after exhaustive in depth presentations to a "multitude" of interested parties do we come to the present and only offer? Have they all looked and walked away as not worth more? Time will tell.
It would be an honest thing to do for the BOD to explain their reasoning behind the recommendation but with the history of this shower it will not happen.
I am not trying to be negative but just think that these and no doubt other questions need answers to in order to be able to make a rational decision
Torreblanca
Great comments Leas now its 5million sales to 2.8million buys, either news Is due or something has spooked the market !
Just like everyone on the BB all I am interested in, is protecting my investment.
Mav, difficult to determine red or blue with the current spread. I noticed 2 x blocks of 500k being traded first thing this morning with several 200K trades. I think the institutions will be happy if they can trade within the 19p- 18.5p range. Been invested over a year in this company and have to say it is one of the best examples of share manipulation I have had witnessed. I decided to invest when I thought RH was almost out hoping that the manipulation would come to an end. However, the opposite happened. The ratio to A trades to O trades must have been at least 5:1
Frustrating thing is the shares on my watch list that I had invested my time researching have at least doubled and one of them multi-bagged.
You can only make decisions based on your research and the information you are being fed from the BoD's. In this case they have failed to deliver on every front. They could not negotiate from a position of strength and misled investors by telling them to do nothing with their shares when the current sp was above a level that they knew wouldn't be achieved through negotiation.
Would not surprise me if a deal has already been cut between prospective bidders post sale. They know that any allegation of corruption cannot be followed up post AMER but this is the world of business we choose to invest in.
Looks like something is going on !
Trades 76
Vol. Sold 2,886,384
Sold Value £537.44k
Vol. Bought 2,372,417
Bought Value £441.74k
PE Ratio 181.771
ML doing a great job tracking intentions to vote and I believe another member contacted the media, but wondered if others had any ideas on actions we could collectively take? I've really no idea on this. Any suggestions? Random initial ideas below
A) Following up with media so we get some coverage re level of dissatisfaction.
B)Using Rns contacts for iis and calling around to get views from them re the sale
C) perhaps a survey of some sort to establish preferred outcome for PIs. Simply voting 'no' not enough for me - do we want new BoD and continue; b) higher cash price; c)cash/share approach.
D) jumping on JW in Bogota to try and get a comment
E) contacting prospective bidders
Anyway, just some thoughts - think most of the above likely non-starters but good to discuss. I'd be happy to take on some workto further our joint aims or to at least develop a voice/consensus.
I don't believe that Giles Clarke has the clout or the respect that he once enjoyed in the City. The performance of AMER and his other business interests says it all. I would not be surprised to see the share price rise if he were to be kicked out. John Wardle, for whom I once had a lot of respect, has not covered himself in glory either. JW once under promised and over delivered. In recent years to opposite has been true, I am sorry to say, especially when we look at OBA throughput and overall production.
JTD, thanks for your comment which as usual is sound and well considered. I will of course keep an open mind, it has been my job to do so. However I do wonder if the people who have vehemently said they are voting no will be doing the same??!! Regards, and thanks for some really informative posts.
Baxi, thanks for your post and I respect your views. Personally I would tend to believe the Board (who you rightly say) have considerable stakes in the company over people on a Bulletin Board who have probably never visited South America, Columbia, or any of Amer’s business, or even bothered to go to an AGM. Personally I would prefer experts rather than BB posters to be in charge and determining the fate of my investments. A lot of people spout a lot of rubbish on these chat groups, although I like you have been impressed over the years with the knowledge and expertise of 3 posters on this site. I watched other boards with people ramping up Companies that since went bust, their advice is not always that good! As I say, each to their own, but from my experiences tread carefully. Personally I am praying for a higher offer but it seems unlikely, in which case I will trust the Board have done as much as they can and more than bulletin board posters could do
Superdad - I appreciate your viewpoint, it has great merit and is a concern to us all, I said at the start we need plausible options along with a no vote.
To that end Moneylender is doing a useful job collecting details as much because it gives a feel to the level of dissent, allows information distribution and maybe even gives some party with the competence to challenge the deal the encouragement to come forward - doing nothing is not an option for many of us. Bear in mind, no one is giving irrevocable undertaking, simple registering an intention to take a particular course of action.
Having said that my vote is an irrevocable NO, I've voted to remove them before, I regard them as near useless in any case. lol
I urge you and I'm sure many others inclined to support to keep a watching brief and decide based on how events unfold - the BoD should not be given any comfort at this stage.
Superdad,
I bow to your significant City experience but I would, respectfully, put this point to you.
You say "if you vote it down the Board will resign and the shares will plummet.", and that could wll be the case (bearing in mind that some have invested their own funds, so they may reconsider that optiion).
But if we support the bid, then we crystalise the value of our investments at, what some well informed and highly respected posters consider to be, substantailly below their true value.
Alternatively, if we vote against the offer - which I intend doing - we continue to remain invested in a debt free, cash rich, company with high value assets in a low cost oil producing area. The shares may well plummet but, if we are to believe the data, this will only be a relatively short term (for LTIs) phenomenon and, as a long term investor in Amer, I am in for the long haul. I would therefore strongly urge all PI's (and any IIs that may be reading this) to support ML's campaign and robustly oppose the bid.
Good evening all
The Emails continue to pour in.
Unfortunately my time is spent elswhere at the moment, (house refurb)
but I will endeavour to spend some time this weekend with numbers updates
and relies where required. Rest assured all your support is appreciated
by us all. I think at the end of day its going to be down to everyone of
us to get in touch with their broker and ensure that the votes are polled as
required, yes or no to the offer.
A quick calculation tonight suggests we have surpassed the 100M mark by
some margin. As I said I will confirm over the weekend
Watch this space.
The situation in Colombia is important to underline - so many South American countries are suffering political unrest and corruption. It is not by chance that Amer were only valued at 12p six months ago and ripe for a hostile bid - the market presumably didn’t like the Amer management’s drilling record - despite upbeat messages on interest in Colombia.
So why be surprised at the lack of offers over the 19.2 level -
I've considered the situation as described by Superdad, and the way I see it is that Geopark have such a sweet deal they will not want to back off. If we NO voters say we would accept an improved offer of (say) 24p, I think they will come back with 22p. That wouldn't be a fortune but it's better than what's on offer right now.
However, it is right to consider the more difficult situation of the whole Board resigning en mass. But would they? They have lot to lose as well. I have no doubt at all that an interim management would be formed and the big shareholders would insist on it.
My opinion is that the key thing is to mass enough votes. We can then present our case to the present Board. or at an EGM.
Confirmation email sent OK