Email Facebook Twitter

Exclusive: Hayden Locke, CEO Emmerson plc, a low cost high margin potash investment
Richard Slape, Oil consultant - Avoiding Losers and Picking Winners, his personal strategy

Member Info for NoEasy

Send a private message to NoEasy

Member Since: Fri, 15th Apr 2016

Number of Share Chat Posts (all time): 459
Number of Share Chat Posts (last 30 days): 32

Last Posted: Mon 17:50

Post Distribution over the last 30 days

Mon 17:50

Spot on Jiving. The authorities it seems don't want a fanfare but if Arthur has revealed the PSC to the public which he has done in the MD&A then the argument against putting the info directly in an RNS is purely semantics. We can do without semantics if it it means news comes after a placing not before.
Mon 16:20

A point on significant matters being included in the MD&A and not in an RNS.

The overwhelming majority of trades in this share are on the London Exchange and consequently are serviced by the RNS system. We lose a lot of exposure to new investors if we do not take into account that they get that exposure by searching through the daily list of RNS announcements. From what I have seen people do not have the inclination to follow an announcement from this jurisdiction to the main Canadian Overseas website and then go to the relevant MD&A. They want hit between the eyes.

I would suggest that we want any good news such as NNPC/DPR approval to be clearly spelled out in an RNS in addition to its inclusion in a document that is hidden away to all but existing shareholders. Failure to do that carries the real risk that we will have an investors 'non-event',such as that that befell the PSC extension, on our hands. That can't be allowed to happen with a placement on the cards.
Mon 09:49

It seems like we are running a marathon in concrete boots.

Secreted amongst the anguish of the time taken has been some significant milestones though. The PSC extension (crucial) was delivered in almost hushed silence hidden as it was in a quarterly document most investors have little idea exists. Let's see what pops up in the MD&A this time.

I'm still concerned about placing timing but I know it will have to happen and it will do so when it is required. The news 'before' or 'after' is down to a third party not Arthur.
Fri 22:12

And I wish everybody the best.
Fri 21:10

There's really not many regular posters here but the level of posting is generally level headed with the more longer term posters providing the balance.

Be good to see all the regulars start to have a sentiment consensus. Over to you Art with the quarterly's.
Thu 08:05

And of course an update on the Agamore position.
Thu 08:02

I am also fully expecting to see the mysterious approval(s) included in the MD&A regardless of any moratorium the government previously put on its release.
19 Mar '19

I liked it too Pickwick, a lot.

Q2 looking transformational if the news stream arrives as TG expects.

Gas Flow Results
RFP Result
Downstream Einvironmental Approval

Also didn't get lost on me that Tony made plain that he saw an excellent timing opportunity with Eskom's significant difficulties both now and forecast over months and years.
19 Mar '19

I know Jay it's a riddle. I looked at it the other way around that how can a service provider give detailed figures for services without firstly knowing what has been approved. You may well be right.
19 Mar '19

Zippy my post related to the wider power demand not just the requirement for 100MW. That was in answer to the question regarding 'why not award a 100MW contract to each party'.

I still see the tender being split. Does it have to be? No it doesn't.

My view is based upon a number of factors. The first is the failed tender for both parties. Both are then invited to reapply. Both pass the compliance stage and technical stage on the new tender. The percentage achieved for both in the technical stage is negligible such that an appeal on that one aspect could be reasonably foreseen if denied a percentage of the contract. That is particularly so as that aspect is 'subjective' and therefore very much open to 'interpretation', both words used by Tony in describing the technical part of the application in his latest interview. The last part of the tender involves a known known for both parties, the costs the Government themselves put forward as the 'power price'.

Additionally the tender itself, while not making reference to the selection process used (see 9.4.1, 9.4.2, & 9.4.3 of the procurement process as posted by JTD) does stipulate that more than one bidder can be recommended for an award.
Unlikely that tender scores will be exactly the same so clearly the Government allow for close contests, which this must be unless Seskaname have significantly undercut or overdone the financials but again unlikely given the Government steer on pricing. I have both parties almost neck and neck.

All I want to see is a percentage of this tender awarded to us, enough to get us connected to the grid and to satisfy our financiers. We certainly don't need the full 100MW and I know I am not alone in recognising that.
19 Mar '19

Jay/Jiving I am getting the message that the SPA isn't yet concluded.

We know that on 29th January Arthur was talking in the LSE interview about the ambitious target to drill in late Q2/Q3, "but if it slips a month or two it's not a big deal. What is important is to get the services and the financing package together."

Seven weeks later we have Cathy's email reply to Anthony which seems to also be using future tense,

'.... the OPL 226 asset requires nearly $200M in fundings! So this is a complex deal that takes time to conclude.'

I may be well off the mark but due to the above my previous thought lingers that the technical approval of all aspects of the field development plan have been approved as being in line with the PSC but that the approval of costings gets settled when an SPA is agreed with the condition of 'subject to government approval of the costings'. Can a service provider give costings when complex negotiations are it seems still ongoing?
19 Mar '19

'Is there anything stopping the Bots Government from issuing both parties with 100 MW? After all they are desperately short of power, so why would it be an issue?'

The government will be following their own procedure, only one tender is being worked through and under that tender only 100MW is up for grabs. So that rules out each party being awarded 100mw each. But that answer doesn't do your point justice DowntoEarth. The Bots Government need the power and it also recognises that that power demand will not be satisfied by one company. That is why I believe we will shortly see this 100MW tender being awarded to both TLOU and Seskaname. They will be looking beyond this tender and what they can do now to foster the future power generation for their country.
18 Mar '19

A pleasure to read that announcement on a Monday morning.
15 Mar '19

All it took yesterday was a nudge. Whatever/whoever triggered it matters little, not HarryMann nor the regurgitated article, the reaction was in the hands of investors no one else. That reaction spoke volumes as to where investors are mentally with this share at the moment.

The expected placing is weighing exceedingly heavily here but it seems we are still very much in the hands of the government regarding moving forward. It would be foolish to believe they have our timetable foremost in their minds. 'Africa time' isn't just a cliché its a reality and I don't think we have quite got that yet. I do also think that far from being removed from this Art is also having to live this reality.

I also understand the point that as long as Art gets his monthly money and enjoying the high life he isn't concerned by our SP demise but I disagree with that. I suspect like most CEO's he want's to be successful and is also money driven. He cannot put money into every previous placing then not give a fig about the downward spiral of the SP, dropping his investments like a stone despite his monthly wage. He cannot be both money driven and not money driven. The alternative is to accept he is not bothered about being successful and wants to just maintain the status quo. I don't see that either and the status quo option won't be around for too much longer without progress.

Lastly we have made some really important progress here with this project and that has been with slow but nevertheless crucial support of the government but also one the worlds largest commodity traders (Trafigura). The timeliness of progress has let investors down not the project itself. I have made adjustments to my investment here as I still see there is good opportunity of reward despite the high risk.
14 Mar '19

Yes Rift, the most blatant attempt at getting people to buy in while others offload me thinks. Backed up of course by the trades and SP movement.

Doesn't alter my view though that once any placing is out the way then it is all about the drilling and sentiment should reverse. It will be good for us all to get to that point.
14 Mar '19

Despite the 36m reported as buys by JA yesterday and today a 'big buy' being worked it seems the SP is responding by going the other way. Isn't that strange?
14 Mar '19

I got a quote to buy at 18.

Just to balance out the 'big buy' post.
14 Mar '19

I think people are missing your point Cn100, that this was the total number of approvals for the whole year of 2018 and not a new list of recently approved well drilling proposals.
13 Mar '19

Dunc - I would have agreed with you yesterday that no-one is ramping but today we have a random ramper turn up with no other input other than 'look at the big trades' and ' '36m buys versus 3m buys'. Funny though how we are still red! I wonder how that happened! I wonder if he can even explain how those economics work! Good to see a 'seen it all before' response from our settled holders though.

But I agree re MCap. I am very much with you Dunc that a placing without news if that is what happens in the worst case scenario is just another kick in the bol***ks for holders but that singular event in harsh reality gets rid of the bad news. What follows in such a scenario is I 'hope' (now where have we heard that word before?) likely to be a different kind of news and a different kind of sentiment. MCap even with a placing before news but with approval/finance news thereafter is unlikely to be as low as where we are now.
13 Mar '19

Thanks for the response Damo. Good to have that input.

Sign up for Live Prices
Top Recommended
Hot Chat Topics
Top recommended posters in the last 30 days

Member Login

Forgotten your password?


Don't have an account? Click here to Register Free!

Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.