The same gang of lying , ramping threatening rampers were all over several other AIM shares on a ` well known web site`.Anyone who opposed them was referred to the abuse dep`t ` en masse`, thus getting the innocents punished. The management were informed of this abuse but did nothing, until in exasperation at being inundated with demands to ban innocent people by the head of the boiler house, they eventually banned it, too late for most though.
I think most of the pi`s remaining after it topped were /are fairly naive punters who thought they would be able to buy a house or retire on the profits here, and it was quite a steady rise over the years to ts 4 quid top from 2p in 2011, an increase of 2.000%. not to be sneezed at- well the bod didn`t. HOWEVER one can only assume that the naifs were swayed by the rampers stating that +6,000% was coming, and being urged not to sell yet!
Yes, they should have assessed the data requirement at the time of the ON and not offhired the rig until clearance to that effect from DECC. Yet they still went ahead with the RN oontract without FDP, l/term funding in place, partner or anything. Cowboys.
Not sure how I missed it when it came our originally but I think it's probably the only time I have seen someone come out and say it like it is
As he wryly said it gave them and others a chance to blame something else - I think though that it only works if you ignore the rest.
I had hoped that the quality of the asset would get them over the line in spite of rather than because of them but that's when I do think the POO hit and by then the insurmountable hurdle for a depreciated asset was the size of the debt.
I don't agree though that we should just castigate ourselves. A certain amount of trust/belief goes into every investment you make regardless.
They broke the cardinal E&P rule Explore via equity Produce with debt
They broke another Don't ****h off your Institutional Investors when the quality II's walk away the only replacements you will find will just be seeking to rip your heads off before you try and turn them over.
His most telling comment is that the downside in oil and gas allowed them to make a graceful exit. i.e it gives them a handy excuse to sweep any other failings underneath the POO.
IMO although the EWT was a success being required was the start of the rot.
They could possibly have got around the disappointment re the reserves and sorted that out later as the EPS would have done the job. That was truly the first time that Rupert took on a financial commitment (Rowan Norway) without the means to pay for it - production licence. The bond just followed the WF loan but each time you are perceived to have screwed up the outfit coming in just apply more punitive terms i.e secured over the asset vs unsecured. Global having it written into the agreement that they can short - priors theoretically prohibited
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.