Register
Login:
Share:
Email Facebook Twitter




AFR Share Chat - RSS Feed

Afren Share Chat (AFR)



Share Price: 1.785Bid: 0.00Ask: 0.00Change: 0.00 (0.00%)No Movement on Afren
Spread: 0.00Spread as %: 0.00%Open: 1.785High: 0.00Low: 0.00Yesterday’s Close: 1.785



Share Discussion for Afren (AFR)


Thread ViewThread View
Please Login or Register to post messages
Posts per page:


Isengard7
Posts: 2,219
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (2)
RE: RE: a fairer deal
19 Jul '15
Under a No vote why would they even care.
 
jester16
Posts: 1,309
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (3)
Debt
19 Jul '15
If debt is the problem would you have advisors costing millions. Would you be aquiring shares in another company. If barda rash is so bad suspend operations and any other turkey to channel funds in a more meaningful manner.
Isengard7
Posts: 2,219
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (6)
RE: Cowsgomoo
19 Jul '15
Interesting thing is that if anyone wanted to buy the assets of Afren how will they afford it?

Will they use bond finance to acquire the assets from Afren.

Ironically then the bondholders still have a grasp over the assets. LOL such like some kind of parasite that just won't go away.

I think the only reason why the yes camp posters come across as Pro-Bondholder is only because the No camp voters seem to be basing their arguments on hurting them.

So we don't think that is a good argument to make. Not because we are Pro-Bondholder but just to debunk the argument which is being used as a pretext for the No vote.

I couldn't care less about the bondholders.

As I said I am in the Alan Linn Camp. And he said on the microsite,

"What happens if shareholders don't support the refinancing?

Voting against the refinancing will not harm those responsible for this difficult situation. Instead it will harm Afren’s employees and shareholders. "

Unfortunately many are going to confuse me with being pro-bondholder which is a shame.
Raja2
Posts: 176
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (2)
RE: a fairer deal
19 Jul '15
I think Linn has decided to put the shares into suspention.. Without bondholders..

Bondholders will only help Afren if it is good for them..
And if they will not give $30m and a better deal Afren will go into administration..

Will that be good for bondholders??!
jester16
Posts: 1,309
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
Lower production
19 Jul '15
Didn't we have a 5000 bopd well and a few 2000 bopd in statement a month ago? Have they deliberately lowered production because all this negativity is coming in a timely fashion...
cowsgomoo
Posts: 10
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
Hitandhope
19 Jul '15
Of course we would achieve a better price in a buoyant market. That goes without saying. You're overlooking the fact that Afren does not have the luxury of one key commodity - time.

The debt needs to be immediately attended to or Afren will simply wither on the vine because of its need for immediate cash.

Basically we're coming at it from the same angle but I think now it is clear that an asset sale without hideous dilution is probably the best course for shareholders IMO. I think the events of last week have proved that the bondholders are unlikely to improve terms and this makes the case for an asset sale more compelling in my view.
jester16
Posts: 1,309
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
Greed
19 Jul '15
This is what its all about nothing more nothing less if the ad hoc chaps and bod done a 50% dilution i think most shareholders would accept. Even though the bond holders would have less shares they would still be worth the same. So you have to ask yourself, i think this is also about control of the company and taking it private, its the cheapest way of doing a takeover. Assets of just under 2 bill taken away from shareholders for a fraction.
Isengard7
Posts: 2,219
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (2)
RE: RE: a fearer deal
19 Jul '15
I also wanted to know more details about lower production etc But apparently its an historical issue and they don't have time to explain it. Go figure lol

Seems like a current issue to me. Administration? I hope not.

Bondholders are in the same position as us. sounds like they're also completely taken by surprise by suspension.

Maybe they will renegotiate the dilution %?
Isengard7
Posts: 2,219
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (4)
RE: A fairer deal.
19 Jul '15
I am not trying contradict anyone. Just giving my personal view.

In my view a No vote is almost like sticking the middle finger up at Bondholders so they're not going to bail Afren out if it goes into admin.

If the company genuinely needs this $30m the bondholders won't part with cash under a No vote.

But I don't think the No camp are to concerned with this as strategy for a No vote is to try and get some kind of residual value after liquidation.

Again not a contradiction just a slight weakness in the plan.

INVESTOPEDIA EXPLAINS 'Liquidation Preference'
More generally, liquidation preference can also refer to the repayment of creditors (such as bondholders) before shareholders if a company goes under. The company will sell its assets, then use that money to repay senior creditors first, then junior creditors, then shareholders.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/liquidation-preference.asp#ixzz3gKlW5vFq
Hitandhope
Posts: 126
Off Topic
Opinion:No Opinion
Price:1.79
View Thread (6)
Cowsgomoo
19 Jul '15
Asset prices are low in the oil industry at the moment and in forced sales one can expect low bids from buyers in search of a bargin.
In my opinion a much higher price would be achieved in a more buoyant oil market with Afren trading on an even keel.
We can still get to that place but only with a fair deal for shareholders and yes, by the look of it, more support from the much maligned Bond Holders.





Sign up for Live Prices


Home  |  Contact Us  |  About Us  |  Careers  |  Advertise with Us  |  Sitemap  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Cookies  |  Privacy


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.