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.
Agree re the averaging down, that was a ridiculous thing to do and to then sit on the co's BB knocking every bit of positive news that comes out as the situation turns to the good for them well that's just sad imo.
Disagree however that the large court case win is their only play. Its a major reason to buy but not all they have to offer pi's Todays news that they're looking at 8M euro's from their crooked partner not 3.5M euro's is a big result not just for the initial cash but also for what they may be due from on-going monthly revenues from incumbent wells Pg-3, Pg-5, PG-6, Pg-7, Pg-9 (if it produces again) and the Dolina and Pt wells.
If they were owed more than twice what they estimated with the initial payment then what are they due going forwards from all this extra production? Likely more than they thought.
Just a case of being prepared to hold as the news comes out imho as its all turning positive nowadays as the co' appears to have moved to a winning formula.
Really do think the Slovakians should settle though, they keep losing AST keep winning that's great for shareholders not so good down the line for slovenian taxpayers.
No one in there right mind would averaged down on a dog share like this ...it has already decimated by a 100/1 claw back... nothing that this shower has done would make this good investment for LTH....... And a business that's only strategy is wait and see about a potential court award is no business at all ..........like most if not all of Parson's failing efforts >>>>IMHO
Well if your thoughts are "great guy he's obviously got my number" then you're welcome ping.
If not then happy Christmas anyway and may you have a very prosperous New Year.
Panman,
Thanks for confirming my thoughts about you....
Don't really care anymore how much you're down ping. Its your own silly fault for holding/averaging down on bad news.
Would also suggest you couldn't care less about any shareholder except yourself so not impressed with your "I worry about shareholders mantra." Its just dribble to make a troll feel better about his postings.
re their metals strategy how come you can't work out that they won't have one til they know what level of funds Slovenian court cases are going to raise. Rest of the market has worked it out why can't you? Is it a case of you don't want to or are you really believing they can work out a plan for S America without knowing what their future cash position will be?
Only asking as confused by your apparent inability to comprehend such simple stuff.
Panman,
I've held here for 6 years & despite averaging down I'm still 80% down!
While I welcome any good news, I continually worry about shareholders receiving any benefit. After all, I've witnessed the achievements of Clive Carver, Colin Hutchinson & now James Parsons! A look into their records particularly the latter should tell you all that you need to know!
What really is happening with AST'S Metals strategy??
The share price will respond accordingly I'm sure!!
News so good even the trolls got out of bed early just to knock it! lol
Truly excellent news for holders and the beginning of vindication for AST for hanging on in there and suing the butts off these crooks.
8 Million euro's likely coming down the line with final assessment end of Q1 or a mere 12-13 weeks away.
Happy days for all but our trolls.
Once again, we'll all have to wait a few more months and then who knows when a settlement will be achieved.
Alas no update on the Metals progress which we are led to believe is a key strategic focus of the business!!
It is the only share that keeps on promising us goodies.
Let's hope that we recover some of the drastic losses we have suffered here due to misguided belief and faith.
Best wishes for a festive Christmas and some long overdue prosperity in 2024!
Would appear someone is offloading. Wonder if they didn't like the payment vehicle company being set up. Easy way to get some director bonuses I guess.
The part time BOD are currently busy with their other part time roles at Corcel Energy & Echo Energy. Despite investors being led to believe that AST's metals strategy is core to the business, after 2 years absolutely nothing has materialised. As they're in part time roles that should indicate how much focus there actually is.
I suggest that they're replaced with a smaller, full time team who actually have the ability to move things forward instead of this lot who in my opinion are just operating to suit themselves!!
So what is company up to whilst it waits to find out the result of their claim.. And what are the highly paid part time so called Executives doing. Certainly not a lot.
Courtesy of Toolsmoker on ADVFN. Looks like the payment vehicle company has been registered.
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/15331521
Disbursements /dĭs-bûrs′mənt/
Plural form of disbursement
noun
The act or process of disbursing.
Money paid out; expenditure.
The act of paying out or expending, as money.
Did you notice this bit...
"and will only be paid out of a portion of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner)."
I feel another long, windy and boring post coming from Pet.
Make as many long posts as you like Pettrader, makes no difference. Holders need to know that...
"Enyo - the specialist arbitration and litigation legal firm who filed both of the Notice of Disputes on behalf of the Company and represented it in last year's pre-arbitration negotiations with the Republic of Slovenia - will be advancing the disbursements which are expected to be incurred in the pursuit of the claim and will only be paid out of a portion of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner)."
@Panman, actually I am not 100% wrong. I maybe did a lot more due diligence (on behalf of various third party litigation funds) for the claim of AST vs Slovenia than a lot of others did. Hence aware of which litigation funds provided non-binding offers to finance the costs of the claim before subsequently pulling the non-binding offer. And which third party litigation funds then possibly stepped in. As I suggested, maybe it would be worthwhile to ask the BoD of AST to clarify if a third party is financing the costs of the claim, or maybe not. Logically, what law firm would take a case that is 3-5 years from start of the arbitration process to any recovery & only work on 'no win, no fee'? Who pays the ICSID fees (which are not the same as the costs of the arbitrators)? Who pays for the costs of the independent expert witnesses? Who pays for the asset tracing reports? Ball park, an ICSID claim will cost the claimant anywhere between USD $3 million if using a small law firm + independent experts + asset tracing (Enyo are not magic circle) up to $9 million if using a 'blue chip' law firm + relevant independent experts, asset tracing etc. If you think Enyo are taking at least $3 million+ of 'work in progress' onto their balance sheet for a case that will take several years to reach an outcome, then you may have more of an insight into the balance sheet of Enyo than many others do. Alternatively, the costs for Enyo plus all the other costs for an ICSID arbitration claim are met by a third party funder. Typically, a funder asks for the greater of (i) Return of Committed Capital (X) + 3X (notice committed capital rather than capital drawn down) or (ii) Return of Committed Capital + a percentage of any successful award. And the financing departments at law firms don't typically allow law firms to run cases for 3-5 years which are 'no win, no fee'. The arbitrator appointed by Slovenia is the same arbitrator that ruled in favour of Russia or the Yukos expropriation case, which has run for years & years with no payments made. Perhaps I am naive, but with friends & relatives who work in arbitration, I would be surprised if Enyo lawyers were comfortable with taking the 'no win no fee' risk based upon the profile of a very well respected arbitrator who was nominated by Clifford Chance representing Slovenia. Following the logic, it possibly makes sense that AST + Enyo decided to involve third parties so that Enyo is working on a Contingency Fee Agreement which is not the same as a Damage Based Agreement. Maybe ask the BoD of AST to provide clarification.
@Panman...how about I name the previous litigation funder that provided a funding agreement that had not yet been signed by the funder when JP made the press release, and I also provide the name of the litigation funder (USA based) that is currently financing the costs of the AST claim. I finance hydrocarbon disputes for a living (the 'pet' in PetTader comes from petroleum) and I conducted all the due diligence on the claim, for the funder that pulled out, and was replaced by the litigation funder that is currently financing the claim. Hence, a litigation funder IS financing tje costs of the claim and Enyo Law IS NOT working on no win no fee, if you want to discuss with Parsons & Co why they have made statements that are not correct, be my guest.
We’ll have to see how this pas about ..but I wouldn’t hold your breath or you are likely to faint and the very least
Whole agreement..
30 May 2022
Ascent Resources plc
("Ascent" or the "Company")
Completion of "No win No fee" Damages Claim Funding
Ascent Resources Plc (LON: AST), the onshore Caribbean, Hispanic American and European focussed energy and natural resources company, is delighted to announce its official entry into a binding damages-based agreement - essentially a "no win no fee" funding arrangement - to appoint Enyo Law LLP ("Enyo") to pursue the Company's Energy Charter Treaty ("ECT") and UK-Slovenia Bilateral Investment Treaty ("BIT") arbitration claim against the Republic of Slovenia.
Enyo - the specialist arbitration and litigation legal firm who filed both of the Notice of Disputes on behalf of the Company and represented it in last year's pre-arbitration negotiations with the Republic of Slovenia - will be advancing the disbursements which are expected to be incurred in the pursuit of the claim and will only be paid out of a portion of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner).
The closing of this funding allows the Company to securely initiate the arbitration proceedings against the Republic of Slovenia in relation to the significant damages by the Company's Slovenian investment as a result of Slovenia's breaches of the protections established by the ECT and BIT, including, inter alia the prohibition of expropriation, the guarantee that the investments would be accorded fair and equitable treatment and Slovenia's guarantee that the management, maintenance, use, enjoyment or disposal of the investments would not be impaired by arbitrary, unreasonable or discriminatory measures.
Notwithstanding the size of the Company's damages, in its view, having increased (for reasons including the increased gas price and the consequences of the recent legislative changes in Slovenia) and remaining significantly in excess of a hundred million Euros, it should be cautioned that in the event the Company is successful in its claim any amount actually received by the Company may be significantly lower.
Andrew Dennan, Chief Executive Officer, commented:
"Today's completion of the 'no win, no fee' damages based agreement allows the Company to immediately advance its material damages claim against the Republic of Slovenia in an international forum, as we seek redress for shareholders after many years of frustration, arbitrary decision-making against the Company's investment and delays being imposed on the project. This impact has recently been amplified with our investment effectively being expropriated by virtue of the new amendments to the mining law which specifically target the destruction of our full investment value.
We are delighted to have secured this arrangement on behalf of our shareholders and which now positions Ascent's equity holders with material upside exposure to a claim seeking damages of several hundred mil
No PetTrader the only thing I found was that you're 100% WRONG.
Can understand you trying that one, there's not much of a bear case here now they've won the cases against their partners and have a no win no fee arrangement with ENYO but no not true at all.
Would have to say good try at trolling but no brucie bonus for that one..
30 May 2022
Enyo - the specialist arbitration and litigation legal firm who filed both of the Notice of Disputes on behalf of the Company and represented it in last year's pre-arbitration negotiations with the Republic of Slovenia - will be advancing the disbursements which are expected to be incurred in the pursuit of the claim and will only be paid out of a portion of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner).
@Panman, I think you will find that the lawyers at Enyo are not fronting all the expenses themselves. Another inaccurate statement by the BoD at AST. If you remember, back when JB was CEO and JP had just arrived as chairman, JP put out a statement about a third party funder. Which was immediately withdrawn after the potential funder threatened to press charges relating to securities fraud (pumping the share price up when there was no binding funding agreement in place)if the statement was not withdrawn. Maybe there is a third party litigation fund financing all of the costs since Enyo became legal advisors. Maybe not. But for sure, AST should update shareholders if others are, or are not, paying the costs of Enyo.
No its not there's no stick at all its simply a court case run and paid for by a very professional set of lawyers who are willing to front all the expenses themselves as they obviously believe they can win,
The only part AST (or more accurately your nemesis Parsons) are responsible for now is distributing funds which the RNS has addressed very nicely.
The old carrot and stick method of trying to get some interest in a life style company! That has shafted it’s long term investors . Long ago .. And now is offering to distribute funds it currently
Doesn’t and may never have. (win)A typical Parson’s jam tomorrow nonsense…imho
Surprised at the amount they want to distribute to shareholders. 49% of any win is massive imho, granted they have to win but they do have a habit of winning cases starting to build so very happy to continue holding and see what happens down the line.