Ascent Resources Share Chat (AST)

Yes, it seems clear the Slovene government changes it's mind whenever it suits.

sd,
"And yet"... that was then!

till the results of the appeal or is there no time limit on this. Anyone know?

" In addition, Slovenia retained its own laws and regulations governing hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation." Are this laws written or are they just made up as they go along. When we initially went there officials knew we are not there to grow potatoes but to extract gas. Was AST informed that they can not do so before 50million was invested?!

"The decisions of these two Inspectorates are a matter of public record and the decisions they have published in respect of the Petišovci project confirm that operations fully meet the required standards. "

And yet .....

Regulation and Compliance

When Slovenia joined the European Union (EU) in 2004, it became subject to EU regulations including its environmental regulations. In addition, Slovenia retained its own laws and regulations governing hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation. The Petišovci joint venture therefore is subject to both sets of regulations.

In Slovenia, oil and gas exploration and exploitation is regulated by:
Mining Inspectorate of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Spatial Planning http://www.mzip.gov.si/en/;
Environment and Nature Inspectorate of the Ministry of Agriculture and Environment (http://www.mko.gov.si/); and
The Mining Inspectorate receives full disclosure from the partners about all of its operations and it regularly inspects the site and operations to confirm that these comply with the relevant government and EU regulations.

The decisions of these two Inspectorates are a matter of public record and the decisions they have published in respect of the Petišovci project confirm that operations fully meet the required standards.

On 22 January 2014 the European Commission issued a ‘Commission Recommendation’ on ‘minimum principles’ to be adopted by member states for regulating high volume hydraulic stimulation. For the purposes of the Recommendation ‘high volume’ means injecting 1000 m3 or more of water per stage or 10,000 m3 or more of water during the entire hydraulic stimulation process.

These recommendations include, amongst others, the preparation of strategic environmental assessments, conducting of risk assessments to ensure the safety of ground water, the employment of best practices by operators including water management plans and providing certain information on hydraulic stimulation operations.

Member states are invited to put these Commission Recommendations into practice within 6 months and report annually to the EC on their progress.

*first paragraph, second sentence... definition here is the key factor*

" In addition, Slovenia retained its own laws and regulations governing hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation."

Whatever form it takes I believe we have a Very strong case, Dependant on how good the lawyer is will dictate the compensation achieved. I would pay more for a top draw lawyer not skimp on a recent grad out of law school. AIMHO

It may be that this whole saga has been a misinterpretation of the EU rules purely down to the area being incorrectly designated a conservation area. If this is the case and Arso still refuse to budge. Considering the damage it has caused the company and shareholders, will shareholders have a right to some form of compensation? This is also a new reason for being refused permits , as it has never been brought up before, so when did Arso claim the conservation area has been declared? Surely if an area has been re-allocated / declared a conservation area, any current business / residential / interested parties affected by a decision like this should be informed and issued with a compulsory purchase order or have some form of compensation offer. These major decisions don't just appear from out of the blue like this seems to have done.

Google “third-party litigation funding” which is essentially the route I think Colin will go down. Shareholder dilution won’t be necessary although the company will be required to take out after-the-event litigation insurance to mitigate some of the costs the third party funder incurs if we lose the case.

Only seen adverts for no win no fee and generally switch channels with the adverts. Colin has said he will use no win no fee and Google will tell you about litigation lawyers for corporate litigation. Now Colin may or may not be believable but litigation lawyers are a fact for this kind of litigation. Not fanciful at all, as you imply.

You guys watch too much TV if you think AST will get free litigation from a no win no fee deal...

It will need paying for, and shareholders will end up paying for it via a placing, which will dilute the sp further.

Lejjb, have you read/seen a copy of the JV agreement?

Stockdale - please remember that:
- Geo is part of the Croatia national energy management company, and it has many many many more things than Petisovci to deal with so little time for Ascent (CH said that in Feb 2019).
- The JV agreement states that Ascent needs to pay all the legal costs (CH said that several times) - of course this is a ****ty clause, but this is what Ascent is bound by now.

I've not posted here for some time. Good to see some usual names still posting here.
I believed in Colin 2 years ago, but this has been a massive disappointment and like others here, I've lost tens of thousands of pounds. It hurts me to see massive salaries still being paid out with a promise of jam, not tomorrow, but maybe in 2121 or beyond and countless dilutions inbetween just for good measure, to keep the lights on for more excuses and to maintain that gravy train for as long as possible. Colin needs to stand up and deliver some shareholder value as far as I'm concerned.

AST took on responsibility for financing the company. But it's not sensible that Geonergo have done nothing to help. They are suffering as well. They have the local Slovene influence, or should have.

Supportive really, how and when?, left Ascent high and dry at times, silly statement.

Afrim,
Oh well!... You entitled to your opinion....

“Certainly looks like our partners PETROL are pulling the stops out!....?....;-)” . What a bull**** statement! I can’t believe, for over two years, I thought that your are genuine investors . You are no doubt part of the same establishment. Milking us and this company relentlessly. Where was Petrol for all this years? Now they decided to put a stop?!!!! A Slovenian company in partnership with the government now realised that something is not right and need to act!!! Just go and hide somewhere. You are embarrassing.

New80,
Don’t forget, Col is an accountant so he will be using his “random algorithmic calculator”

For clarification, I was referring to the post at 19:57

jester16,
Your comment is 1000% spot on. I could have written exactly what you stated.
without all the convoluted, torturous permit, litigation, now this........where we would be ? 3p ?
All the Best.

No win no fee why not imagine that in an rns it would work wonders for the sp.

The deadline for filing an appeal to the Administrative Court was 15 July 2019 and the partners have filed their appeal.

Certainly looks like our partners PETROL are pulling the stops out!....?....;-)

We did develop the asset, and we £50million quid, 10 years in the process and piddling amounts of revenue

Collin will just keep plucking numbers from his spreadsheet .... all that wizardry and look at the share price does this guy leave in the matrix ??