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.
The BOD at this point are highly unlikely to know what they have found - the best technical information WDI available would be that they have encountered “fluids” ... just as easily water rather than the black stuff.
Just a grab, nothing specific..........!
but my sophisticated algo shows 2.04p Vs 2.047............ATM.......... :)
14-Jan-21 12:17:31 2.047 24,426 Buy* 2.00 2.05 500.00 O
14-Jan-21 12:11:45 2.047 27,500 Buy* 2.00 2.05 562.93 O
14-Jan-21 12:11:29 2.04 1,000,000 Buy* 2.00 2.05 20.40k O
14-Jan-21 12:07:43 2.047 30,000 Buy* 2.00 2.05 614.10 O
14-Jan-21 12:00:46 2.047 146,262 Buy* 2.00 2.05 2,994 O
14-Jan-21 11:59:33 2.04 200,000 Buy* 2.00 2.05 4,080 O
14-Jan-21 11:46:05 2.047 31,560 Buy* 2.00 2.05 646.03 O
14-Jan-21 11:45:41 2.047 31,168 Buy* 2.00 2.05 638.01 O
14-Jan-21 11:40:31 2.047 145,105 Buy* 2.00 2.05 2,970 O
14-Jan-21 11:38:54 2.04 400,000 Buy* 2.00 2.05 8,160 O
All the best (tighter than the P1 hole........... :()
SC "Be assured it wasn’t a half-hearted advanced ramp in case of a duster"
I used the word "rampy" in the context of your > £350,000,000 MC (7p a share) ex cerp assets, it was not meant to be taken literally that I thought you were a ramper. But honestly if you think the ex cerp assets are ever going to be worth 7p into an excess of over 5 billion shares, then good luck.
"the date on which BPC may be required to make a reconciling payment to the Investor is extended ….. to 16 April 2021, this extension allowing a considerably longer window for the determination of the need for a reconciliation payment (if any), which BPC CONSIDERS TO BE TO ITS ADVANTAGE….’"
Of course it is advantageous the date has been moved from February to April !!! I don't get the point.
"1. If Lombard has the right to dump all its shares unconditionally (whether duster or not), why is the extension to 16 April of any relevance whatsoever? Why is it ‘advantageous?’"
The advantage is they can hold for results and get even more than the 115% guarantee. I feel bad answering this one because I have the advantage of the RNS today which shows they have been selling. But nothing as yet to show they took the call. At the end of the day (not literally) they get a minimum 115% as long as they get rid by 16th April.
"2. Nowhere in the two Lombard RNSs, does it state in the event they do not make a 15% ROI, BPC must make (or be liable for) the reconciliation payment within 24 hours."
You would need to show me where I said they would have to make the reconciliation payment in 24 hours, I did not, but they will have to make that payment at some point, I think they call that a debt.
"I did not write or contribute to Monday’s well written article as alleged."
Anyone who accused you of that must be as dumb as a box of frogs, for several reasons, the writers name is in the article, the writer is a known holder/poster on another group page. And even my post was titled Not SC. For my part I will admit that I titled it that because I felt personally it was a better communication than your open letter sent by one of your friends here.
I do respect everyone's opinion here with the exception of some of the trolls, but if I see nonsense posted and I feel the need I challenge it. You should not worry, you have been here a long time and have a big follower base.
BPC need a commercial find (10-12% CCOS) as opposed to finding “something” but it failing to be commercial (GCOS 30%+)
So do the maths ...
At 2.0p (likely going nowhere but down due to selling) you have a 10% chance to make perhaps 2-300% and a 90% chance of loosing 60-75% approx of current value. It is what it is
BigSi,
I don't agree, I think the issue of the TR1 suggests they now have a hold point - for a period at least. This is supported by looking at todays trade history - which suggests that there are very few sells. Unless the contract has minimum share sell price in it that would be breached at 2p, in which case this is now being tested - I would like to believe the funding contract had a safety net built in.
The BOD have inside information on the well and act accordingly. The well is a tight hole and info cannot be divulged to Lombard, however the option agreement was included for a success case without providing inside info.
Is it really a gamble for BOD? Their futures and salaries are now assured with CERP assets to fall back on. Albeit future fundraising would be even harder and on even poorer terms.
THE GAMBLE or burden of RISK is being shouldered by any existing holders as they would see the value of the equity holdings decimated on drill failure and now potential profits on success severely curtailed due to ongoing dilution
The reconciliation payment scenario is different now that the date has been extended by BPC to April 16th. This is advantageous to BPC as it allows Lombard to hold shares for the well result and then decide what it wants to do. ie: Well result successful Lombard can sell at 4,5,6,...10,12,15p etc. The premise is that the option to the put was exercised for extensive evaluation work on the well due to hydrocarbons being discovered.
John Briggs.... if that’s your warped idea on why a company raises finance then I feel very sorry for you. And anyone who lives with you.
Lombard are clearly already selling in volume and if continue at the same rate will be OUT by TD -
so BPC will have to make the “reconciliation” whether they are successful with drill or not
lol............!
ex CERP holders will remember Ross's persistent propaganda campaign of a cheeky 1 (or was it 2 ;) for 5 raise back in the day................. :) Saffron #1 .......!
All this will be forgotten when we get the #P1 tight hole results...............!
All the best (have LO taken the call option yet............... ? :()
They needed to drill and have done it (the gamble), but at what cost? Time will tell but the only judgement I can see they've made is that this approach means will be able to still draw a wage if P1 is a duster.
Let's hope (for all invested sakes) that their gamble pays off.
The shares are almost trading at 2p, opportunity is there for anyone who wishes to buy on the open market
I look at it this way
It was either a hugely discounted placing without the guarantee - 1.6-1.8p - (given the legal threat)
Or a 2p placing with the guarantee (the guarantee was the risk premium attached to the legal situation)
Now if the board are confident on a strike then the guarantee becomes irrelevant (Put & call) as the shares will trade way above 2.3p thus less net dilution than the discounted placing option!
I am betting on my own assumption that the BOD are privy to info from the drill that we do not know about and are comfortable taking further funding also with the guarantee in place. Make of that what you will!
No way they would have raised that kind of money from shareholders, Hintza. Would have taken too long and SP would have fallen below the offer like ti did last time they offered unsophisticated investors that opportunity.
A large number of shares were cleared by Lombard at prices greater than 2.3p - however I suspect the aggregate now is very close to or below 2.3p given the reduction in today’s TR1
They have tapped up shareholders recently with an open offer - (check historic RNS) where they to do this again it would not have raised anything like near enough the funds required - hence previously and currently relying on funding with such generous risk free terms to lenders -
Securing as much cash as possible prior to possible PV1 failure - BOD are “prudently” securing the companies and thus their own futures at the expense of existing holders - DILUTION
A company which incidentally is becoming increasingly defensive in its attitude to its shareholders.
I don't see that there is an if they sell below 2.3 - they must have been selling below 2.3, given the drop in holding and the timing of the TR1.
And when people say the company - the only money the company has is ours!
We ought to be getting another one soonish considering P1 is still churning. Of course, is it too much to expect a weekly update? Probably. Be nice though.... to know depth reached, etc....
Why did they go down the (in effect) Finance route and not a rights issue to all holders?
Top up then (encourage others ) and ask questions later, themuir01. Deary me. Has the 2-penny dropped?
Risk free
As part of the terms of the Funding Agreement, on the earlier of (i) 60 days after the date of spudding of BPC's Perseverance #1 well; (ii) 31 December 2021; or (iii) such other date where a reconciliation is permitted under the Funding Agreement, BPC may be required to make a cash payment to the Investor to the extent that the Investor's aggregate return from those new ordinary shares has been less than 115% of the subscription price
Yes - it’s guaranteed 115% of 2p
If Lombard sell at aggregate price below 2.3p BPC have to make a “reconciliation” payment
Star,
Perhaps by that date in Apr they expect to be drilling in another site to get to their 2500bopd target for 2021, which would raise the revenue to $40m PA which would provide a buffer for a potential duster at P1, and keep the SP at a level where there might be sufficient trust to continue to be able to raise funds (although some of us will continue to be smarting with the further dilution)
BPC is only required to make a payment in the event the Investor sells shares for, in aggregate, an average price of less than 2.3 pence per share (being 115% of the subscription price), with the payment being the difference between 2.3 pence per share and the average sales price.
Anyone shed some light on this.
Are BPC going to have to pay 2.3 back if we don't hit 2.3?
I know we will but just asking