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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
No, I meant emojis don’t work on this board so I put a smiley face and it posted the darn question marks!
You're right, we should remain civil. And I will never use emojis again! haha. I don't know what came over me... Too much texting with my girlfriend I fear. She gets grumpy if I don't include a smile. Hopefully the odd emoji will brighten Jim's day too.
Oh yes I forgot, no emojis. Was a :-) not ??
None at all, you just each seem to be pushing against a brick wall and I shouldn’t like you to fall out over it!
Don’t get me wrong, I agree that there is no harm in a different perspective and, for example, I didn’t know that Azinam have spent all that money on surveys. The exchanges seemed to be getting a bit testy that’s all ??
Sorry if you are not enjoying this. I thought that the purpose of boards like this was to facilitate debate, not just to post prices and buy/sell volumes.
Jim is clearly optimistic about GBP and is pushing it hard. Where's the harm in providing a different perspective?
I suspect that neither of you is going to persuade the other so I suggest you stop arguing. I think we all know that AIM shares can be a lottery, we do our research and place our bets accordingly. Sometimes they come off and sometimes they don’t. Time will tell.
"If there were any deals to be concluded, I would suggest any fund raising would follow at a significant premium to the the current sp......." Really?
When is the last time you saw any AIM-listed minnow oil company raise money at a significant premium?
In the current coronavirus-afflicted environment with oil prices around $40/barrel it is highly unlikely that any small oil company will even try to raise funds, let alone at a premium.
"de-ramper"... hilarious! GBP is already trading at c1p and valued at c£2m. Gosh... who would need it to go any lower???
I feel sorry for existing shareholders and hope that the future turns bright very soon.
Once again, your post is full of smoke and fury, signifying nothing.
Don't you have an opinion on the valuation that Azinam might seek in a theoretical merger? That seems to be the topic of the day.
I don't know who wanted to buy your holding but it certainly wasn't me.
"And then afterwards, as you agreed in your post, there would be even MORE dilution when (or "if") the combined entity raised money for multiple wells... Nightmare!"
Oh dear, you are the worst de-ramper yet lol...........of course there will be a placing, that is the whole point of a company having a listing
If there were any deals to be concluded, I would suggest any fund raising would follow at a significant premium to the the current sp.......
On the subject of keeping the sp down, it takes very little news to increase the sp here due to the very small free float
Very recently I was asked if I wanted to sell my holding, which I declined and then you turn up......coincidence ???
It is funny that you speak of "a potential suitor trying to keep GBP's value down"...
During the last year GBP's highest market cap didn't even reach £6m and for most of the preceding twelve months its value has hovered in the £2-3m range. I really don't think any incoming investor is going to bother squeezing the company any further, it's low enough already and has been for ages.
I'm going to ignore your puerile insults. I'm more interested in the debate than the participants.
You don't seem to understand that GBP (including all of its assets in Namibia and Italy) is valued at c£2m. The company has high quality assets with great potential, I agree. But they are risky, as demonstrated by every other drilling event in Namibia during the last decade, and GBP is also running low on cash. As a result, the public markets have valued the company at c£2m. That is an undeniable fact, just get over it if you can.
What is Azinam worth? Gosh, who knows? It also has a good portfolio of assets in Namibia that have easily been as well-developed as GBP's assets. It also has its blocks in South Africa. As I said previously, Azinam has tried to IPO at a valuation of >$60m in the past. They have also spent at least $80m on seismic across their portfolio.
So what sort of valuation do you think the owners of Azinam would want to achieve in a merger with GBP? $60m? $80m? £20m? I don't know - and neither do you -- but for sure it will be much higher than the £2m current valuation of GBP. Which means, that if such a merger goes ahead, GBP's current shareholders are going to be diluted massively.
You keep making all sorts of accusations but you never actually step up and post your own assessment of Azinam's value - and the impact it would have on GBP during a theoretical merger.
Since Azinam is a private company, its owners can use a variety of techniques and metrics to develop a valuation. They can use CPRs, maybe $/bbl for 2P resources, maybe they can refer to Eco as a reference... There are lots of options for theoretically deriving the "value" of a private oil company. But that all changes when a private company goes public by any route. Its theoretical value crystallizes into a much more tangible figure that is instantly available on the screens of investors worldwide.
Imagine how Azinam's private equity investors would react if - after investing >$80m into Azinam - they saw their prize company merged with GBP at a pre-money valuation of a few million pounds! Very very unlikely to happen. The only way such a merger goes ahead is if GBP's existing shareholders get diluted massively. "Public Market Homeopathy" ;)
And then afterwards, as you agreed in your post, there would be even MORE dilution when (or "if") the combined entity raised money for multiple wells... Nightmare!
It would be in the interest of a potential suitor to keep the sp down ahead of an RTO, as a share swap would be set at an average price over a set amount of days trading
Anyway not all substantial shareholders are listed on the GBP share register, if they have shares held in nominee accounts they are not named. There is c.45% held by the BoD which could be increased further with substantial holders tightly held in nominee accounts.
Yet more twaddle I see.........
Azinam only have three shared interests in Namibia and will be farmed out further, they have five shared interests in S/A. Only one is a current discovery so little value assigned as the assets are frontier, but the potential is huge
GBP have two frontier assets in Namibia that probably more potential per acre than anywhere else in Namibia between 4.5Bln barrels and 11 bln barrels. The WD prospect is drill ready and is the pathway into the PEL29 flagship licence. Deepwater assets are very much another box tick for any prospective suitor
GBP also has 4 massive licence applications in Italy that the company are very keen on.
If GBP has a farmout deal in the pipe for the two Namibian blocks this will also add considerable value
The LSE listing is cheap route to market and makes GBP a prime target for any privately held company, particularly a like minded company in the same region, that needs to fund a huge up coming exploration campaign
Dude, you're funny sometimes: "you are paid to write dross on this micro cap as your company would like to see a lower entry price".
First of all, GBP's entire market cap is c£2m and it is tightly held by the Peters. So any fund that tried to enter GBP by purchasing shares on the public markets could never hope to acquire a material stake in the company. Maybe, mayyyybe they could hope to acquire 10-20% of GBP without sending the share price through the roof, but that is highly unlikely.
In any case, if an investment company was trying to accumulate a material stake via the public markets then everyone would already know about it! Because AIM rules state (AIM Rule 17) that shareholders who accumulate 3% or more of an AIM company must notify the markets - and all such notifications would be visible here on LSE. So, have you seen any? No. Would any investment company bother holding less than 3% of GBP (which would be worth c£60k)? No. So try to get your facts straight before you start casting aspersions.
You note that Panmure has just been taken on by GBP, which is very good news, I agree. Hopefully they can find incremental funding for GBP and the future is rosy.
Sorry mate, but the reference you quote refers to US markets (that's why the article quotes the SEC) and it only really applies to cases where a private company backs into a publicly-listed shell company. GBP is on AIM and it is not a shell company. Ask any investment banker...on the London public markets an RTO is nearly (but not quite) as complicated and expensive as an IPO.
If Azinam does somehow complete and RTO of GBP then good for them! I hope it makes all shareholders happy. An RTO in itself doesn't necessarily provide any additional funding, however, so the combined entity would still face the same challenges that the two separate entities face today. It would still need to raise more money and/or farm out a bunch of assets.
I see that you claim - and I quote - "It matters not the history of spend...". Perhaps not. But in an RTO the respective parties still need to assign a valuation to Azinam. GBP's valuation is publicly available and obvious. But Azinam's? Not really.
Azinam has a much, much bigger portfolio of assets than GBP spanning both Namibia and South Africa. And those assets are covered by vast swathes of 3D seismic. There is no way that Azinam would be valued at a figure anywhere close to GBP's £2m market cap. If an RTO did go ahead it is a fact that GBP's existing shareholders would be diluted massively.
What value do YOU think Azinam would claim in an RTO?
Everything you have written is utter tripe
It matters not the history of spend all the shares of both companies are exchanged, this covers all assets
It is a fact that an RTO is massively cheaper than an IPO
A reverse merger is an attractive strategic option for managers of private companies to gain public company status.
It is a less time-consuming and less costly alternative to the conventional initial public offerings (IPOs).
Public company management enjoy greater flexibility in terms of financing alternatives, and the company's investors enjoy greater liquidity.
Public companies face additional compliance burdens and must ensure that sufficient time and energy continues to be devoted to running and growing the business.
A successful reverse merger can increase the value of a company's stock and its liquidity.
Understanding Reverse Mergers
Reverse mergers typically occur through a simpler, shorter, and less expensive process than a conventional IPO. With an IPO, private companies hire an investment bank to underwrite and issue shares of the new soon-to-be public entity
You are paid to write dross on this micro cap as your company would like to see a lower entry price
IF there is an RTO it will have a huge positive impact on the SP, Panmure has just been taken on by GBP, who are in the premier league of brokers, there is a good reason for this appointment
You on the other hand are out of your depth and clearly are not clued up on Namibia or it's players lol
Yes I meant McKeown. Not that it matters and not that I really care. I'm pretty sure you knew who I was talking about...
Here is the link again:
Azinam announced an IPO in 2018. McKeown (phew, glad I got that right!) even wrote bullishly about it. But it did not proceed, obviously. So the attempt was a failure. What's contentious about that? Are you saying their IPO attempt was a success? :)
No need to be rude. I haven't accused you or ramping or de-ramping or whatever. I'm just interested in the facts and how this alleged deal may or may not play out. I don't hold GBP but I would like to see it succeed.
Sorry to replay the same point, but on AIM, an RTO requires a readmission. There is very little difference in cost/complexity between an IPO and a readmission.
If there is to be some sort of merger/RTO/whatever involving GBP and Azinam then it will be fun to see what valuations they use. GBP is a public company valued a c£2m. Many holders of GBP may argue that its current valuation does not reflect the quality of its assets or the amount invested into them so far or their vast potential - and they would be right! Even so, there is no escaping that c£2m valuation figure.
Azinam is a private company with assets in both Namibia and South Africa, most of which have been covered by 3D seismic. We know that Azinam has invested at least $80m into its Namibia assets, plus who-knows-how-much more into its South African assets.
If there was to be an sort of merger between Azinam and GBP you can bet that GBP shareholders will be squeezed like a lemon between the thighs of a Bulgarian wrestler. When Azinam tried to IPO previously they aimed for a valuation of $60m. And that was before they acquired the full suite of South African assets that they hold today...
If a merger/RTO occurred with GBP at £2m and Azinam at $60m, then current holders of GBP would be left with c4% of the combined entity... Horrific! And the resulting entity would STILL need to raise tons of money to drill wells and/or conduct multiple farmouts.
Both companies are struggling to complete these efforts as independent entities. Jamming them together into one big lump wouldn't necessarily make the job easier...
McEwan......I think you mean Mckeown........who has never mentioned a failure of any IPO
The subsidiary companies are included in any RTO or merger............RTO's can take as little as three weeks and have minimal costs compared to an IPO that can take years.
Anyone can google the difference between an IPO and RTO ........it is not rocket science
Your post history confirms you are very much a de-ramping tool and was my impression on your very first post
Having you turn up here confirms there is news coming here and very soon ;-))
What a joker you are !!!
Interesting thoughts, as always.
Seacrest Capital is a management company and Seacrest LP is a limited partnership into which investors have pledged funds. It's a typical private equity structure. Anyone doing a deal with this mob will negotiate with Seacrest Capital and then receive funds from a Seacrest LP. From an external perspective, it is entirely reasonable to lump both entities together and call them "Seacrest".
I say that the Azinam IPO "failed" because they did announce their efforts to IPO quite widely at the time and then faded away with a whimper. There is no doubt that a string of failed wells in Namibia at the time hampered their efforts. But so what? They tried and they failed, fact. Of course McEwan gave all manner of slimy explanations for pulling the IPO. He's a manager and has to defend his company. I doubt you'd ever hear any manager say publicly "yeah, we screwed up our timing and got shafted by bad news". It's his job to put spin on adverse events, which is completely normal. The IPO did not succeed.
If Seacrest had funds, they wouldn't need to do any sort of IPO/RTO transaction with Azinam during a period of such unfavourable market conditions. We've got low oil prices, coronacrap everywhere, contracting GDP across the board...etc, etc. It's certainly not a good time to be a seller, which adds further evidence to the idea that Seacrest (and thus both Azimuth and Azinam) is out of money.
Sorry Jim, but the cost difference between an IPO and an RTO are not very different. An RTO involves a full admission document and a full suite of compliance checks that are barely any different to those involved in an IPO. If indeed Azinam is trying to complete an RTO of GBP, then it's not to save money, it's to distance themselves from their previous aborted IPO.
Your point about "swapping entire shareholdings" is not entirely correct. Azinam is a private company and its Namibia and South Africa assets are held in different subsidiaries. In a deal between Azinam and GBP, Azinam could contribute pretty much any subset of its assets, or as you say, it could jam the top level Azinam entity into GBP, like an enraged proctologist.
Regarding Okea and SeaPulse...
If you look at the two links below you'll see that Seacrest doesn't really have a stake in Okea, despite the nonsense on their website. The OKEA deal was done separately, outside the umbrella of Seacrest and Azimuth, using a different source of funds.
Not sure what's your point about SeaPulse. They have indeed been up and running for a couple of years and do indeed appear to have relevant alliances in place. But again, the only deal they've announced is with Azinor, which is another Seacrest company, and even that deal has not yielded any progress nor announcements. Not sure what else they've been doing for the last two years... It doesn't take that l
Just for the record, currently online sell limit is 620k @ 1.01
You're burning the midnight oil Jimarillo!
Great research, thanks for sharing.
The wait continues.....tick, tock ...
You are quoting "Seacrest LP" who are a fund run by Seacrest Capital, two quite different entities
Seacrest LP .............https://privatefunddata.com/private-funds/seacrest-lp/
Seacrest Capital..........http://seacrest.com Which includes amongst others Azinam /Eco/OKEA who just IPO'd last year
Regarding the Azinam IPO , have a closer look at the date, you will find it to be 13th September 2018. You said that they tried to do an IPO and failed.........don't see any mention of that whatsoever and will not find it anywhere on the internet
In the same day (13th September 2018) Azinam announced the appointment of Phil Loader to the BoD, who had been VP of global exploration at Woodside to advise on a possible IPO and strategy going forward for Azinam and Seacrest.
Tullows Cormorant result came out on the 28th September and the Azinam/Char duster was announced 11th October 2018 This was followed by Total's Brulpadda discovery in S/A . These three well results completely changed the game plan for Azinam. Azinam CEO Daniel Mckeown....said it was a step change to the thinking in the region and a new concept was born. Azinam couldn't do an IPO, because there was a substantial re-focus in the region and they were out of position. Phil Loader would have been instrumental in this decision and what follows, including walking from three licences and looking at deepwater licence plays
This re-focus has brought counter parties to the door of GBP, which for Azinam "could" be a two birds with one stone solution......ie: an RTO in place of a much more expensive IPO and two deepwater licence plays, with multi-billion barrel potential
Final point, when two companies decide to do an RTO it requires both companies to swap their entire shareholding, this captures the complete assets of both companies. Which would include Azinams Namibian and South Africa assets
P S .....Seapulse have completed all the alliances relative to conducting exploration campaign, however due to the re-focusing in Namibia and South Africa, the initial wells to be drilled are no longer applicable and negotiations are still ongoing and possibly about to be concluded
Goodnight !! ;-))