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.
"if it were 80% and recognisably so by our hosts, don't you think the company, iR and our new CEO would have made that crystal clear at an AGM, better still, a banquet, a banquet serving Cristal champagne with cherry's on top? I know I would if I were him."
Why would you celebrate something that hasn't changed?
Continued… The strength of the ad hominem these fraudsters throw out at posters who call them out is, I wonder, directly proportional to the level of difficulty and frustration they have in executing their scams fruitfully. The greatest compliment I’ve had is to be called, by Bucephalus, a “mofo”. Yes, as a new investor here, I was taken in at first by how learned some of these posters seemed to be. Not anymore.
Broadford Bay, hi
Thanks for all that interesting info. The mid 2043 date for expiry I got from an email from the company, the text of which is below:
Apologies for the delay in coming back to you. Please see attached the byelaws pre the 2019 amendment. As per the 2019 AGM notice of meeting (see pg.5, special resolution 13), the amendment was a technical matter regarding treasury shares.
The PSC expires mid-2043.
Best
Yes, the above text doesn't explain where the 2043 date comes from, so I'll have to ask more questions about it at the next AGM, if I am still a shareholder then. Yes, I can see that the date has to correspond with the terms of the PSC - I'll just have to check if the date is plausible or not. It sounds possible if the PSC started in August 2013.
Yes, I agree there are some disputes outstanding (sales of oil before the PSC started - e.gl who gets the revenue?). On the matter of what our %age WI is of Shaikan, I am satisfied it doesn't matter for two reasons:
First, the invoices are prepared on one WI basis and are paid on a different WI basis and, this is the crucial part, a higher deductions regime for the higher WI method.
Second, I recall doing the calculations both ways, one with the lower WI, and the other with the higher WI, and I got the same entitlement, probably because the higher WI method comes with deductions that bring the entitlement figure into line with the low WI method.
Third, my calculations seemed to correspond with JF's statement that any change to the PSC would be "value-neutral", something he stated in an RNS, so that would mean jail-time if it was incorrect.
Fourth, my layman understanding of law and contracts is that they can't be changed unilaterally,as a rule, as if they could there wouldn't be any point in entering into a contract. There are some exceptions e.g. by 'custom' and by 'usage': if you are told to accept a lower payment, and you accept it without protest, then that can become the new 'contracted' remuneration - the purpose is maybe to stop new contracts having to be typed up and signed the whole time so a contract can be changed just by acquiescing in some disadvantageous new terms, I wonder, without actually signing a new written contract. Then there is the situation where one party can repudiate a contract by declaring force majeure. Check out "by custom" in a legal dictionary.
It's interesting how we are exposed to such variety in the MOs used to execute competent frauds: the 2 guys on Twitter change the conspiracy theory every other week to support a higher share price, using plausible corporate finance and law lingo; the multi-avatar guy just changes his avatar three or four times a week to pump out the share price lifting nonsense, while Surreyscot changes low probability share price boosting events into high ones, deleting the associated trail of failed predictions under his ADVFN highlander7 moniker. Continued...
"In addition to, or included in all of that (?), is the thorny issue of Working Interest. The market has still not been officially informed as to whether the WI% remains at 58% or whether it has been increased to 80% - a very significant factor to take into account."
I have asked this question to IR on the phone an received an inconclusive answer. More cough and splutter than clarity.
So lets put it this way; if it were 80% and recognisably so by our hosts, don't you think the company, iR and our new CEO would have made that crystal clear at an AGM, better still, a banquet, a banquet serving Cristal champagne with cherry's on top? I know I would if I were him.
"The market has still not been officially informed as to whether the WI% remains at 58% or whether it has been increased to 80% - a very significant factor to take into account."
"I cannot see how they arrive at 61.5%, anyone got any ideas?"
More importantly the WI remains at 80% and the CBP at 40% (they have not been reduced).
Could be dangerous to bring up any reference to historical debt with our masters (and certainly suicidal to mention overdue interest due on same) or us, and our dubiously legal PSC, will be toast forthwith - they probably have a spectrum of trumped up reasons to remove GKP no doubt).
In my humble view - the best strategy from our invisible BoD would be to keep things wildly in the public eye, and (after our longterm loan and the costs of eventually achieving the 55kbbls/d are funded) keep paying out sufficient dividends to minimize that annoyingly high bank balance we appear to be capable of generating - to avoid angering our masters.
Buybacks ?
Well proven to have zero effect on our SP, so divdends as long as we are permitted to continue in business in Kurdistan please.
BB, from FYr 2020 RNS.
“ During PSC negotiations with the MNR, it was tentatively agreed that the Shaikan Contractor would provide the KRG a 20% carried working interest in the PSC. This would result in a reduction of GKP's working interest from 80% to 61.5% and, to compensate for such decrease, a reduction in the Capacity Building Payments expense from 40% to 20%. While the PSC has not been formally amended, it was agreed that GKP would invoice the KRG for oil sales based on the proposed revised terms from October 2017. Since revenue is recognised on a cash assured basis, the financial statements reflect the proposed revised terms. Relative to the PSC terms, the proposed revised invoicing terms result in a decrease in both revenue and cost of sales and on a net basis is slightly positive for the Company. The Company is in dialogue with the MNR to confirm whether they would like to proceed with an amendment to the PSC or revert to invoicing on the basis of the PSC.”
I cannot see how they arrive at 61.5%, anyone got any ideas?
Nobull,
I posted the following some time ago (Jan-21) but, in view of the "80-year" nonsense now being spouted and your mentioning 2043, the content needs reiterating:
A. Shaikan was declared a Commercial Discovery on 1st Aug-2012 and the Contract Term is for 20 years from commercial discovery; that means end-of-term is 1st August 2032 (PSC Clause 6.10 refers).
B. There is an “automatic right” to a 5-year extension - and that would take it up to 1st Aug-2037. It’s my presumption that this “right” will still have to be requested or demanded.
C. There is another possible extension, of another 5 years, which can be requested at the end of the 20+5 year period (1st Aug-2037).
D. IF requested, and granted, the contract would then finally end 1st August 2042. Note that this particular request has to be made at least six (6) months before end of the development period.
So, in 11 years time (minds will be concentrated well before the drop-dead date!), a decision will have to be made by the BOD on whether to “stick with it”, or to seek pastures anew.
It would be most wise, at that point, to have plenty of ammunition in your cupboard – and by that I mean both technical- & commercial arguments AND well-filled pockets.
For some years now the company has been arguing (“in discussion”) with the KRG/MNR about finally transferring the TKI 5% interest, agreeing a new Contract Amendment, paying back historical outstanding payments, AND the receipts from Test Production sales ($27.3M) made during the period prior to approval of the original Field Development Plan (July 2013).
In addition to, or included in all of that (?), is the thorny issue of Working Interest. The market has still not been officially informed as to whether the WI% remains at 58% or whether it has been increased to 80% - a very significant factor to take into account.
"55k bbls a day for 334days a year for 80 years." It's only worth (to a logical investor) the present value of the cash flows from the oil that can be got out before the PSC expires. It expires in mid 2043. Because of the risk of the PSC being repudiated (we are operating in one of the most corrupt countries in the world), the risk of the oil price crashing, the risk of payment defaults, etc. a very high discount rate needs to be applied to those cash flows, and that's probably why the share price is what it is today, what with the shares trading on an earnings yield of nearly 20%.
A lawful unilateral contract annulment (e.g. if the PSC was found to have been improperly obtained in the first place) could send the share price down to half net cash per share. Maybe that's why our chairman won't invest his own money?
I recognise your modus operandi, Surryscot, namely, the reason to buy this share is because there's always going to be another fool who will pay more, and you are particularly well qualified to supply plausible (to fools) reasons to buy while you trade against them.
Rational, risk-averse investors look at the cash flows and discount them appropriately, and they also look at the risk rating, which is SPECULATIVE. Got it? The best reason to buy these shares is for a production increase to 55k bopd and for reasonable analysts' eps forecasts to be achieved in the short term, recognising, something you don't do (like most bigots, fraudsters and, sadly, some deluded people) that events can occur that upset even the most well reasoned analysts' forecasts.
Calling your fellow longs "trolls" is maybe a sign of your frustration at making your scam successful, I wonder? You need to be more polite to people with differing views otherwise you self-identify as a bigot and a fraudster. JMV.
Ok...so why dont you lot work out the following ?
55k bbls a day for 334days a year for 80 years. ( allowing 21 days a year Lost time for maintenance)
I seem to recall this from NINE years ago........ and GKP still survives despite all the bashing ........why ?
Somewhere close to the truth ? - which will 'out' eventually ?
"2012 GKP Tender for two 500 K a day pipelines , a 700K a day one gets built ( eventually ). That would take 4 years production to empty a 1 Bn field, doesn't add up does it. Call it 5 years as Atrush has some of that pipeline. " Shaikan will produce for 80 years " JF.