The latest London South East Webinar takes place on July 6. Come and hear CEO’s from Orosur Mining, Caledonia Mining, Glantus Holdings and Tekcapital speak. Please register 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 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.
rns "If neither of those agreed to participate (30% of the register) , do you really think the rest (mainly retail) could have raised the necessary $100mm.."
the issue is that neither of these were approached early enough or when the share price was considerably higher . The time to have approached them would have perhaps been last september - in time for the weather window . they could have asked major shareholders first and tried an open offer for any shortfall.
who in their right mind would be willing to finance this bod now when they clearly state that they want to wind up the company?
"who are the 2 major shareholders? is there a shareholder register?"
And you're invested on AIM?????
Applecrumble...” they could have announced a rights issue any how and see the appetite from smaller shareholders? Even if they announced a rights of 0.5p they would have collected 250 million dollars at a similar deal ( 1:20)”
Very relevant point..
Because the BoD are bent to give it away to the Bondholders at any price to save their jobs and salary ..
Announcing a rights issue. Unless it’s underwritten will not guarantee the raising of a single £1. It’s a right not an obligation.
The two largest shareholders are Kerogen and CA it’s on the website.
If neither of those agreed to participate (30% of the register) , do you really think the rest (mainly retail) could have raised the necessary $100mm..
and which one engaged and refused and which didn't? which one asked for resignation? If the major shareholders refused, they could have announced a rights issue any how and see the appetite from smaller shareholders? Even if they announced a rights of 0.5p they would have collected 250 million dollars at a similar deal ( 1:20)
who are the 2 major shareholders? is there a shareholder register?
If you want to understand Lincoln then read the latest CPR.
It is estimated to contain 18-80 mm bbls recoverable.
Further drilling will be needed to tighten the range...
It’s all irrelevant of course as there is no money to do this and the main shareholder isn’t prepared to put any further money in, and the other major shareholder won’t engage.
"there’s no oil, we’re winding Hurricane up now”
Testing of the Lincoln Crestal well recorded a maximum stable flowrate of 9,800 stock tank barrels of oil per day ("stb/d") with the use of electrical submersible pumps ("ESPs"). The well flowed at an average rate of 4,682 stb/d under natural conditions. No formation water was produced.
No oil my Arsenal......!
For once we are in agreement.
All the best.
I haven’t studied this in detail as I’m not involved. It seems a shame though that we seem to have another example of playing fast and loose with other peoples money without the same duty of care as there would be if it were their own. I’m off but wish all lth’s the best of luck. If I was a shareholder I wouldn’t be involved with litigation though, too toxic far too complicated and the chances of success are incredibly slim. Write it off, offset any relevant losses against future gains and move on. We’ve all been there. GL.
"there’s no oil, we’re winding Hurricane up now”
They've said that now and no-one believes them............................
Tuxedo yes he did say that (in December actually) but further down the very same release they also also stated:
“ It should be noted that there is a risk of dilution to existing shareholders from a possible restructuring and/or partial equitisation of the convertible bonds. Furthermore, if no agreement can be reached with the Company's stakeholders on additional investment, further development activity at Lancaster might not be possible. In such a scenario, Lancaster could continue to produce from existing wells before reaching the economic limit, the timing of which would depend on oil prices, actual production levels delivered and the level of cost savings achievable. The field may then be decommissioned, with potentially limited or no value returned to shareholders. Notwithstanding these risks, the Company will endeavour to secure the best possible outcome for all stakeholders.”
You can’t take factual quotes (higher prices = more value” ) out of the context of the full RNS.
This post from advfn is quite apt.....
nigwit: "Given the number of clear warnings the company announced over the last several months I wonder exactly what words they could have used instead to make all those investors who continued to hold sit up and take notice instead of growing their daft conspiracies. Frankly, I think even if they had said something as blunt as “there’s no oil, we’re winding Hurricane up now” many would have refused to believe them."
Yep it's there in black and white RNS, only there are so many dangerous rampers here with their wacky conspiracy theories they literally can't see the wood for the trees.
There is a copy of the explanatory statement on the HUR website which addresses your issue about who they consulted shareholder wise (and 259 pages of other stuff)
It states section 6:-
6.6 During the course of its discussions with the Committee, the Plan Company has also sought to engage with two large institutional shareholders in order to ascertain whether they would be willing to enter into discussions with the Plan Company in relation to the terms of the Restructuring and/or to provide financial support to the Plan Company. Whilst the Plan Company made efforts to engage with those shareholders, only one institutional shareholder has been prepared to participate in discussions with the Plan Company prior to the signing of the Lock-up Agreement (the Wall Crossed Shareholder). The remainder of the Plan Company's shares are generally held by smaller shareholders in custodian accounts. In light of the Plan Company's regulatory obligations under the Market Abuse Regulations, it was not practicable to engage directly with smaller shareholders for the purpose of undertaking a market sounding prior to signature of the Lock-up Agreement.
6.7 A detailed presentation and discussion of the potential benefits of potential development options was made available to the Wall Crossed Shareholder. As part of those discussions, the Wall Crossed Shareholder indicated that (i) it is not willing to provide additional financial support to the Plan Company and (ii) whilst the rationale for the Restructuring was understood, it could not actively support it. Another large institutional shareholder was also
approached by the Plan Company's nominated adviser in the same manner as the Wall Crossed Shareholder,10 but indicated that it would not be prepared to enter into confidential discussions on that basis. Consequently, it was not possible to provide a detailed presentation and discussion of the potential benefits of potential development options to that shareholder.
This explains what they did, and it’s pretty clear Kerogen were wall crossed and CA were not....their choice not to participate.
@Mirasol, “what more do you want to know things are likely to go pear shaped?”
How about the meaning of the CEO statement this very year that “A continued recovery in oil prices would further enhance the significant value we see in our West of Shetland portfolio.” A bit confusing wouldn’t you say? Unless possibly the useless Chairman now unbelievably still in position for more than 3 years then told Maris that statement was meant for the “ad hoc group of bondholders” only and not shareholders you du*bo, lol!
"what more do you want to know things are likely to go pear shaped? A personal call from the MD? A brass band and parade down your street? The voice of God as you travel on the Road to Damascus?"
agree Captain, and that's what I was eluding to Mirasol, not so much the writing on the wall bit, the what are the options to protect all stakeholders bit... Why were shareholders almost totally ignored, I understand bondholders take precedent but there were no defaults and therefore still time to involve all..!
The thing is that Hur have made it very difficult to understand who is who. Who are the committee that they have been in talks with since sept ? Who are considered stakeholders ?- presumably some of the major bondholders but who else ? Are there any conflicts of interest?
If they have been in discussion with committee since sept has this affected their course of action in regards the forward plan etc.
Why did they only leave it until after the restructure plan to contact major shareholders? Why we're retail not proposed an open offer ? Why do they still not have a decision on Lincoln ? After all this time ?
Maybe it has all been above board - however I think clarity should have been given to shareholders who have lost everything
The bod have only ever acted in bondholders interests as far as I can see.maybe that stands legally but ethically ?
"A valid question would be why existing shareholders weren’t kept completely in the loop and then more importantly given an opportunity to understand where this was heading"
the field doesn't produce what they say it would, the Messianic CEO who is behind it all is given the shove, a warning is given of possible massive impairment - what more do you want to know things are likely to go pear shaped? A personal call from the MD? A brass band and parade down your street? The voice of God as you travel on the Road to Damascus?
Fair point wrt PwC, you clearly think they are “suspect”
And cannot be trusted.. How about Stifel, Deloittes, Evercore, and each of their legal advisors? Are they also complicit?
Do you believe that their NOMAD, Advisors esp PwC who ran the financial forecasts and their legal representatives would allow the Board to knowingly make a negative misrepresentation. ?”
Is above statement supposed to be a joke with the emphasis on “esp PwC” who have unfortunately been associated with some of the biggest recent fraud and corruption cases and allegations which in some cases have resulted in PwC being blacklisted for a duration in some countries, please see 2 examples of many here below FYI (Wirecard and another case in India are other examples in case of interest), so having been audited/certified by such firms means absolutely nothing when it comes to investigations these days, DYOR.
“The Netherlands targets PwC in SHV corruption case”:
“Blacklist audit firms for fraud failures, urges Pirc”:
Thank you Rosie, appreciated
Looking at the fundamentals and the current market cap something obviously doesn’t stack up. A valid question would be why existing shareholders weren’t kept completely in the loop and then more importantly given an opportunity to understand where this was heading and given a chance to contribute to the fund raise. It seems that they’ve initially dropped the ball then picked it back up and booted it out of the ground. Undoubtedly questions for them to answer - you didn’t explain why you seemed possessed by the whole thing though RNST, are you a shareholder ? You can’t be trying to save people as most would be significantly underwater and would have effectively written this off ?! 132 posts in a couple of weeks, it must be taking over a huge amount of your thinking time, if you’re not being paid to do this then you’re going to give yourself an ulcer with all of this increased stress ?!