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.
As derampers go Nige I think you are pretty damn good I hope you are on a good wage from your employer . You play the embittered holder role very well , all the best !
Cash has properly been paid out to the likes of drilling companies yes. The directors have been paid, relatively modest sums in the circumstances where projects have visibly proceeded. No, cash has not merely flowed out to suspicious groups for unclear reasons. If anything, the entities raved about here have allowed cash to flow in.
So I repeat the questions you have singularly failed to answer, despite promising to do so. You, who have demonstrated your own unreliability and untrustworthy nature as a result. What is your experience? What is your background? What is your precise interest in PRD?
Did you say "no cash has flowed out of PRD" just now and you demand my CV? Would I give my resumé to a traffic warden or Dominos Pizza mushroom slicer? No cash flowing out? Are you smoking a pancake?
You need to get on the blower to Griffiths FFS! Demand an explanation re director massive sell off just market hours before a placing.
Toast the little squab about the two opaque ops rns's, its your money old queen.
I give up, it literally is the Gibbon enclosure at Twycross Zoo here!!
Nigel, key stage 1 even if you are able to. What is your background? What is your experience. And I will add, what is your precise interest in PRD?
Only no cash has flowed out of PRD has it? So it is still about whether there are assets there worth serious money. It may be a question of what proportion we each get, but on any measure, to be worthwhile, it's a damned site more than 5p
Beetle I really am trying to make this Key Stage 2 for you.
The game has changed! Whinny and Co have smelled it out and published. It is all about sentiment and cash now old chap.
Nickel you are a gift to this single party state bulletin board. Winnifrith is a very able, rigorous and evidence based sceptic, in fact I think he is related to James Delingpole!
Before you go, what's your opinion of GRH? I think, classic salesman: feeding partially formed ideas to the credulous who then give themselves a bag of hula hoops and a veiny palm tree job just because they can join the three remaining dots. Trying to win favour by dropping in what for we British is extremely private information another cardinal sign.
As for Griffiths, I'm after some clarity now to justify further holding
To voice a potentially obvious but unusual point - none of this represents any value to anyone if PRD does not come good on its assets. If there is not gas, if T&T is a dud, and if Ireland is a pipedream then no matter how many millions of shares one is given, one is left with nothing.
Arato did not get all shares for nothing, it paid very large sums into prd facilitating the successful utilisation of Morocco.
If there is a debate as to what fair value is to shareholders of the assets, it is a debate that only matters of there truly is value there to be shared. As such it is wholly inconsistent with the theory that RP sold out because PRD is a dud.
If I had to chose between 100% of nothing or 25% of a very large something I take the 25%. We can examine whether anything underhand occured later if needs be. For now, we just need to continue to demonstrate that the assets have the very large promise they have indicated to date.
3 posts of utter nonesense that you've been called out on.
1."Not long before he gave Arato extra shares not to redeem the CLN ... nothing odd there then??"
I called you out for slander, a few hours later you corrected yourself.
2."Arato were given 2.5m shares to waive Predator using placing proceeds to pay down the CLN"
Well duh, the placing funds were allocated for the projects. Arato then took the mick and kept converting which was stopping any uptrend so Paul raised to pay them off.
If you post bs then expect to be called out.
" I have made these few short posts to raise serious red flags over Predator. The 'Predator' has a bad smell around it."
Sorry but the smell arrived with you.
Zebra better named ostrich perhaps?
I'm not asking for replies - most will stick their head in the sand and see only what they want to see.
I have made these few short posts to raise serious red flags over Predator. The 'Predator' has a bad smell around it.
This will be my last post on the matter - I don't wish to engage with the paid rampers and nutcases on LSE.
- Shareholders have been kept in the dark about the beneficial ownership structure of Theseus.
- Information provided about Arato was inaccurate - RNS 15 Feb 2019: "Arato Global Opportunities is an investment fund focussed on small and midcap growth companies." Not true - set up for a single CLN, fronted by an individual barred by the SEC for 3 years in 2008, with no traceable ownership or source of funds.
- Arato was awarded an unnecessary CLN on terms far too favourable.
- These terms included additional shares for allowing Predator NOT to pay off the CLN - Tucked away on page 114 of the prospectus for the £3.6m placing announced in the RNS 14/02/20 - Arato were given 2.5m shares to waive Predator using placing proceeds to pay down the CLN - yet a few short months later Griffiths was paying off the CLN with another placing - so an additional £100k at the then placing price of 4p chucked in Arato's direction for no good reason. Wonder why you would do that? If you own 40% of the company why dilute yourself with an unnecessary CLN of v favourable terms to the lender.... unless??
- Predator could clear up any issues over Arato by providing full transparency on ownership, funding, holdings of PRD shares and timing of share sales .
- Pilbeam sold most of his shares only hours away from a discounted placing while loyal shareholders were in the dark.
- Did Pilbeam sell because Mou1 was a stonking success? Did he sell because it provided information that now made Mou4 a certainty? Did he sell because the July bopd update for CO2 eor from Trinidad promised in the annual report is on schedule and is going great?
- No - he sold because Mou1 was a miss, it questions their whole geological model and it makes the chances of success at Mou4 less likely (although - it is still a possibility of course). He sold because Trinidad is delay after delay after delay - and they are likely having significant trouble getting it to anything like commercial flow rates.
- I conclude the management of Predator have little time or respect for the shareholders who have funded their salaries for the last few years. They will have to continue to raise more funds from placings in the near future to fund their personal contracts, and to fund their 3 projects which appear to be struggling to deliver tangible progress.
Over and out.
Beetle I do not make a habit of interacting with the deluded or paranoid: you appear to have a delusion that there are two of me.
May I suggest a search of the British Journal of Psychiatry?
Recent history for Nickel suggests you're correct Zebra.........!
"News tomorrow.... 1 000 buy = £1.90 = 1 code?" on Mayan Jan 2019........ ;()
All the best (you got a one right there........... :()
Nickel I really cant be bothered replying to all that nonesense.
1.Paul didn't give arato extra shares not to redeem to cln... Slander.
2."lot easier, quicker and SAFER to raise.... he's done it at drop of a hat many times ..." PRD had never raised at that point. Slander again.
3.Small cap clns always have favourable terms in the lender favour.
May I suggest you direct your concerns to FCA/HMRC/SEC... Clearly this is an urgent matter for them and not for a bulletin board.
Clearly that won't happen as you wouldn't want to attract heat to your own slander/defamation on a public forum.
I'd wager you're part of tw.
Before the CLN, therefore before Morocco, PRD was much more of a punt. Trinidad sounded great but with huge uncertainty as to whether it would work. Placings now are over subscribed, but I don't know that would have been the case at the time. Many of us here spent months complaining about the CLN and its effect, but it got us Morocco and I am far from convinced there was a viable alternative at the time. These insinuations reek of conspiracy theory tinfoil hat time. The raise for the CLN clearance came at a time when the company at its core looked much more attractive. Paul's own relief at ending the warrants was palpable and it had nothing to do with anything being "found out".
As to "hidden" ownership, this is the blinkered and wrong headed approach the likes of HMRC take. Isle of Man is a great place to incorporate due to its tax regime. With it comes non public ownership whether you wanted it or not. To assume that the motivation is to hide again reeks of conspiracy theory time.
I've been in shares where TW has thrown around similar accusations and nothing has come of it because it was nonsense. Again stopped clocks are occasionally right but it does little to recommend regular reliance on them.
Well, well, Tim/Nige (or whatever other names you use), here you have the perfect opportunity to nail GRH. HE has come out and given us numbers, but what do you give us? Errrrr.. let me see now...... oh yes, you were "right" about the "placing". Yes, ok, now let's see your numbers and answers please. And for any newbies, here is GRH's question for Nige/Tim/Whoever:
you did claim relevant experience a while ago ...
and you were kindly going to set out for the BB what you have achieved
either in the markets
or of course within E&P itself
Despite a reminder having been posted, I don' t recall seeing your note on that...
And for the avoidance of doubt, I am completely in agreement with GRH.
So c'mon Nige/Tim/Whoever - let's be having those numbers and answers please?
There are clearly matters of concern for The FCA, Hmrc and The SEC in the US.
Novum and the Predator Board may well find themselves with many questions from the authorities
Good post Nickel
While always sceptical of my own investment decisions the last three rns's are clear evidence of weasellyness, that is not to say that potential does not exist but who would disagree? Well obviously his grace professor GR Zimmerframe of Eastbourne of course...
Not read the piece but is it only the Irish assets?
" who knew Griffiths had 50% of Theseus which meant he wouldn't be diluted on the Irish assets with prd raises?"
1. Firstly, Theseus has a 50% share in ram head and corrib south not in predator Lng, which is the main project. Paul owns 50% of Theseus? that is great to know, even more skin in the game. Your point on dilution is silly. He wouldn't be diluted through his Theseus holding (a private company) but will still be diluted form his prd holding (a public company where he can raise).
2. Theseus is a private company, they can chose to keep the identity hidden. Unfortunately that's how the world works. Tw isn't whistleblowing.
3. Nobody thought arato was a real company. Lol. It was purely set up for the purposes of the CLN. Novum arranged the funds through one of their contacts. Its what these type of broker do and why the market expected it to be negative for the sp.
4. Fully expected a bucket shop fronter, if you follow the company sp you'll see that's exactly how he played it out.
5. Paul has said timing and speed. The Guercif license was up for grabs. At this stage the company had never raised before, it wasn't as quick as the broker contacting previous placees. Paul was assured at the time the lender would be responsible. Clearly he wasn't so Paul raised to pay him off.
6. Rp's sells we still don't know why. Many posters have commented on the matter which you can read.
7. Markets/laws/loopholes its all complex. Most the times its just noise.
So you can chose to follow tw if you like.
Griffiths' big play has always been... trust me I'm totally aligned with you.... I'm not so sure.
You are right re TW .... but the article throws up HUGE RED FLAGS.... ignore at your own risk.. .
1) who knew Griffiths had 50% of Theseus which meant he wouldn't be diluted on the Irish assets with prd raises?
2) why is the holder of the other 50% of Theseus hidden via Isle of man? If you think it isn't deliberately hidden write and ask him...
3) arato and the cln..... arato weren't a "real" investment co. Just created for the cln.... why? who?
4) The who.... Arato fronted by George Sandhu ..... banned by the SEC in the US??
5) Why the incredibly favourable terms for the cln given away by Griffiths for whoever was the real funder behind Arato....?? Why was it even a cln and not a placing.... for the benefit of the hidden cln provider!
6) Pilbeam insider selling at around 6.5p pre placing.... why? Presumably he knows a lot of interesting stuff and the details on mou1.... available info on mou4
7) Non disclosure of related party transactions... obvious why u do that!
Not sure the regulators will do much. Isn't their creed to maintain an "orderly market" rather than a particularly legal one?
Yes hedgeman it could get nasty all depends how serious the FCA take to the letter that have been sent to them and if they invesigate time will tell
TW and his despicable crew are NOT here to look out for YOUR interests.
Has anyone actually read the article by Brailey (TW) ?