Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video 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.
ST123: **I will continue to look at the positive actions of the present board who I have every faith in delivering sound to a much better place so I must therefore restate the mantra “in Graham we trust”**
Would you care to enumerate the positive actions, ST123, or did you really mean "positive utterances"? In Graham's recent video appearances he has said that the following are the crucial things to haul SOU off the rocks -- sort out the bond, raise the finance for LNG and find a contractor to deliver it, complete a gas sales agreement.
So far there is a heads of terms agreement to sell a fraction of the Horst capacity, along with a loan on onerous terms that is insufficient for the funding required, a 20% dilution for shareholders to keep the lights on, and a lengthy exclusivity period similar to last year's which fizzled out. Are those the actions you were thinking of?
The leaking of TE9 results was criminal, no doubt about it. Badile was highly suspicious as well.
Daveyboy yes I’m surprised the posts haven’t been removed. The last ones to disappear were removed during the late evening so watch this space. My point about Trellis being duped by Parsons is purely to demonstrate that he obviously does not have the insider information that’s he hints of from time to time.
give it time, or perhaps being potentially implicated in covering up criminal activity is where LSE keyboard warrior moderators run out of spine.
Personally, i hope the pair get everything they deserve, the only thing better than a criminal conviction for the pair, would be a criminal conviction and a court ordered seizure and sale of assets gained via criminal activity, to pay back company, now that would make my day..... and perhaps the financial authorities would then have to pay attention to the fraud going on within AIM instead of burying their heads in the sand.
Sharetrader, there is no inside info for anyone to base their previous share buying on. It's information that had lately surfaced which could be used in a criminal case against JP and Marco. I'm surprised my posts haven't been removed yet.
Investor 12, in Grahams interview yesterday he spoke about the bond and even hinted it would be possible to pay it from the monies generated from the gas sales which shows the potential earnings from what we already have in the ground.
Pduk it is what it is, yes I'm not a long term holder but so what? The journey you have been on I must admit has been difficult and no doubt frustrating and damaging financially. It’s got to a stage though whereby you and Trellis have been somewhat warped by your bad experience to the extent where you no longer believe any good news and are prepared to dispute any positive news in order to wallow in your misery. What happened with Parsons and the previous board has passed and constant harping on about his activities is not going to change things moving forward. Your hero Trellis who you keep quoting constantly does not know the inside information he claims otherwise he would have made smarter investment choices than he has. It looks like Parsons did a good number on him hence his bitterness. I will continue to look at the positive actions of the present board who I have every faith in delivering sound to a much better place so I must therefore restate the mantra “in Graham we trust”
As someone pointed out before, restructuring could be an option and that is what Lyon is probably hoping but on the flip side why would they agree to that when they could the whole company themselves.
Sharetrader123, who are you to criticise anyone here? Many, many have been here for years and have had their life savings taken from them after James Parsons (before he did a runner form such a good thing) ramped this to high heaven whilst taking them to one side and shaking their hands when not standing at a podium. You, in your own admission, have only invested in the last couple of months so do not share that history or anger. You maybe a 'ShareTrader'123 but the majority here are long term investors
It was at the start of that period that you was found to be begging on this board for SOU information as you couldn't be bothered to harvest the information yourself from reading RNS's.
It is not just your fat fingers lying but you keep repeating that we are funded to LNG. We are NOT. The funding we have maybe takes us to March 2021. LNG, at best case is, Dec 2021. In between that we need to repay the 20million bond. Here is pS200306 reminded you of that~~~~
**There's a few alternative *facts* in there too, ST123. We would have had funds to March next year if the PI offering had been fully subscribed. It wasn't, but even if it was, March is a long way short of end of 2021 which is the earliest possible first LNG revenue -- and sounds optimistic at that. We don't have a multi trillion c ft asset. We have 47% (currently) x 0.377 Tcf = 0.177 Tcf of a 2C resource. Regardless of what it's worth, why would the bondholders accept restructuring if they could have the whole company themselves ... or at least extract their pound of flesh with additional onerous terms. Meanwhile we've given away 20% just to keep the lights on to the end of *this* year. Even if we make it to first gas, shareholders may have been diluted out of existence. Not saying it will happen, just that there is a flip side to your unbridled optimism.***
According to many here, Graham Lyon told us that dilution wouldn't happen. It did. Thus far he has told us all what he is going to do (rather like James Parsons) but unfortunately until something is signed and delivered I will take things with a pinch of salt.
Be positive. Great! But don't mislead in order to 'ShareTrade'123
Woundlick, yes Graham spoke very well today and it is clear that there is much positive work going on at present. The previous posters who were slating the board for doing nothing during covid should hang their heads in shame.
Well after watching the latest interview with GL, I am feeling better tonight than I was last night. Small steps and all that.
Sara Dees wow and of course pure fantasy again,
I don't think sharetrader123 is Sarah Dees. Unless it is a ploy to throw us off the scent, Sarah Dees wouldn't make such amateur mistakes. I always found her in e-mail and in person to be of high intelligence and integrity.
PS it was only an alternative view in a bid to cheer up woundlick. None of us know for sure how it will all pan out in the next 12 months but getting the ONEE deal signed will certainly change our outlook for sure.
There's a few alternative *facts* in there too, ST123. We would have had funds to March next year if the PI offering had been fully subscribed. It wasn't, but even if it was, March is a long way short of end of 2021 which is the earliest possible first LNG revenue -- and sounds optimistic at that. We don't have a multi trillion c ft asset. We have 47% (currently) x 0.377 Tcf = 0.177 Tcf of a 2C resource. Regardless of what it's worth, why would the bondholders accept restructuring if they could have the whole company themselves ... or at least extract their pound of flesh with additional onerous terms. Meanwhile we've given away 20% just to keep the lights on to the end of *this* year. Even if we make it to first gas, shareholders may have been diluted out of existence. Not saying it will happen, just that there is a flip side to your unbridled optimism.
Woundlick you are in great need of comfort.
Alternative theory: Present board have enough funds to take us well into next year. In the meantime ONEE conclude deal with Sound and secure our journey to first gas with good income stream worth 18 million dollars gross in the first year and a take or pay contract on the first 0.3billion cubic meters of gas. The bond is then restructured on basis of having multi trillion cu ft asset and a market to sell our gas.. Get to first gas and sell LNG to create sustainable revenue stream. With the money flowing in,further investment is secured for pipeline build. Pipeline project complete and access to new markets and income streams via linking to the European grid network. Further steady income generated by charging access fees to other producers in the area desperate to get their gas to the European network. Share price rockets and shows good growth over coming years. Sound investors live happily ever after.
Sorry to be so pessimistic folks, but I'm really struggling to see how Sound can be saved at this point. We're already diluted up to our eyeballs, more recent further dilution has only raised insignificant funds compared to the amounts required for actual development, never mind dealing with debts/liabilities. Where is there to go from here? From what I can see the only possible routes to avoid total collapse are either to get a farm in partner or sell the licence to the highest bidder. As Trellis has pointed out, the obstacles in front of us ahead of first gas with the LNG plan from a finance side may just be insurmountable in my opinion. But without revenue from any gas/LNG sales there is no funding for any further development.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing but apparently the reason for not pursuing early monetisation via LNG (or other small scale production) after the TE6/7 drills was because that would have triggered the start of the 10 year tax holiday off the back of relatively small production considering the 'super-giant potential'. At the time JP was able to raise funds far easier for further exploration - and if the tax holiday had started long before an eventual sale - any potential future buyer would have factored that into their offer as 'time lost' against the tax savings.
Fast forward to 2020 and we have minimal funds remaining which is not enough for any meaningful action in terms of producing gas. Without gas we'll have no more funds to do anything at all, not even office related 'action'. So why not just sell the company right now to the highest bidder or do whatever is the best deal on offer for farm in? Even if those deals are offered at a huge discount to the 'real' value of the asset - I don't see what other choice we have. If such a deal is at a huge discount, there should be no shortage of interested willing parties to do a deal.
I really hope I'm missing something here. Can anybody give me a good reason to be more optimistic? Before you ask, no, I'm not selling. No point as it's not worth much now anyway. Given the fact I've been completely wrong (or misled by JP) about everything so far......who knows, I might just be wrong again. Certainly hope so.