The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. 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. 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.
In an RNS towards the end of last year Andrew Denham appeared to give the impression that shareholders would be updated with positive progress early in 2023. Once again nothing has transpired! Anybody can see that the Directors are just sitting on their hands watching the salary role in.
One example...since being appointed what exactly has been the role of Malcolm Graham Woode??? Why have a large Board of Directors when they are all mates of the CEO and the day to day activities of the business are so non existent that they can justify part time roles.
Meanwhile both the authorities and indeed LSE appear to support this and look the other way!!!!
Extract from January 2022 RNS
“ Ascent Resources Plc (LON: AST), the onshore Caribbean, Hispanic American and European focused natural resources company, is pleased to announce an update on its ESG Metals strategy, introducing Peru as its primary target geography alongside the signature of a Joint Venture agreement with Peru-based Blanco Safi SAC to collaborate on the identification and subsequent development of precious and base metal rich tailing and processing operations.”
No mention of Ascent on the Blanco Safi website!…and no mention of the agreement since January 2022.…and no mention of the Cuba operation!…seriously, if you are thinking of investing here do your research on the claims made and take a long look at the track records of the Directors.
The Cuba operation never got off the ground! I believe the two month extension of the MOU expired in January 2022.
These shysters then claimed that Peru was their primary focus but not a peep since early 2022.. do some research and then decide if It’s a sham company led by fraudsters claiming to be invested in Hispanic and Caribbean operations.
If anyone finds evidence of that being true, please post it here
Interesting. Compare to Slovenia.
https://www.share-talk.co.uk/announcements/rns/pathfinder-minerals/spa-signed-for-sale-of-im-minerals/202303220700057831T
Yet another awesome update to justify the over inflated BOD's salaries for another couple of months!!! Could we for at least once, have an update on some genuine, tangible progress in any part of the business??? The share price is a true reflection of the BOD's lack of progress anywhere.
Parsons earning £600k per annum for several part time roles...you see my point!!!
Ping - Debacle is the right word!
At least the discussion about Slovenia takes the spotlight away from the Cuban debacle!!! I wonder why no progress is being made on that either!!!!!
https://www.brrmedia.co.uk/broadcasts/5d6f90612760173908009ee4/ascent-resources-strategic-update/
Came across the old transcript of the Q&A session with Parsons/Dennan... back in June 2021. Most bluster... a few questions on the Slovenia claim though...
Question from SteveM
Arbitration, how long will this process take? Have the new lawyers given any indication of how
quickly the process will take?
Andrew Dennan (Chief Executive Officer)
I recall an average time to complete arbitration is approx 3 years, some claims have been resolved
as quickly as 90 days and others can take 4/5 years. Slovenia have had 3 arbitration cases
against them, 1 they lost and paid the damages award voluntarily and within the time period
stipulated, the other 2 Slovenia settled after arbitration had been initiated but before it concluded
Question from SteveM
If any large sum is won during the arbitration proceedings will a proportion be returned to long
term shareholders that have suffered for years being invested in AST??
James Parsons (Chairman)
We really can't speculate on what the Board would propose to do with a successful damages
award. I do personally have some thoughts on this and a plan in my mind but it is premature to be
speculating and anyway it is possible / likely that it would require a shareholder vote. I suggest we
cross this bridge when we get to it - it will be a luxury problem to have! Having said all that I
would highlight that we are acutely aware of the history at Ascent and are very focused on doing
the best we can for shareholders.
What a good time these Q&A sessions were... all bluff... questions about Cuba too... progressing as fast as they can apparently! :)
I am assuming nothing.
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/AST/completion-of-damages-claim-funding/15473433
"Completion of Damages Claim Funding"
"will be advancing the disbursements which are expected to be incurred in the pursuit of the claim and will only be paid out of a portion of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner)."
You could always call the CEO and double check with him, as I did.
That wording is the same wording used in the Annual Report.
You seem strangely committed to trying to undermine the Company's claim in the ICSID, particularly, for someone who is not a shareholder and only has a passing interest. Maybe you have some other interest?
What matters is that this is going to the ICSID and what will happen will happen.
DYOR
From the annual report
"Enyo are funding the payment of advanced disbursements which are expected to be incurred in the pursuit of the claim, and these disbursements along with the time of Enyo's lawyers will only be paid out of the proceeds of the arbitration in the event of a successful damages award or execution of a binding settlement agreement (if achieved sooner)."
Pretty clear
DYOR
Pet, follow your own argument through.
You expect that Clfford Chance on behalf of Slovenia will ask for security of costs. If you can foresee that, why can't Enyo, AST and the entity funding the legal costs? Do you think that it will come as a complete surprise to them, that they will throw their hands up in the air and say, well I didn't expect that!
Enyo, in pursuing things so far and up to the point where surety is demanded will have incurred a lot of costs under the funding agreement. If you were right and that the demand for surety was unexpected, unfunded and AST had to walk away then it is Enyo and the funder who are out of pocket. At this stage, it is not AST that would be walking away but Enyo and the funder.
Far more likely that Enyo and the funder have done their homework are happy with AST's case, fully expect CC to demand surety and if demanded it is funded.
Enyo have done this before and would expect all the usual things and the same would be the case with the funder.
DYOR
I forgot to metion, I see more value in 'defense side legal financing' with Slovenia than I do for financing AST versus Slovenia. I do not own any shares in AST but each & everyone to their own.
@Helpful, also need to factor that Clifford Chance will undoubtedly ask AST to post security of costs. I would be surpised if Enyo Law will agree to post collateral in advance of the tribunal meeting. The claim progressing will then come down to how much does the team at Clifford Chance ask AST to post, and where will AST get the collateral albeit can approach the insurance market for an After The Event policy (which comes at a cost, the insurance premium has to be paid in adavnce). The names of the relevant partners at Clifford Chance can be found via a websearch as Enyo Law appeared to publish on the web a letter Enyo sent to both the assistant Attorney General in Slovenia and the partners at Clifford Chance. With the production license due to be renewed, or not renewed, later this year, the credibility of the independent expert witnesses retained to asses quantum for loss of future earnings will also be critical. Btw, I have previously run an oil & gas company, I have a technical background, and I have been part of hydrocarbon teams that have successfully sued countries for a lot more than AST is claiming. There is still a long way to go for AST, the value or the merit of the claim is not just down to the ICSID arbitrators and Enyo Law.
Nothing to do with Board from here on in: down to the ICSID and Enyo Law.
We'll all be dead by old age by the time this BOD come up with anything. James Parsons and his mates! Don't just look here look at every company he is associated with!!!
I'm sure if we receive positive news then any gains will be hoovered up by the Executives - I should never have come anywhere near this sham!!!
Give it a rest with your standard boring rant.
Nothing you said is relevant to the news on the ICSID. This is now largely nothing to do with the board; this pretty much all down to Enyo Law and the terms on which they did the funding deal (we don't know the terms).
This is funded through to conclusion and Slovenia know that. If Ascent had no case, Enyo Law wouldn't have taken it and they would not have secured funding for the case.
The next step is that the panel sets a date to meet and draw up the procedure and the timings: it is not open-ended. We should know fairly soon when the first meeting is and that should give us a better view of timings. Again, pretty much nothing to do with the Board.
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/AST/arbitration-initiation-revised-damages-estimate/15585791
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/AST/completion-of-damages-claim-funding/15473433
Before you say the Board is obviously lying, they are not, as evidenced by the ICSID website:
Claimant(s):
Enyo Law LLP, London, UK
Respondent(s):
State Attorney’s Office, Republic of Slovenia
Clifford Chance, Frankfurt, Germany
DYOR
All well and good but I do not trust this BOD at all...
The share price would increase overnight if the BOD announced that they were departing and the wage bill/expenses would make the balance sheet look better.
Let AST get some real industry experts in who genuinely want to take the business forward!!!
President appointed. This now starts to pick up speed.
Recently found against Spain.
https://icsid.worldbank.org/cases/case-database/case-detail?CaseNo=ARB/22/21
https://www.bredinprat.fr/fr/avocat/raed-fathallah/
He should be fairly favourable to AST.
DYOR
Epic but imo significant. Feel free to. Helpful thanks for your helpful and wide-ranging links.
Seems the rise is because of a fuss about the EU Canada deal know as CETA. It seems "fracking bans" may be incompatible with the treaty and that the Slovenian constitution banning "fracking" may have to be changed.
https://corporateeurope.org/en/climate-and-energy/2013/05/right-say-no-eu-canada-trade-agreement-threatens-fracking-bans
https://www.stopcorporateimpunity.org/press-release-eu-canada-trade-agreement-threatens-fracking-bans/
https://tnc.news/2023/03/06/bonokoski-the-president-of-the-european-commission-comes-to-canada/
DYOR
Wouldn't fancy my chances on a lifeboat with Mr Parsons in charge of the rations!!!!
Obvious what is going on here but this is the nature of AIM and the authorities continue to turn a blind eye....
Parsons in basically a crook.. it's legalised theft, but hey... if he's good enough to get away with it, he sure will, for £600k per year and achieving F-ALL, I suspect many of us would be tempted by the lucrative proceeds!! :) Slovenia crushed this company, with their anti-anything stance on well stimulation/pseudo-fracking... it was never going to recover. It's just a salary machine now for Parsons/Dennan etc.
If you look at Parson's salaries over his Executive rolls it's in excess of £600K all part time rolls. All small cap's with very limited resources.
Very true I invested here before he came along .. And had my share’s numbers decimated … I definitely wouldn’t go near anything he is involved in, as it only benefits one person …himself! His salaries across the number of companies he’s involved with is unbelievable .. all for part time rolls .. most if not all are on their ****s … with the share prices at all time lows.. shocking really. iMHO of course