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.
In short, yes...at the meeting MH clarified at my prompting that it was "best endeavours" (I think we will all say best efforts is close enough). At which point I immediately highlighted that this hadn't been made clear at all to s/hers (and noted the secretary furiously scribbling notes...I'm sure it never made it into the official minutes!). The answers given before were along the lines as it's complicated and there are multiple debt documents that all interrelate...but it was never directly answered. BTW - I'm a debt guy (not bonds, but have some experience with them). The resolutions I believe were more about resolution 2, which I hope they use wisely / at the right time for the right flexibility. Resolution 1 they had to ask for (as best endeavours). We will know shortly (coupon on one note due end of month I think) if the election is taken. And...the great news is, we only gave them an election until the next AGM. At that point it is clear as anything to us that it's best endeavours, so we can say no as we please.
'read back to my best efforts thoughts on the notes interest election'
' is it written that effectively management need to make best efforts to get the approvals and if they don't get them then the noteholders cant' elect to take the interest in share'
My reading of the bond agreement, again, just from the plain English, not as a legal expert, was that 'subject inter alia to the Company having the required share issuance authorities in place' meant the agreement didn't commit us to issuing the shares if the company didn't have authority to.
I was surprised, a bit shocked that it was agreed; I asked you about that a while ago, if you remember. The conversation on the board at the time of the vote discussion seemed odd to me, I couldn't understand how people read it any other way than that it wasn't binding but subject to, and had suspicions about conversation being steered towards it being binding, in order to get the vote. Do you mean I was right and it wasn't necessary? Or if not what was the legal position exactly?
I liked the minimum share price before dilution, obviously, and the zoom call sounded good, but was disappointed (not surprised!) that the suggestions came to nothing and that management got what they wanted and shareholders got no concessions.
I think in terms of perspective you should join the other social media groups (discord, telegram one, a private twitter group)...I spend most of my time there trying to reel the rampers back in!
With eyes wide open, I do back management a little more proactively now. Not blindly...not rampily...but I do believe that MH is our best chance of success for the moment. There is always though going to be a slight sour taste in my mouth due to the history.
My position on mgmt changed from a month or so ago after a couple of chats with MH. Before that I was a lot more passive and much like most, irked. I chatted before the OGM and then at the OGM since I was one of 3 (but only 2 relevant) shareholders there, we had plenty of room and time and they offered it up. JP was there as well. Reading body language, and delivery of the message was fundamentally great and has been massively missed. I only decided my vote at the meeting. I think the 2 other s/hers there knew what they were going to vote before-hand. And my decision to support the resolutions was made even with me calling out in the meeting that I think they were not clear with shareholders on something pretty significant (read back to my best efforts thoughts on the notes interest election...I was right).
I like to think I gave them a flavour of the distrust - I even told them that on the TWTT sessions beforehand it felt like they were answering questions by committee...ie faceless behind a keyboard too scared to be confronted (much like here...errr)...it was very good to see MH engaged, and not pre-scripted.
Anyway...I waffle...just like ranger (OK, OK...I read the tea-leaves and unfiltered), so will stop now. Hopefully the above gives you a little sense of where I am coming from wrt mgmt.
Fair, long-term holders may have a clearer perspective on that.
I suppose with the benefit of the doubt, we could accept Echo as a company that is doing a number of things right, held back by legacy debt. It just frustrates me that the threat of that debt could be fast receding even now, if more progress had been made. The scale of it makes it an urgent matter still; 2025 is not really such a long time away and seems much closer than it did in Spring, given the pace the company is moving at.
I do also want to say that Ranger is right in one thing: there is a tendency to be charitable to Echo and highlight that it is doing its best, that good decisions are being made. But none of us should really be interested in effort or forgiving of bad luck or even sensible decisions that don't ultimately pay off, not when it comes to an investment. I think Echo has had some bad luck or judgement with their timelines - I don't think they or we can afford much more of that.
Lokan - perhaps I was reading too much into it but there was a slight acknowledgement at the OGM that they got it wrong quoting timelines. Or at least I may have said it wasn't smart.
In terms of no coherent vision...we're miles from the company before that was almost entirely exploration / early stage dev with cowboy management (that's my nicest way of describing people who were pretty inept). But it's that prior management the burnt our capital as well as the money from the notes (I shudder to think of what we actually spent on Tapi Aike and the like to then hand over our share of the asset...I mentioned that at the OGM as well). The fact that we have some producing assets now is a massive step in the right direction. Yes it's unsexy...yes at some point we need to attach something more strategic to the plan (Bolivia will be that attempt I think), but we can't do that with a wobbily foundation. Hopefully at the moment we're all quibbling about how long it's taking the cement in the foundation to set...rather than we find out they were trying to build without one.
The really, I have to say incompetent thing they did was to say '5 days' for the wells, then '15 days', then silence for months, then '4 wells' and not mention the other 6 or the workovers. And in between they land an RNS about issuing shares. The interview was awkward and the investor presentation was thin.
This seems like a company with potential, and sensible short term plans but no coherent vision; when they talk about growth, when they talk about a wider vision, they seem out of their depth. Perhaps that's just a sign of their focus on the matters in hand, the turnaround, but at some point they need to sell their ambitions; a compelling, fleshed out vision for the company's future will make the debt seem far smaller.
And the quality of writing on the website is a punctuation-free run-on sentence monstrosity. It's like something from one of those satirical essay generators. 'Active work programme to deliver resource growth and production increase through exploration and short term operational activities generating multiple catalysts for newsflow across the asset base.' . Careful all that high-velocity newsflow doesn't prang the asset base...
But thanks for replying to my concerns; I feel happier with this investment, because for all the small issues that have kept it at this level, there's nothing serious holding Echo back, that we know of anyway, nothing that even the most negative posters can identify.
abz
My waffle was that I got the well numbers around the wrong way. However I did point out once they stabilize with regards their production that may take a couple of months but an increase is good news that can be expected in some wells too. I did say in my waffle that they were reopened successfully? maybe it's because you want it to read negatively.
The reason I said that they were closed in was the weren't economical. isn't that the same as producing something that you can't sell? please correct me or my economics teacher.
So I do stand corrected regarding the number of wells that have been reopened only 4 not 6 as I posted, leaving 6 not 4 wells that are still not producing. Wouldn't we all be happier if it was indeed the other way around
I agree abzzba, but we haven't seen even... 10 percent of that so far? And it's been a long wait... we've seen, I think, lower gas production, higher oil production.
I also agree about the negative posters, though I think Ranger has useful insights and knowledge. One of the things that interests me is the posters on the other stock forum, you must have seen them?
Two posters dominate the Echo board and one especially seems to put a great deal of research into long, detailed, researched, half-truthful posts, which are certainly worth reading though they slant their calculations quite cleverly towards negative conclusions. Maybe it's just that the long fall has left Echo with some keen detractors but I do wonder - then again perhaps it's just pointless to speculate on that kind of posting.
This is all basically what I'd surmised from studying the figures, apart from the supply contract issue which I hadn't considered.
Yet I'm on balance optimistic, whereas you are extremely pessimistic; I suppose partly because I got in low and then averaged down lower - no offence to the long term holders but I will be happy with a sensible market cap given the debt and challenges faced, and then decide whether to hold as the recovery develops. I don't see any issues here to justify the company languishing at a 7 point-whatever million market cap forever, or going lower. And this is if they can't as I say, pull anything better out of the hat.
The worst case scenario actually still looks like a company gradually turning its fortunes around.
ranger, you do waffle some real crap, to set the record straight after your waffle post below, its actually 4 wells that have been successfully brought back into production, those 4 wells are now producing double what they were producing when shut in April last year and they were shut in as ECHO could not sell the oil not because they were not economical, agreed that this increased production might fall back after a month or two but any idiot knows its cheaper to look after 4 wells rather than 10.
As for the remaining 6 wells we have no idea of their status at this time.
The only factual thing you have said today is it does ECHO no favours that they must rely on third parties, on the bright side our junior partner Interoil have applied to takeover as operator of the Santa Cruz field so thats a plus as they have a vested interest, the current operator Selva Maria will not be happy so i guess we cannot expect any favours from them but as Interoil expect to be the operator by year end this works in our favour.
Anyone reading this board should be asking themselves why several posters have been on this board daily for several years pumping half truths and negative view points, try going through their post histories, it might help you focus.
As for the workovers mentioned page 9 of the latest presentation, some pretty good figures have been quoted for the expected increased production, realistically we cannot always throw a six so even if we end up with 50% of the expected increased production we will be doing very well indeed.
When carrying out workovers as well as when reopening wells you're not 100% guaranteed of a successful outcome. we have heard of the 6 wells that have been successful (again these need to stabilize) the other 4 may need addition work done likes of swabbing and intervention (pumps injection works etc). These are old wells that weren't that economical when they were closed in so cost and reward in additional work to bring them back online. if you get 8 out of the 10 than that would be a good outcome in my view.
The last few RNS's have all been positive but bare in mind we thought the RNS about the workovers last year was a game changer but then silence? I think we will see a balance in production with the 6 wells back online but there has been a compressor outage with SC that we know of how that has affected production as well has there been any implications with regards Echo's own supply contracts? As well as is it Echo's compressor? Hence my view of treading water.
Ok, that makes sense. You have suggested in the past that expectations for this work, e.g. the well reopening, might be unrealistic.
Are you expecting a bombshell RNS at the end of the month, high costs relative to revenues, little progress on work to expand production? Do you or anyone else think there's any chance we will get something more positive?
One reason to be optimistic is that Argentina seems to be at the end of its current covid wave and is relaxing restrictions. It seems as if Echo has a chance to pull something out of its hat. Treading water is not so bad if nothing is actually going wrong for production, and if they can accelerate their activities going forward. I don't think the summer gas pricing is a problem long term; i think gas is going to be in demand in Argentina for the foreseeable future and it doesn't look bad for the company if their wells keep performing.
Loka
Going on other companies operation updates it appears the compressor issue was resolved but it took several days with lost revenues from no product flowing through the compressor. One of the main issues here is no information flowing from Echo with regards these issues.
Again Loka Echo relies on others to do these work (work overs and reopening wells) they don'y have that many boots on the ground. So you muck these guys about and you'll go to the back of the queue but at the same time is they get a % of the product so swings and round about's but I'm sure Echo isn't their sole source of income.
So they are producing but also spending it's all about how much cash they have at the moment as to what work gets done. What gives the best quick reward is what I think is needed or they will just be treading water.
This is the kind of conversation i hoped we could have on this board. Ranger brings up a key point. What is going on with the workovers and also gas production, wells reopening? Is production declining long term or was the compressor issue resolved? I am not sure I buy Ranger's idea that the twitter photo was part of a compressor masquerading as an element of a workover. If there was a problem they wanted to hide with a compressor, why use a photo of that at all? This kind of thinking does seem a bit paranoid and I don't think the world works like that.
I keep trying to focus the chat back on the main issues instead of meta-commentary... What is everyone's view on the prospect of getting back to 2500 plus barrels a day and so on. What is the risk of production actually declining.
Digittt
As I have said all along I give a pragmatic view of what is going on with regards Echo rather than some of the fanciful posters of this stock.
I looked at Echo sometime back with a view to invest but was strongly advised not too by someone with direct dealings with the company. The person is no longer involved in or with the company. I was glad of the advice as if I had invested in would now be worth a very small fraction of my intended investment. Like everyone i DYOR and based on that if I can make a potential investor have a second look at what their buying into then all well and good.
Like everyone in here I wish the sp would rocket and Echo was well run but the reality is it historically hasn't been.
You point out a very good fact in the Echo needs 3rd part contractors to do the work and by withholding moneys due sure a hell you'll not get the service your needing.
Echo spent a fair some on a gas compressor telling us it was a money saving solution but at the same time their not paying their bills? now how's maintaining this sort of equipment? Yes 3rd party contractors. Now a gas compressor goes down which causes shut downs with our field. was it the compressor we bought? fast forward to the twitter post from Echo and we have an over painted component which maybe from a gas compressor and we are lead to believe it's Echo progressing on with upgrades. hhmm
So more cash need to be spent just to stand still. We hear this from Echo's on 3rd party contracts operational updates. While Echo's is some what quite.
Util...(think I've been in ECHO since 2016, maybe 2017, ie a little earlier) . Angle? Only ever had one ID on LSE...actually only have one ID everywhere. Not sure what you're suggesting with that, happy for you to elaborate. The question for Ranger as well is "Why is he here?" If he's an investor, then based on his views, he should get out. If he's not an investor, his motives for lurking for a long time on this channel...where it's the only channel he's on on LSE (apart from Sound I think a long time ago) are questionable. It's not about it being wrong to have negative views on an investment...I've had / got plenty. It's about continually spouting negative views / looking for the most negative in anything while being an investor and that's the only thing you contribute. Either you shoudn't be an investor, or you aren't and you have other motives. I am patient and I do see value in what I hear from others negative or positive, but the above dictates why I would call him out as a troll.
Lokan - (my view) CL hasn't been progressed as relationships in Arg soured last year with our contractors as we held back payments as we had no cash. No cash definitely meant no CL progress. Now....our partner in CL wants to use their folks to do the work and it's going to take a while to get them into the country. Our alternative would be to get someone else locally to do it, but that requires contractors in Arg who we have relationships with willing to take credit risk in some form on us (and it also might irk our partner). Those relationships don't exist for the moment until we rebuild them/the trust. Any activity in Arg with contractors is likely to require cash upfront for the moment. While our cash position is starting to turn, any spare cash is being spent on the easier payback investment options of reopening what we shut. And that leads to why it will take a while to get to CL...well without some cash injection. Agree at current SP, an equity raise would be daft.
Digittt bottom line, do you think they are still losing money, and do you think the serious progress on production that MH has been so confident about will come about?
I am confident in this stock if the company achieves what it repeatedly promised was straighforward to achieve. It doesn't have to work miracles to look cheap at its current market cap. But it does have to make progress.
Digitt as you say a balanced conversation. You have been here under your current angle since 2018. I have held shares a lot longer. You make a valid point but please realise many of us have heard these messages proclaiming imminent progress many many times before.
I am not big on social media, no face book, no twitter no anything apart from the emails i use for work. My opinion is mine and mine alone and i have the right to express it. Just as all of the people who constantly post this will fly soon and other, in my opinion banal statements. I do not tell them to stop posting and i do not filter them. I take the last option i posted of earlier. I laugh and let it brighten my day to see people who have obviously invested their hard earned still believing that they are about to make their fortunes. That`s their opinion and they have every right to express it. As i said if you don`t like mine then filter me. It won`t hurt me a assure you. However, it matters not to me however many times you tell me not to express this opinion i will.
The things I worry about are a. is Ranger right about production increases essentially being unlikely.
b. is gas production stable or not?
c. are we going to give out 2 million euros of shares at a sub-8 million market cap? Honestly I'm not sure how this would even work as it would tank the share and the bank would get less than the current value of the shares.
Am I right in thinking that you think it's a cashflow problem that is stalling CL and other projects? I heard you say payments in were lumpy, I think that was from your post. But what worries me is the overall revenue/profit situation. Because if they're not making money now, with higher gas and oil prices, reduced costs (as per RNS), then how can they make money in the future and how can they pay the debt?
To me it seemed as if, with the commodity prices, Argentina opening up, they couldn't really fail long term unless everything went against them. But it also doesn't seem as if their efforts are bearing much fruit. Surely they would let us know if things were in fact going better than it seems, but would they let us know if they were much worse? What's the downside from these levels, that's what I'm interested in - I'm patient enough to wait for an upside if it's coming.
Util...as I said, I get just as irritated by permanent rampers. All I'm looking for is a balanced conversation. Modern day social media society though leads to people trying to take the most extreme positions because they believe they have safety in anonymity and they've been lead to believe that everything is an argument and that's how to win them. While extreme negatives and positives may balance out it doesn't lead to a balanced conversation. If you’re here, I’m assuming you’re also sat waiting to see progress. If not, why are you here? It's not like you're driving past a car wreck and slowing down...why are you here?
I do not sit here expecting ECHO to go gangbusters - but I do think there's more value potential there. I believe I understand why things like CL haven't been progressed so far, and I'm sticking around to see what happens if / when they are progressed. That's why I'm here.
Digitt as you say you can filter peoples whose posts you don`t want to read. You could ignore them or you could just treat derampers(of which i am one) as fools to laugh at to cheer up your day.
However, you and others don`t take any of these options. You scowl and get annoyed by the sheer audacity of those who dare to criticise. Could it be that in your heart of hearts you are only too aware that this share is going nowhere. All of the false dawns have come to pass and no significant increase in the share price. It`s summer time soon in S America when usage drops and the futures market shows prices dropping over 30% in six months time. No windfall for Echo but the man still gets his £500,000 per year.
Ranger, simple enough to filter you as I said before and away you go. I can’t stand permanent rampers, can’t stand permanent derampers. Rampers I understand as they hold shares and in their minds they’re doing something to help their investment valuations. Permanent derampers and you, I don’t understand. At best you are a troll. Can’t imagine you’re trying to play a short game with echo.
Oh and you’re wrong on The_Linns…go back and you’ll find he wasn’t the one collating names. And I’m not a conspiracy theorist like you on data. Data that needs to be kept private is kept private. My holdings in echo aren’t a risk and aren’t private.
Now remember The_Linns
How many PI's sent them their emails and investment details to him/them?
Post anything on here that you want to hear your onboad. Readily giving out personnel details and share holdings to who know's who. He she them now knows who you are.
Utter stupid.