Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. 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.
Surely, the shares to be held for Employee Benefit Trust should be in addition to the $15m shareback. Otherwise, there has been slight of hand. The 25m shares at current SP represent about a third of the $15m. This liability of the ENT is separate and pre-existing to the Buy-backs announced? So is the Buyback $15 minus or plus the liability of the EBT?
It is intended that the first 25 million Ordinary Shares purchased under the Programme will be held in Treasury for issue in due course............. after the initial 25 million Ordinary Shares are purchased, all additional Ordinary Shares purchased under the Programme will be cancelled.
R, your 'deal' theory works for me.
If they could, they should buy the whole $15m now at or around the current SP. Could this arrangement with ML have allowed then to secure options to purchase shares at or around the current SP?
The shares are being stored for employees in the Employee Benefit Trust. No cheapo shares for the vultures. This means that AB + EBT is probably close to 20%. We have a dictator with skin in the game. I like this. Does the 2 month window mean that they are finalising a deal?
Considering the end date of 30th June, the GBP/USD, and the current SP, they need to average buying 1.7m shares/day. Should be interesting !
The window does appear small. I'm sure there will be logic behind it..just not sure what it is.
Bet the SP drops lol
Somehow they turn all news into a negative reaction
Seems Merrills now need to get a move on with only a 2 month window granted .
Buybacks are go.
Good chance to hoover up cheap shares and put a bit of a lift into the price…
Steeelwarch1
Thankyou for this link
https://www.oedigital.com/news/495498-samsung-delivers-shuttle-tanker-to-altera
it took me over to some intersting technical reading on the drilling etc. etc
Likewise your links to the offload info. encourages further reading into that which most people may not apreciate
Https://www.oedigital.com/news/495498-samsung-delivers-shuttle-tanker-to-altera
Apologies if someone beat me to it. Don't follow here too closely.
Next Kraken offload booked. One I missed, not being on the watch list, due to previously being located elsewhere in the world:
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:6944402/mmsi:311001011/imo:9895264/vessel:ALTERA_THULE
ETA: 2024-04-27 00:01
And thence:
https://www.orkneyharbours.com/info/shipping
AIMoil
Unfortunately where you list has no bearing on where you pay tax. Tax is paid based on location of your operations and the only way Enquest can avoid EPL and other UK taxes would be to sell all of its NS operations.
AimOil It is grossly unfair to target an important industry. But there are no legal challenges available. All one can do it to campaign for the law to be modified. The Oil and gas industry is an easy target for taxing politicians. It has few political champions. I myself think one has to emphasise not just the jobs, the tax revenue and the energy security but the transition that is being made to a carbon neutral future. I am a big advocate of reducing carbon emissions more drastically. But that has to be done in a sensible way without wrecking the economy. Enquest are part of the solution as indeed are Harbour and a host of other companies who produce oil and gas do not ignore the science of climate change.
From the Annual report , ABs new vision : ENQUEST
EnQuest is providing creative solutions through the energy transition. As an independent energy company with operations in the UK North Sea and Malaysia, the Group's strategic vision is to be the partner of choice for the responsible management of existing energy assets, applying its core capabilities to create value through the transition.
EnQuest PLC trades on the London Stock Exchange.
Please visit our website www.enquest.com for more information on our global operations
And the wording is always suspect mrc. Do you support world peace, universal suffrage and an end to sectarian strife. Most would say YES but if at the bottom it asked you to pay £5,000 pounds towards these ends you might reconsider.
The climate alarmists have used up most of their ammunition and their threats and promises have come to naught and causing damage to existing industries. I believe that the Scottish people will be the battleground. If you can't get them onside then the renewables movement has failed. The country is after all the major source of UK hydro-carbons and wind.
It depends how you frame the questions.
SNP policies have been driven by the Greens. I can see cons and SNP being supportive of O&G now which will force labour to shift IMHO.
If the Scottish parties support O&G then it is one less source of negative media noise which can influence the general public mood.
Ask the public if they support banning new licences and they will say yes, but that IMO is because the extremist narrative has been unchallenged due to political expediency
AoK - the challenge would need to come from two directions. The costs and evidence that hydrocarbons do not harm the environment.
The flaky claims of the climate alarmists are now being challenged more openly. It was thought once career ending to say you don't believe in ESG or the effects of CO2. Now people are pretending that they never really supported it. With the importance of Scotland in all this I think we are due a major surge. A large part of the SNP's policies were around Net Zero and they have had to abandon their targets and Yousaf might lose a no confidence vote. If there is a Scottish election that could be a referendum on continuing with O&G or treating the industry like criminals.
Labour will take note of the Scottish anger. I'm angry and I'm not even Scottish. The touch paper has been lit. Let's see where it goes? It can hardly worsen the situation for us.
'It is never difficult to distinguish between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.' and this is a quote from 90 odd years ago when initial renewable discussions were commenced and it was decided to concentrate on wind power as being less controversial than solar which was a rarity in Scotland. The deep-fried Mars bar brealthrough was to change all that.
Sek, yep, understand your point, but this tax is not applied to all businesses, so why can't a minority that is suffering punitively challenge the government? If the tax is based on the making of excessive profits, where are these profits? Why does this tax not allow for all tax losses, other businesses are allowed? I am sorry, sovereign or not, EPL is unfair and has disrupted the market and is damaging the UK economy. If it cannot be challenged, personally, I would de-list from the UK stock market and list elsewhere, still have to pay EPL but the UK Government would not benefit from other future tax revenue.
We have been over this before. What legal challenge could be mounted to primary legislation? The Finance Act 2022 which brought in the EPL was passed by both houses of Parliament. Parliament is sovereign. It makes the law of the land.
I hope they (NS O&G companies) start making noises about a legal challenge a.s.a.p. The companies should all get together (even through the trade association) and put some money in a pot for a legal challenge. Such a challenge may even help the sp if people believed it might be successful. Any successful challenge would have a massive positive impact on the sector whether from increased profits, reserve valuations and economic stability/environment perspectives.
Waldorf have financial pressures and are small. RockRose is small too and their track record is short. Neo is a peer but also trying to exit the UKCS. For now I would add NEO so a peer group of 5 over a certain size production wise?
It might hopefully help us ascertain what assets AB might look at from the remaining sellers in the basin.