focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar 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.
I agree that the bigger oil stock will come good again mate but its these little aim companys that can see shareholders being shafted.if anyone gets a chance just check out whats happened to the agq shareholders today they have been shafted by the bod and had their key asset given away for peanuts.these bigger companys get there claws in and are after only one thing the smaller companys assets i do hope this does not happen to fogl
The fogl board clearly are confident that they will recoup enough funds to more than cover the gap, but I accept your point that that is not certain. What worries me is who has control over triggering this security clause and when can it be triggered. I hope there is a back up plan B such as even a very minor rights issue for even £5m, although I accept you explained earlier today the practical problems there could be with that .
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=5658b6e6e4b0b3955a5a01b6
there is a smell of a rat about this whole thing
Absolutely shocking......either total incompetence or fraud. Time for some answers tim are listening
Am I right in reading under 6.1 that the debt to Noble / Edison is capped at a max of $15m ? FOGL currently have $8.7m and are due another $5m from the cancellation of Jayne East, so in total if that is the case almost enough to pay the o/s cost on humpback. To assign security over all their licences to Noble for this comparatively small (in corporate terms) debt seems alarming to me, under what circumstances and when would Noble be able to trigger this agreement. If I was a cynic it would be easy to draw the conclusion that Noble have engineered this, all imho.
FWIW I think we will find that the lien is only over anything that is 100% FOGL - SFB plus probably Susan and Helen. Where there is a JV in place PMO and RKH will have a first offer of FOGL's share and I very much doubt either of them will accept NBL & EDN muscling in so that bit is likely dead in the water re NBL & EDN, even if FOGL went into Receivership. My own company is involved in two JVs and that's the way it works. Its Susan and Helen I'm bothered about as they are both Isobel look alike. As to SFB frankly I would welcome FOGL dropping that as even if there is proven oil there its likely to be minimum $60-70 re just breakeven compared to NFB at about $40.
thanks for that pb well it sounds clear enough as it says all the acreage yes that being the case and insurance payouts being notoriously stingy if paid at all, then falling into the loving embrace of RKH seems to be prudent and timely to say the least the bod still want shooting for allowing this to happen, and it does rather make you wonder who was making what reassurances to make the bod put the company's future at risk in the belief that they were about to hit the big time..... Noble have had their pants down big time
eegbvi,... that's how I read it, that clause 9.3 is over all of the FOGL acreage, which I also find very disturbing,... as you say it could just be badly worded, I hope so. BW
Island parish I watched it last week.yes interesting background info Cheers
Re clause 9.3 all the negotiations have been done with both Noble and Edison so that side is accounted for. Its the incoming claims that are still in limbo and are likely to remain so probably until Q2 of 2016 with doubtless counterclaims from the rig owners and their equipment suppliers. The bit I find somewhat disturbing is that FOGL seems to have given its two creditors a lien on all its acreage not just some of it. Normally it would be over bits of the acreage and would exclude any of the NFB JV acreage since under any JV FOGL would most definitely need the written approval from its partners to do that. I hope therefore that its simply badly worded as I can't see either PMO or RKH agreeing to that as neither would allow NBL & EDN to be foisted on them. JVs are extremely rigid and normally veto such moves as always a clause gives other partners first refusal.
peteb308,... with the past experience I have had, I am very uncomfortable with clause 9.3,... your confirmation of no further obligation on SFB drills, gives some reassurance. BW
peteb308,......Yes, that's why I have sold a few FOGL & started to buy RKH, disregarding the discount. BW
Like I said, if FOGL cannot repay their debt, NBL will pick up the assets and us shareholders will be left with NOTHING!
Yes, clause 9.3 is why I'm concerned & will be voting for the merger myself. BW
Current price FOGL 9.7 * 3.341=32.4p Therefore if you buy FOGL at 9.7p and the merger goes through, it's the equivalent of buying RKH at 32.4p now. Or if a better offer comes in for FOGL you're £'s in.Is that too simple? GLA ODR
This makes complete sense to me, my only question being - Are the present terms fair to both parties and shareholders won't really be able to judge that until Isobel 2 is finished plus we know the Zebedee numbers and FOGL's then cash situation. Also neither will either BoD which makes me wonder how the 0.2993 value was reached. It would help enormously if that bit was explained. If for example Isobel 2 is a disaster then FOGL clearly has the better deal but a success re Isobel then could mean that cash apart RKH has the better deal. As to the FOGL voting situation the PIs probably only speak for a total of 15% or so of shares so at best can only make a bit of noise. But they should make it to the FOGL BoD well before any vote on the deal to both FOGL and all its Advisors. Re any rights issue I assume FOGL did the rounds in the City to get a sounding, & probably got told 'Thanks but No thanks' thus leaving RKH as the only game in town. However should OPEC move soon re the oil price it could be a very different story and outcome. Meanwhile FOGL first needs to clear this with FIG and as RKH is a UK registration that should be a straightforward matter albeit let us hope FIG takes its time since Isobel result is about 4 weeks away.
.....is sufficient and more detailed information to know whether it is truly Hobsons Choice or not..... surely we are owed that
C'est la vie. If I write off what is left - maybe it is cut off your nose to spite your face but I will feel better for it. All I ask is: 1. I am aware of all the facts (or at least as many are possible) before I make a decision. I may then take a view that is as informed as possible. 2. If we were 'trading insolvent' is that a criminal offence? 3. The BoD are singing 'We are alright Jack - up yours shareholders' Wjmflp
The term 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' springs to mind. Whilst you are free to choose how to vote, letting emotion sway your decision is dangerous. If the merger doesn't happen then you can kiss goodbye to your investment. Now that the true FOGL cash position is know there is little chance of the sp increasing. FOGL owe more than they have in cash and will be forced into insolvency if they don't take action now. A cash and asset rich combined company with a 64% stake in Isobel and Zebedee should provide a better return on your investment than an in debt FOGL once CPR's are released. Anyone thinking that FOGL's sp will skyrocket on an Isobel success without a merger is living in a dream world.
Oh and how I've learned well thanks Fogl and all concerned glad you and all your mates r sitting pretty as I see it you have told lies and robbed people of their cash (fraud) playing the game. well karma is a ***** and I hope it comes your ways in tons and you suffer the worse payback ever Just saying :)
Shaggy, reason for RKH announcement of EGM is that RKH shareholders must agree to issue of circa 160m RKH shares prior to conversion of FOGL to RKH. If this is voted out there will be no merger.
Clearly up for an argument, well sorry but I have better things to do, to urge people to think of the consequences when making a decision is simple common sense but beyond that you can jog on, I have done my research and know what I will be doing.
Please pray tell me the 'REPERCUSSIONS' of saying no? maybe they will be better than being swallowed up - especially if: 1. Monies owed are paid 2. Issy comes up trumps 3. CPR for Zeb and others are issued in to the public domain 4. Results for Humpback are divulged clearly 5. reasons for rig problems and delays are fully explained Then at least we can vote knowing clearly and exactly what the FOGL position is and what we are actually worth. Otherwise you are voting in the dark (maybe even deliberately held in the dark). Wjmflp - spleen fully vented and maybe a tad more rational now
Quote: 'all I would urge is that people consider carefully the worst case repercussions of rejecting this deal' I think the word 'urge' gives it away Phil All I would ask is a more balanced way tom say it - perhaps? Urge being a trifle too emotional and directing? Wjmflp