The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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 seriously hope it will be a sale soon at a reasonable price. Surely when it comes to that we shareholders should have a say? I dare say 99% of us would prefer a sale. Disagree? 98% then. Have a good weekend break from this site.
Ouch
I consider myself "told".
"Thanks for the lecture on the sheer simplicity of setting up a NS E&P player on a budget of nothing" ??
Perhaps you could point to this "lecture" which talks about "simplicity" of any kind in "setting up a NS E&P player"? I'm not sure where you get this simplistic idea that anyone has suggested this was "easy peasy".
"They will have considered at all times what steps to take that are in shareholders' best interests."
LMAO are we actually talking about AIM here? Could you perhaps point out an AIM company which exemplifies this approach of considering "at all times what steps to take that are in shareholders' best interests"? Would perhaps the activities of Trap Oil's former leadership team, especially towards the end when they took their much reduced salaries immediately in cash, be a good example? It being AIM, I know there'll be no shortage of examples of selfless director behaviour putting the interests of shareholders first.
"Who are we, as keyboard warriors on a blogsite like this, to challenge their decisions"
Shareholders, that's who!
"Names and salaries please."
I believe a (half-hearted) suggestion was actually made in the very next sentence to the one you quote! Salaries....hmmmm... that's an interesting question, I think it's more a question of what activity is to be undertaken once the Serica farm out is completed and the remaining paperwork is completed (which I highly doubt is CEO activity.) With farmouts and FDP completed, what demanding work do you anticipate needs doing by the JOG team?
Perhaps you could try turning the situation on its head for us and suggesting what you think JOG's leaders will need to be doing from 2025 onwards which will justify millions in shareholder cash heading out the door in salaries (and bonuses, no doubt, we've yet to hear about how highly they're going to reward themselves for achieving the farm outs, since apparently that wasn't what they were paid salaries for!) Or perhaps the view is that since Benitz was one of the founders he's entitled to an inflation-busting salary (with bonuses) for life from JOG?
Because my perspective, simplistic as it may be, is that JOG is all or nothing based on the GBA - if Neo and/or Serica decide 'No' at the point of FID, then all JOG shareholders will have left is the cash in the bank, and we all know how well that turned out for investors in Trap Oil.
When Boris had a hundred and fifty seat majority, I suspect AB, RL and other influential shareholders thought that £10 might even have been the low end of expectations but how times have changed (and the dirty word oil is never mentioned).
Timing is all and JOG have taken a bit longer to get their farm outs away than we'd all hoped. But I think it is naive to believe that AB isn't well aware of shareholders attitudes to his position and the skills he's had to import. I think both he and RL would like a sale asap and I suspect that given the cash they have both taken out of the business, they will have a realistic attitude to what JOG's value is now. Three times today's value is nearer £6 than £10.
Thanks for the lecture on the sheer simplicity of setting up a NS E&P player on a budget of nothing and a few years later - despite strong headwinds along the way - getting it to the brink of a pay-out (for those who have been with JOG throughout its journey) of something in the order of 200x its initial market cap.
Easy peasy.
Has everything gone according to plan for JOG since it reversed into the remains of Trapoil in 2015? Of course it hasn't - it never does. People would know this if they had a modicum of understanding of the complexities of establishing and running a business of any merit - never mind one of the most complex it's possible to encounter.
Have mistakes been made along the way? They probably have - it would be a surprise if they hadn't. But has the company achieved what it might realistically have been expected to, given the circumstances. "Not yet" might be the accurate answer, but the company is as well placed as it is realistic to expect it to be, given Greta et al and the low behaviour of the Conservative government - for which I shall never vote again - in mounting the raid it did on the UK O&G industry (all for quick money to spend on the wrong people to win their votes). These low-lifes opened the door for Labour to complete the job of finally killing off the North Sea - and hundreds of thousands of skilled jobs it's spawned not just in the industry itself, but in many industries impacted by its products.
JAB doesn't run the company on his own. There's a team of experienced and enormously capable individuals (led by Les Thomas, an acknowledged industry heavyweight) overseeing all. They will have considered at all times what steps to take that are in shareholders' best interests. Who are we, as keyboard warriors on a blogsite like this, to challenge their decisions when we don't know the facts, or what routes it was open for the Company to choose?
No-one is precluded from taking up their concerns directly with either the chairman, the CEO or any other director. I have made contact directly on many occasions and, whilst my concerns could not always be eased by information it was proper (and legal) to give me, nonetheless my concerns were taken seriously and I always came away feeling my views were valued. Sometimes circumstances I had not taken into account were pointed out to me, enabling me to reassess the situation. Occasionally I have posted info here I felt others might benefit from having.
IMO If Labour introduces "a proper windfall tax", any company making a decision to invest in the NS would have to be insane. With tax @78% and no enhanced reinvestment relief, there'd be nothing in it to make investment worthwhile. Run the DCF numbers if you doubt me. The hope that is that Labour will back down - let's hope it does.
Re: " I think the whole leadership needs sacking to conserve cash, and replacing with someone capable and who knows the industry well"............
Names and salaries please.
Consider also the NEDs and Les Thomas, and multiple heavy hitting shareholders that will protect our interests.
MPO818, I've been saying similar things to people in private for a while now.
I've no objection to paying management for delivering shareholder value, but most of the current market cap simply reflects the money investors have ploughed into the company over the past years.
Regardless of the price people paid for their own holdings, I just don't see how there is any legitimate need for Benitz and the people who were drafted in to do the job he was (apparently) unable to do, now that the farm outs are done. If the company isn't sold quickly, then I think there needs to be a dramatic culling of those who collectively are draining about a million a year in shareholders' cash for their salaries (and, no doubt, we will see Benitz needs a large bonus for delivering at the very bottom of his forecast farm ins, behind schedule and despite the fact that he couldn't actually get the deals over the line himself.)
Buchan looks like a fantastic asset, and hopefully the unions will persuade the numbskulls who lead the gvmt-in-waiting to back down on these punitive NS measures. There's no doubt in my mind that Benitz had a role to play in bringing the company to market, but he's no north sea heavyweight that's for sure, and I don't see what value he adds to the company these days. As I often hear people in the investment world say, nobody's interested in history.
The only bit of JOG history which I think is relevant is that if there's no sale of the company in 2024, then I think the whole leadership needs sacking to conserve cash, and replacing with someone capable and who knows the industry well - perhaps Landsdell could be persuaded out of retirement for a part-time care and maintenance role until the oil revenues start flowing in during 2026. (I always felt that the wrong founder was shown the door when RL left and we were left with Benitz.)
Im sure a bird in the bush, or 10 million in the bank trumps 300k a year.
Whilst AB continues to collect his £300k salary + whatever add on's available and with the knowledge that in 2/3 years time cash will be flooding into the company he (imo) will be in no great hurry to sell the company. In the interview he reiterated there will be circa £25m cash at the next year end and running costs for sitting on their hands is circa £3m pa. Why should he rush?
I hope by now AB is convinced the only way forward is to sell the company. Please don’t be too greedy in your negotiations. Good weekend all.
Talking nonsense EinbertAlstein, did you watch the video -I think you vote for this party? "The Loony Party would issue fifty trillion pounds of quantitative easing and give all voters free lunch and complimentary drinks".
Brilliant video, no mention of future projects, operatorship, etc. come buy us. They’ve delivered to promise so far, two farm outs at £6 a share, no way they won’t close the deal for their share of the prize. Very exciting 2024 ahead!
Thus investment allowance will quietly stay, no endangering further development of GBA
I think the 3% satisfies politically and doesn't make things worse than they already are.
Withdrawing the investment allowance stops everything immediately dead pretty much, a car crash of job losses and a potentially embarrassing U-turn.
My take.
Due to the tax changes this has gone from one of the best under-priced shares too close to uninvestable. UKGOV PLC happy to hammer away for years at oil companies making 'supermassive profilts' apparently because gas price spiked for 6 months.
Nervous? The boy clearly has no idea what he’s talking about.
Good content, nervously presented.
Hard to imagine that they will get more than £7 before 2026 with labour government policy on the horizon. Given their polling position they may still take a tough stance on the capital incentive withdrawal. I thought AB handled the question reasonably well, but he was hardly going to say anything else.
I personally thought they hoisted a for sale sign last night - but let’s see
They had a very good 2023… but personally given the clear risk on the horizon I would rather they got on with selling it for 3.5x todays value ..
DYOR
Surety, it does depend on what you perhaps want to hear.
He clearly indicated that the wider area was next in line after the Buchan project was up and running. There is vision beyond Buchan albeit there's enough on their plate for now. A bidder needs to remember there is more, or am I being greedy? I just think 7 quid, whilst newsworthy doesn't mean it's a fair value.
Interesting to listen to the q+a at the end
He is asked the inevitable ‘labour party’ perspective. Handles it reasonably well..
DYOR but they are painting a value disconnect of 3.5 x the market cap .. feels more a ‘we’d welcome a bid aroind that value please!’ Watch this space.. there is little in the form of the future for Jog beyond Buchan! In my mind it translates as were up for sale.. here’s the guide price!!
Interesting that men ' of a certain age' appear the majority of the audience present - if the baldness quotient is factored in.
Thanks for that Troajan.
Onthe 6/EinbertAlstein
JOG’s latest presentation does indeed say they are fully funded to first oil but this is qualified with footnote (1) which reads “Full carry for JOG’s 20% share of Buchan pre-FDP costs plus the development capital expenditure budget included in the Buchan FDP approved by the NSTA” and needs to be read carefully. You also need to read the FO agreement terms which for NEO read “12.5% carry of the Buchan field development costs included in the FDP approved by the North Sea Transition Authority ("NSTA"); equivalent to a 1.25 carry ratio” and for Serica “7.5% carry of the Buchan field development costs, up to the budget included in the approved FDP; equivalent to a 1.25 carry ratio”
All of this suggests to me they have guaranteed full carry to FDA approval but only full carry on the budgeted cost of field development post approval by the NTSA meaning that if the actual field development costs exceed the budgeted cost JOG will have to contribute.
The field development programme will include rig hire plus the purchase and installation of all the subsea structure, so a substantial amount and if there is a cost overrun my perception is that JOG will have to contribute 20% of that overrun.
I raised this question previously, see my post 25 Jan 2024 23:22 when I asked for views and opinions.
So much interesting discussion today :) Unlike a few of the other boards I occasionally pester where they are all just fighting about how rich they are going to be when, despite the fact that a few of them need to be 20 baggers just to get some of the people their money back! (Rather sums up the IQ problem Britain has with the electorate.)
Frankly, I have often thought that perhaps voting should be weighted towards those who actually are net contributors to the national coffers - after all you don't see many companies (at least not ones which last very long) listening to non-customers at the expense of their actual clients. But I digress.
I suspect there is very much truth that has been spoken on here, and a lot that I completely disagree with (it's always great, don't you think, to hear other opinions which generate such feelings, the polar opposite of the mealy mouthed nonsense which our politicos spout daily in a constant effort to be seen to be relevant but without saying anything which might possibly offend anyone whatsoever.)
Wealth taxes, yes you bet they're coming to the UK - just look at the O&G industry: Norway all the way (at least on the tax to the gvmt front, likely absolutely nothing like Norway when it comes to refunding losses in cash each fiscal year!) And Norway has wealth taxes - approximately 1% of anything over about 130k in net worth. Yeap, 130,000 GBP and anything above that and you pay a little over 1% of that excess amount every year to the gvmt for the privilege of having "formue". Includes everything - houses, cars, bank deposits, ISAs, stocks and shares (minus the mortgage and car loan.) Of course what is missing in this calculus is that Norwegian council tax is about half that of the UK, but you can bet that LIEbour will ignore that and just want 1%. Probably starting on things like investment property and second homes, then it will quickly become main residence, then ISAs, cars, etc.
I don't agree that Rachel Reeves gets it about economics, if she did they'd never have announced the 78% tax on O&G whilst disallowing the "loophole" (whoever heard of effectively R&D and infrastructure development in any industry being called a loophole when writing it off against tax?!) Where do they get these cret1n5? Does the national party just stop into Idiots'r'Us and pick up party leaders at the same time as future chancellors? Perhaps they get a multi-buy discount. (I hope so, because we're sure gonna pay for it in the end.) So it will start out as a tax on "millionaires" (which is basically any lower middle class person living in London, Bristol or the SE.) And quickly become a tax on the middle class, just as stamp duty has.
Yes, the Tories are DIRE and deserve electoral wipeout. What follows will be worse because the socialists are the people the Tories normally have to clean up after, and the Tories have left the country in such a mess because cleaning up would've involved hard choices and they didn't have the spin