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.
Some parties on here seem to think that the LU is still under active consideration ('in the bag' has been said) - I don't think that is realistic. That ship has sailed and the Government will not reverse themselves. LOGP is about to leave the stock market - it is taking a legal action for compensation which may result in a payout 10 years from now. I think anyone who thinks LOGP will still be actively trading in a few months is kidding themselves (at least).
I agree they should be actively pursuing compensation.
However political figures come and go and decisions can be overturned on the grounds of illegality, procedural unfairness or irrationality. On all 3 of those grounds I would say that ryan is on a sticky wicket. His subjective assessment was not based on law, the length of time taken and the principles applied were not in accordance with standard practice and based on current and future energy requirements for rhe republic the decision is definitely irrational.
Barryroe Energy raised the forty million needed to proceed with its drilling programme, but Eamon Ryan did not want the company to drill for oil and gas, so found a rarely used clause that started that Barryroe Energy needed to raise three times the amount necessary for the drilling programme, forcing the company out of business. That sort of Government action is only seen in Putin's Russia.
As for the future, Lansdowne have only three weeks before been delisted, so hopefully they can get a foothold in the next week or two, otherwise it is over.
There are at least three good reasons, therefore, why the ECT will not allow frivolous, time-wasting appeals. The case is clear-cut in the extreme. It is more than 6 weeks since we had an RNS from Boldy. Why is this, I wonder? Is LG giving him a hard time?
Battle, just for clarity, the shares will be suspended, it will be far from over and I am sure measures will be put in place to facilitate the buying and selling of LOGP shares, the future of Lansdowne is certainly not dependent on its Aim listing and neither is the ECT litigation process, ..GL S
I hope so. I would like the company to issue an RNS to that affect.
Swizz, thanks for that. Delisted companies retain all their rights as a legal entity. I am happy to know that LOGP can and will pursue their case under ECT, with or without LG. We do not want to be beholden to him and he needs to know a waiting game will not work. It seems then that no acceptable common ground exists for a deal as yet. We will know by the 19th of March after which LG and LOGP will go their separate ways, if no agreement. That is how I see it.
The UK is pulling out of a treaty that lets fossil fuel firms sue governments over their climate policies.
The UK will quit the controversial energy charter treaty (ECT) after efforts to align it with net zero emissions plans failed, the government announced late on Wednesday.
The treaty allows fossil fuel investors to sue states for lost profit expectations in an opaque corporate arbitration system set up to protect fossil fuel investors in the former Soviet economies in the 1990s.
Graham Stuart, the energy security and net zero minister, said: “The energy charter treaty is outdated and in urgent need of reform, but talks have stalled and sensible renewal looks increasingly unlikely. Remaining a member would not support our transition to cleaner, cheaper energy, and could even penalise us for our world-leading efforts to deliver net zero.” Treaty protections for new energy investments will cease in one year’s time when the withdrawal takes effect, the government statement said.
Do you think that is relevant to LOGP, beardozer?
I would hope all existing disputes are unaffected and will run their course.
Perhaps the final step of suspension of the shares will add weight and even increase the amount of damages that LOGP can claim. Possibly the advice from Ashurst was to delay formal action until 19th March, thus putting the final nail in ER's coffin.
Can't see the suspension of the shares making the slightest difference to the eventual compensation.
But it will have huge implications for individual shareholders.
For my part, all the losses within my ISA will count for nothing while all the gains from 0.09p will be taxable!
What I was hoping for was a takeover of LOGP before suspension but it doesn't appear to be happening.
Seems like a missed opportunity but WTFDIK?
Beardozer, you have that wrong I am happy to say. It’s in your isa and that’s a tax free wrapper. The shares don’t get cancelled because of suspension
I think I confused "suspension" with "cancellation" - presumably delisted shares are not welcome within an ISA?
"In the event that the Company does not complete a reverse takeover under AIM Rule 14 within such six-month period or seek re-admission to trading on AIM as an investing company pursuant to AIM Rule 8 (either being, a "Re-admission Transaction"), the Company's ordinary shares would be suspended from trading pursuant to AIM Rule 40. Thereafter, if a Re-admission Transaction has not been completed within a further six-month period, admission to trading on AIM of the Company's ordinary shares would be cancelled." What happens then? Any remaining shareholders will hold shares in a private company.