The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
Oscar; Good point but they will only get around 20% of the value if they sell the award.
Take out Harbour's 35% and Rkh would only get around £40million, not an insignificant amount and much needed but giving away 80% of the award would be a difficult decision for the BODs to make, especially after seeeing Cairn's successful outcome recently.
Stillneedoil; What a pathetic, stupid post and the fact all the lemmings voted it up shows the ignorance and silliness of the posters who agreed with this ridiculous & 'untrue' statement from Stillneedoil.
Rational to Sell the Award when cash is required.
Chess
Let’s try and simplify this for you which one shouldn’t have to do if you are a British Chessmaster
NO ONE CARES rightly or wrongly no one cares
RKH don’t care
The solicitors don’t care
The rest of this board don’t care
I don’t care
The OM money will rock up one way or another if the award stays in RKHs favour
Research all you want but NO ONE CARES
GLA
D, The Chessmaster is not here to influence anyone's positions. He is here to enlighten posters, who might otherwise be suffering delutions on when payment from ROI can be expected.
Of course, OM is a side show, albeit a pleasant one that should, in time, return a handsome gain for holders and you are indeed correct,the main theatre of interest over the next few years will be SL & the FID milestone.
Of course, being a Master, my powers of foresight are considerable and I expect The Rock to be taken out well before production in the South Atlantic begins.
Chess,
“ But let us not get obsessed with Alter Egos, there's also the possibility of the award being reduced on annulment to discuss or whether the Italians will delay annulment by not paying fees on time and not attendimg court for the sovereign immunty hearings after annulment, thus buying themselves another 2/3/4 or whatever years time.”
You are right, there is no point obsessing over that possibility as we will be cracking on with FID on Sealion regardless while increasing the award by approximately EUR 1,5 mio in interest per month.. your concerns are duly noted, but I’m afraid you will find it futile to try to influence anyone’s positions in here. Most here are battlescarred veteran Rockhoppers and we are used to wait for years on end and we are used to alter egos - in fact some here have numerous. The award is a sideshow to the rkh story as a man/woman with your thoroughness and intellect would know. So even if the award was annulled tomorrow, very few of us would sell. You are wasting your time - and everyone of us who is bored enough to reply you
Chessmess is a time waster
Nick, I'm not being negative , I'm being realistic on what course of action ROI are likely to take.
There is nothing negative about it, its simply how the process will likely play out and we would all do exactly the same as ROI If we were in there position.
I am happily holding Rockhopper and their prospects for SL have never looked better but I don't forsee any capital coming from ROI for 3 to 5 years at the earliest, so capital raises will be required and /or maybe the firesale or partial firesale of the award .
There's nothing negative about exploring anticipated future scenarios with one's investments.
Take Out is also a possibility to consider and may come from Delek or Navitas. I can't see why these oil guys would want to partner a potless Rkh, who have no production experience and can add little, if any value to bringing SL to production, better for them to remove rkh and have 100% between them.
Well, I didn't expect that you would acknowledge that 'Alter Egos' are used by States and have to be proven by time consuming, costly asset tracing paper trails in courts before any assets can be seized.
But the fact is The US judge said the four companies had proven that PDVSA was an 'Alter Ego' of the Venezuelan government and on that factual point I rest my case on this pedantic point that you find so difficult to accept ;_)
But let us not get obsessed with Alter Egos, there's also the possibility of the award being reduced on annulment to discuss or whether the Italians will delay annulment by not paying fees on time and not attendimg court for the sovereign immunty hearings after annulment, thus buying themselves another 2/3/4 or whatever years time.
When someone new comes on, informing us of the negative side of what might happen it always make me feel positive. The chances of an annulment are tiny, even if this remote chance happens, (given the ROIs behaviour so far) I think any reduction % would also be extremely tiny.
The fact is the claim is just a side dish, it’s the main course that’s going to be so tasty that the very thought of it will satisfy any hunger. FID within 12 months is the complete game changer. knives and forks at the ready, table is being prepared.
GLA
Chess,
This will be my last post on this subject.
The case you mention has absolutely nothing to do with a state(Venezuela) hiding assets . It is about US and Canadian companies being allowed to seize assets from a US subsidiary of a state owned oil company PDVSA.
At no point did Venezuela try and hide the asset.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/more-venezuela-creditors-granted-right-seize-citgo-shares-if-sanctions-change-2023-03-24/
Mogger
CitizenTS thanks for confirming. It’s a fault being too polite, I know, but it has served me well.
Yeh yeh laticsfule, as we know you're always unfailingly polite to anyone who disagrees with your gospel !
Ohh and of course how could I forget dear old Ovets He’s usually late though when the others decide to verbally kick a man for standing his ground and merely stating his opinion which they disagree with.
Also worthy of debate is that whilst the annulment commitee are extremely unlikely to annul the award, they may reduce it.
The ISCID Annulment Committee in the Exon/Venezuela arbitration case reduced the award from $1.4 Billion to $188mln after 3 years deliberation !
So whilst the percentage of cases annulled by the comitee is very small, the percentage of reduced awards may not be as small.
Venezuela v ConocoPhillips is another case worthy of note.
Awarded $8.5 Billion , Venezuela managed to delay annulment proceedings by failing to pay the fees on time.
ConocoPhillips then took steps to enforce the award (like rkh will do) in court and they delayed that for more than 2 years by their lawers not appearing in court....
AND THIS ONE IS FOR MOGGSY....
Quote ' Crystalles has secured a court-ordered sales procedure after a Delaware court accepted that the $8Billion worth CITGO is an 'ALTER EGO' of the Venezuelan state and thus liable to be seized.'The Canadian miner won $1.4 Billion.
Quote' In the case of ConocoPhillips $8.5Billion award, the oil company would have to prove the ALTER EGO 'again' in court before being able to collect shares from the subsidiary " !
There are your facts, they do try to hide assets using Alter egos exactly like I said, never doubt a British Chess Champion :_)
I can't believe you haven't heard about any of this well known Alter Ego skulduggery online before ? , it only took me 10 mins to search a few out for you.
Make no mistake, these States will do everything possible not to pay !
Chess, you're missing the point.
Anyone who has had to go to Court, when dealing with someone who doesn't want to pay-up, will know that those sorts of people will try just about anything to avoid paying. I think we all get that.
The Italians (or at least quite a few of them) are well known for being slippery, so the point you're getting all high-and-mighty about is one that we all know and have known for ever.
The point Mogger was making was that, after claiming to have gone to all the effort of scouring "hundreds & thousands of ICSID arbitration papers over the last 6 years", when asked to produce just one example, your reply was "I do not have the time or desire to spend the many hours required trying to find the specific pieces" that would have supported your claim.
If the only mate you can find is Latics and then calling us "inbred weirdos", you just make yourself look even more silly.
My Primary point has not changed, it's all related to how difficult and long it may be till Rockhopper get payment from ROI.
Whether its annulment, hiding assets through changing ownership, sovereign Immunity, non recognition of award, ect it doesn't matter,what matters is that they are all delaying tactics designed to stop Rkh getting payment so they should be analysed & debated collectively .
Hiding assets is only one of many tools ROI may or may not use, I brought this to attention here as i've never heard anyone mention the possibility before but asset tracing paper trails both forward and backwards, is equally important as will be sovereign Immunity when it kicks in after annulment ends.
Chess,
Thank-you for starting the discussion.
I have been following the Spain vs Infrastructure Services Case closely as it is one that has been due to come to its conclusion most recently. I presume you have read the judgement written by the Honourable Mr Justice Fraser after the final hearing at the High Court earlier this year?
Your initial point of countries trying to hide assets to avoid payment does not seem to be apparent in this case. However, I see that you have changed the point you are now making into one of " , just how difficult & long these States can make this process after 'losing'their cases."
I think we are all aware of that. It certainly didn't need an ex chess champion to highlight the fact that the arbitration process has taken some time.
You were asked to provide details of states hiding their assets. All you have shown is that cases take a long time.
And the Spain case has actually helped Rockhopper. In his judgement, Me Justin Fraser writes:
"However, there are no proper grounds for setting aside the Order or refusing to
recognise the Award, and on all the different arguments raised by Spain on its
application – those based on lack of jurisdiction or immunity, no arbitration agreement,
an invalid award and so on - and also non-disclosure to the judge who made the Award,
Spain has failed. I would add only this. I have produced this judgment in order to
explain the analysis that I consider both underpins the domestic enforcement regime for
ICSID awards under the 1966 Act, and to address Spain’s carefully advanced and
argued multiple grounds of opposition to the Order. This should not be taken as
encouragement by any state in a similar position to Spain that there is a lengthy and
costly legal argument, based on wide-ranging arguments under international law, to be
had on all or any attempts to obtain recognition of an ICSID award by an investor under
the 1966 Act. There is not.
t. "
You are aware of the theory of case law? - I wonder if King and Spalding are aware of this judgement?
Mogger/Moggsy - (Latics - look at the abuse that your friend shows!)
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Infrastructure-Services-Luxembourg-v-Kingdom-of-Spain.pdf
Surprisingly, I have not seen anyone post about this case here ? One would think with it being an ECT ISCID case and European State against a European company ( 2 actually for the pedantics here ( Ovets/Moggsy ect ) . So similar to ROI v Rkh.
One would have thought this case would be debated here for its similarities but no, nothing.
The Chessmaster (former British Champion, no less) has not gone away and to show the ill-informed doubters, who shown contempt & mockety for my award payment concerns, just how difficult & long these States can make this process after 'losing'their cases, check the Kingdom of Spain against Infrastructure Services,Infrastructure won €101mln award from ISCID arbitration for KOS breaching the Energy Charter Treaty, they won their award in 2018 and 5 years on they have not recieved a penny !
KOS are, of course, claiming Sovereign Immunity, just like Italy will do when they lose annulment, although they have recently lost Immunity in Australia.
So it's been 10 years now for Infrastructure and 5 years since they won the award and they still haven't received any money from the Kingdom of Spain.
I think my point about sovereign states going out of their way to not pay ISCID awards by any means possible is 100% valid.
Why would ROI act any different to Spain ?
So like this chess guy (joined a couple of weeks ago), has 'scoured hundreds & thousands' of ISCID arbitration papers (over the last 6 years) and when asked, can't give a single example of a nation state obfuscating state owned assets to avoid sesquestration?
They may well have a good point, but needs evidence, else just another fishy grifter passing by.
@ChessMaster321 - and of course not forgetting CitizenTS who’s job is to insult you continuously by deliberately changing your moniker insultingly.
Member of the same cult who ‘welcomed’ you earlier.
Chessmess gone away?
Received my 4500 shares from Warrants today using Iweb
But, why today ?