We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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 said some weeks back that absent SS, we come back at 15 pence-ish. No reference was made in the interims to another hydrocarbon deal, so perhaps what was being worked on has fallen away. Maybe they're just staying silent though.
Agree that the market will price CC at zero, but perhaps that's a buy opportunity for the patient private investor. Niger clearly has no increment to share price until some oil flows to Benin.
Don't think the IIs will bail, but they'll be seriously pressuring the BoD.
All that said, SS is still live apparently. My guess remains that it's all about the licence extensions beyond 2027.
We need to put a GPS tracker in Knottie, like one of those Jason Bourne films. At least we'd get some visibility that way.
Reading everyone's posts here with interest. (Well, nearly everyone's, anyway.)
Isn't the RNs if you read it, just a renaming of the fund that holds thr shares under the Standard Life umbrella. If you READ the detail there really isn't that much intrigue unless of course you want to make as if there is
Lol
JDC - that just about sums up the market :)
I'm not the most knowledgeable investor here, but in my limited experience, the AIM market is a cruel mistress. She will punish no progress or bad news to the maximum and reward good news to the minimum. Someone please tell me I'm wrong :-)
Just about keeping the faith though......
Well if it’s something they know and we don’t I hope it’s something good.
Maybe a raise at >56p?
Could be housekeeping ahead if there is to be a shareholder resolution in the near future………
Just the holding being moved to Phoenix life which is Standard Life Assurance is owned by Phoenix Group.
Also Voting rights have been transferred to Standard life Assurance from Abrdn plc with no change in economic interest.
https://www.savannah-energy.com/investors/major-shareholders/
There can be various reasons why a fund may sell shares from one fund and transfer shares to another fund, even when a company's shares are suspended due to a reverse takeover transaction on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) and the shares sold and bought net each other off. Some potential reasons include:
Fund Mandates and Restrictions: Different funds may have different investment mandates and restrictions. If a company is going through a reverse takeover, it might no longer fit the investment criteria of one fund (e.g., based on size, sector, or other parameters), but could be appropriate for another fund within the same fund family.
Profile of company post RTO: The profile of a company might change after a reverse takeover. If the profile of the company post RTO does not align with the original fund, it might make sense to move the shares to another fund that has a profile to match more in line with the post-takeover company.
Tax Considerations: Depending on the jurisdiction and the specific tax situation of each fund, there might be tax implications or benefits associated with realizing gains or losses in one fund and transferring shares to another.
Client or Investor Requests: Sometimes, institutional investors or significant clients may have specific requests that prompt such transfers.
Rebalancing: The change in the company's nature, size, or prospects after the reverse takeover might lead one fund to be overweight or underweight in that position, prompting a rebalancing action which could involve inter-fund transfers.
Internal Agreements or Arrangements: Sometimes, funds under the same management might have internal agreements to maintain or to handle certain situations in a predetermined manner.
Fee Structures: Different funds might have different fee structures. Transferring assets between funds might impact the fees earned by the fund management company.
Standard Life gone from 5.71% to 0%
Tier - having thought about it a bit more, I don’t think the market will like it if we come back without a completed (obviously we would still need shareholder ratification if we did come back with all work streams and Gov approval post ad doc and re-list) deal. I am also assuming that should we come back without a completed SS deal that we do not announce another M&A deal. My reasoning for this is:-
1 the market would be very nervous about SS completing, especially after the Chad fiasco, albeit on different terms
2 yes we are favourite for the 4 x ICC cases but these are too far off decisions and the market will price in zero for them
3 the Niger pipeline is delayed and so is our well testing program that should have been in Q4 2023
4 at the interims, debt has gone up since EOY 2022 and production was down
5 not sure where we are at with 450MW renewables in Niger but am assuming delayed with what’s going on in Country
6 no revenue coming to us from Cotco while revenues are frozen
If we did come back without a completed deal in SS I would dearly love to come back (as would everybody else on here) to come back at a minimum of 26.35p but somehow I think we would come back lower than that.
All that being said, I still think we have a good chance of SS completing and if it does, I hope the market do not discount for the ongoing war in Sudan and hence threat to the export pipeline.
Not looking forward to relisting with no deal. We discussed and some of you think the share price will hold but I really don’t think so. Anyway a month/6 weeks makes all the difference if all parties truly want things to happen. Not long to find out.
Tier - I think it will all depend on whether Savannah Energy are comfortable in releasing the admission document without formal approval if all other workstreams are complete, for the various catch ups people have had with IR we have safely established that admission document being released is not contingent on formal approval and it would be nice to have alongside the admission document but not a condition precedent, the question will be and the onus on Savannah as to whether release an admission document without approval or come to the market without it
My worry is what will happen if still no SS approval by Dec 15? Another suspension? What will be the reason? Will it even be granted?
Also does it look likely for another big deal announcement by year end? Personally I think it’s pretty slim when still nothing by now. I’m not saying there won’t be just unlikely to be by Dec 15.
rocky / tier - frankly speaking those trade organisations mean nothing to me, it's like any trade body or organisation they don't mean nothing.......... they are just bunch of ****e organisations created by governments and have no real substance, a way to house government staff on all expenses............... the un, imf, world bank etc they all talk out of there ****e and are so disconnected with reality these days, they don't have the same weighting or political sway in opinion as past decades........................
Consequences? To the region and to us?
US to remove Uganda and three other African countries from Agoa trade deal https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-67236251
Komakino - I am just assuming that is it a fools game by Petronas and Savannah or are their background assurances we will never know until official one way or another..................
It wouldn't surprise me one bit what the government say in public and what they agree in private are 2 different things.
Which is one of the very reason's why I believe the Caltech saga was designed to do as there is greater pressure in the political realms in South Sudan to either nationalise the asset or achieve the best possible deal possible, we know that they don't have the capabilities to run operations and nationalise the asset, so the only remaining option being a deal but is there a genuine party willing to match or better our deal only time will tell. Putting out press releases such as Caltech saga allows the government to at least say that they explored viable alternatives and none bearing fruit they progressed with the only deal on table etc...................
I think Chad was different in that there was a one month time limit by which, if approval wasn't explicitly denied by the govt., then approval was deemed to have been given, so Save and Exxon could complete the purchase legally (obviously to be decided by the arbitration panel).
This is obviously not the case here and so I think what TiL is saying is plausible, though obviously with the Caltech affair, there are probably no certainties with the SS govt. either. Still, Save and Petronas are still pursuing this so you would like to think they still believe there is a good chance of completing.
“It would be illogical to think that for 10 months Petronas and Savannah have been completing those milestones on pure word of mouth basis and the South Sudan government have just being a spectator for the last 10 months only to hinge on a yes or no for them…….In summary the point I am making is are Petronas and Savannah foolish to do all this work for 10 months without any tangible progress and continue to do so….”
But isn’t that exactly what happened with Chad ?
I hope SS will be different but until we hear from SAVE or there is a leak we can only second guess because we (investors) are always kept in the dark due to the processes involved.
Soder - One would think after the whole Caltech saga which was about 5 to 6 weeks ago the Savannah, Petronas and Government of South Sudan would have had a frank conversation to say are all parties still in or out, and considering we haven't heard anything since and Rocky's update seems like everyone is still working as if the deal is still on.
In terms of the deal progress and approvals, it's hard to tell as every deal is bespoke and works differently. But one would imagine at each stage there are progress, milestones and checkpoints for all parties Petronas, Savannah, and government of South Sudan. We know that Petronas and Savannah being the sellers and buyers would be hitting those however one would imagine that the government of South Sudan must being also hitting those checkpoints or completion tasks from their side as well to still keep Petronas and Savannah still at the table.
It would be illogical to think that for 10 months Petronas and Savannah have been completing those milestones on pure word of mouth basis and the South Sudan government have just being a spectator for the last 10 months only to hinge on a yes or no for them, one would hope that no deal is structured in such a way.
In summary the point I am making is are Petronas and Savannah foolish to do all this work for 10 months without any tangible progress and continue to do so or have they started to get binding assurance at each stage of the deal over the last 10 months thus allowing them to progress to the next stage each time. Obviously we know the final approval is always the main approval from the government.
World Bank warns oil prices could reach $150 a barrel https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67267719
Given we announced signing of the South Sudan SPA on 12 December I would think the 15 December date given in the last update represents the official termination/long stop date under the SPA.
The long stop date is a hard date in the SPA which I would think they estimated 12 months for regulatory and govermnent approval. If the transaction is not completed within 12 months then both parties can walk away without penalty. Obviously that date can be extended if both parties agree but at some point we would need to agree with Petronas if there is any point going on. We can’t just sit and wait forever. And neither can they.
I wonder why we started to try and buy it at n Jan 21 if the SS Gov announced in 2020 that they intended to nationalise their oil in 2027?
Anyway, good that the Gov have been over to China / CNPC to discuss their backtracking on Nationalising and PSC extensions beyond 2027.
Great that we have CNPC fighting for extension for themselves and by default for ourselves.
Am not certain but I think Arrow have to wait until February 24 (which gets them into the 4 year window of current PSC ending) before they can extend their PSC in Columbia beyond 2028.
Maybe it’s different country by country but we are now within the 4 year window of CNPC’s PSC ending in SS in 2027.
God knows how long these things can take but am sure we will find out in due course.
At least SS seem determined to increase production beyond 250kboed and if that’s to happen they need to extend PSC’s and keep CNPC, the other company and ourselves onside.
*it's, not *its.
The longer this goes on, the more I suspect that extension of the operating licences beyond the remain three-ish years (I believe) is likely to be a key outstanding issue.
Do any oil-industry people on here have experience in the remaining timeframes at the point when these things are extended? Operators are hardly likely to push the financial envelope on capex if they believe its the end of their tour of duty.