Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video 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.
Hi paddy1964. Good question. Do not definitely know. Applying logic one would think that if the whole business was moved on as a 'going concern' that any tax breaks would still be available. Imo, and only my guess, is that if you break up and sell piecemeal all tax breaks evaporate. I could be completely wrong, .
Cyan2,am i right in thinking that any tax offset from the XER 450m expenditure on Bentley could be inherited by a purchaser now but would be lost in the case of say Statoil pick up the pieces in liquidation?
Am reposting my 7th October comment on the licenses below; The question of losing the license is very significant. I would have thought that the company would have warned in the RNS that 'enforcement action' would lead to revocation and negligible value left in the company. Just had a couple of minutes searching and found this link; hTTps://www.gov.uk/guidance/oil-and-gas-petroleum-licensing-guidance#change-of-control-of-licensee Here are a couple of extracts; Charges on licences "It is common practice for banks lending money to companies to demand a charge on the company’s assets as a form of collateral. Creation of a charge on a Petroleum Act licence is controlled in accordance with the model clauses attached to each licence." and "If a borrower defaults on the loan, the lender may wish to seek enforcement of the charge to have a licence interest transferred to itself (possibly after appointing a receiver). This would constitute a licence assignment, which is controlled in its own right under the model clauses. Faced with a request for consent to such an assignment, the OGA would take into account all relevant factors, including the expectations of the lender. However, the Secretary of State must exercise their discretion in each specific case, and this cannot be fettered by earlier promises to take, or not to take, a particular course of action. The OGA will also not make such promises."
That's why they have succumbed to bondholder temptation, jump ship and hope to recover later. They are pawns of the bondholders now and cannot be relied on for impartial advice.
So depressing reading all this, if this was a dog it would have been put down months ago. I would just be happy to know the BOD have suffered the same as the rest of us, zero share value and then their gravy train stops. Like pulling teeth, just very, very slowly!!!
The only significant 'value' left in XEL is the licenses. Long term investors have obviously believed that BENTLEY has significant value. My wild stab with the £65m figure is what, imo all licenses and other tangible assets could realize in , effectively, a fire-sale. This , imo, likely to be a transfer of the whole business to Statoil. I very much doubt that the BH's made such a low (1.5%) equity proposal if they were not absolutely sure that, in the case of a 'no' ; they would still be able to realize a cash value from the licenses.
Exactly - it's a licence, we don't own it...... As such BHs need us as much as we need them - maybe that's why cole put out the doomsday RNS - I.e shareholders stand up and be heard.
As for the licenses being taken away I think there is an area of disagreement as to what happens if administrators are called in. I do not believe the licenses will be instantly revoked. The first resolution administrators will attempt is to arrange a sale of XEL as a going concern. If all else fails assets are liquidated. I think Statoil will acquire the whole business for a song together with the licenses.
£65m for what? The licences will revert to the UK. No one has shown any nterestnin farming in.
The bondholders will receive funds from the disposal of XEL's assets by the liquidator. Whether that approaches the totality of the $149m debt is the question. I doubt they will get all back. My wild stab in the dark is £65m. Nothing will be left for shareholders imo. The only 'comfort' in the liquidation scenario is that the directors shares will become worthless along with yours
Mr cyan nothing to lose then I will be voting no hope the government takes licence back BH Cole and us get nothing that will do me
"will vote no, in whoch case they will get nothing" The bondholders are at the top of the creditors table . They are NOT the ones at risk of losing everything. Shareholders are at the bottom of the tree and THEY are the ones who are most likely to lose every penny if you call BH's bluff by voting 'no' and the company goes into administration. The gamble is ; will they blink and agree to new terms? Its a high risk strategy but one thing is for certain; whatever value XEL has WILL largely , and eventually, go to those Bondholders.
Must be aware that Xcite do not have the resources to repay, and that shafted shareholders will vote no, in whoch case they will get nothing. I think the ludicrous proposal which has been floated will be amended, so that shareholders accept in relief. So think carefully - what level of dilution would be acceptable? 95%? 90? 80? 75?. I think shareholders should articulate a firm resolve not to settle for less than 25% at a bare minimum.
Maybe OGA have sent a warning shot over the bows - saying - xel you are at serious risk of loosing the field here (regardless of ownership status) and that it's in everyone's interest to go back to the negotiating table... the reality is that we do still have a negotiating hand here (as share holder) - I.e a no vote wouldt necessarily mean a wrap up - it could push a second BH proposal - either way it's a no from me....
Nothing like publishing reliable, credible and up to date information. You have to laugh . "Published On: Wed, Oct 19th, 2016 Analysts Price Targets | By Brian Radcliffe" "Most recent broker ratings" 02/02/2016 – Xcite Energy Ltd. (CDI) had its “Buy” rating reiterated by analysts at Liberum Capital. They now have a GBP 42.00p price target on the stock. hTTp://newsden.net/analysts-price-targets/analysts-consensus-for-xcite-energy-ltd-cdi-lonxel/70984
Pretty sure rhe prospective partner that walked away was CNOOC for their internal reasons. Petronas were in Ireland.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-37700978 Untapped North Sea oil and gas is 'significant opportunity'
Again. We require an EGM to vote on the proposed restructure. Still no EGM. Why????? HB. If you remember last summer. I posted a piece regarding one of our service partners being in serious trouble due to the collapse in the POO. The BOD were in a panic for obvious reasons (pre-FEED would have to start again from scratch). You may recall this article from January, which shows the hard work that was going on behind the scene to ensure the Bentley project stayed on track- Xcite looks to team-up with SSP for Bentley •08 January 2016 01:00 GMT •UK-based junior Xcite Energy is understood to be seeking a partnership with US-based floater technology provider Semb¬marine SSP covering the design and engineering of a cylindrical floating storage and offloading unit to develop its wholly- controlled Bentley heavy oil field in the UK North Sea, write Rob Watts, Steve Marshall and Ole Ketil Helgesen. •If it goes ahead, the new partnership would replace an earlier memorandum of understanding between Xcite and Teekay Shipping, reached in 2014, for the supply of a Sevan Marine- designed cylindrical FSO, said industry sources. Due to the total collapse in the price of oil in Q1. It is now looking like the company were let down (walked away from the deal) in Q1 by one of the JV partners that had completed DD. The rumour at that time pointed towards Petronas. I have absolutely no idea what the hell is going on right now. The jungle drums are silent. The way we, the shareholders are being treated is rather sad at the moment. I will wait for the final outcome before passing judgement.
Let's test this industry valuation shareholders were told by 'management' was inherent in xer value by voting no. It sure as hell is not represented by 1.5%, nor what the bondholders signed off on, $140m. In agreeing to the loan their risk valuation would have had to be, from independent valuers, 2-3x this. Even the original $155m rbl, while taken out in better times was only based on 1/4 of the proven reserves at the time.
Plus they have to expend a further $10m to keep the show on the road via retaining their new 'managers', hanging on like limpets to their jobs and who have brought this unwanted catastrophe on all, w/o which the whole pack of cards, including their interests, will fall apart.
Imo the bondholders are in some doodoo also. Apart from the stock they were persuaded to buy at 65p they can't be happy to have listened to cole concerning his abilities two years ago to move xer through fdp bond repayment and out. Now they are caught up near to termination of the lease they think they control with having the necessity for that action to go ahead under the guise of xer as it has to, in a tight timeline and w/o risking serious wrath from oga. They also have the need to have to work with the same clowns or one in particular that has brought xel to this current state of near extinction, while having to use a bod that pi shareholders abhor to persuade them to vote their own near destruction through under the 'terms' these same clowns 'negotiated' and are trying to persuade shareholders to accept. Totally ironic comedy situation if it was not so sad for the many genuine shareholders caught up in the charade this bod has maintained for years that they had any capability to move xer through to production, which through expenditure of huge sums of money, multiple failed plans, they have shown to be demonstrably incapable of doing. Vote no. Jmo.
We are royally screwed, the BOD have zero interest in the PI. If we get 5% it would be a miracle and most here must know 1.5% is happening. It is basically legal fraud IMHO, the BOD are ONLY interested in their own pockets, they will negotiate to continue taking a salary for so many years to push the deal through. You must be mad to think they have not already agreed terms for their employment. Cheaper for the BH's to pay Rupes to sit at home than pay us a decent %. Rupes will be paid to be on garden leave as he is as much use as a chocolate tea pot. Wish I could be positive but we have zero options with a BOD that has no morals.
Just twigged that this line from my earlier post does not read well; "So there is the decision; vote 'no' and call their bluff and maybe lose everything or vote yes and see a market value of 1.612 p per share." Terrible prose ; should read more like " So there is the decision vote 'no' to 1.5% and call their bluff and maybe lose everything or, maybe force them to issue less shares & give 5% to see a market value of 1.612p per share." If one votes "yes" to the current share issue plan with 1.5% for equity holders each share would have a market value of around 0.5p post dilution. E minus for my prose today.
Vote No ... Society can exist only on the basis that there is some amount of polished lying and that no one says exactly what he thinks...we'll see what that poking does to them.
Hi toxicnerve. I sympathise with the sentiment. Trouble is , I doubt the BH's would accept just 20%. We have to return to the companies rns which clearly indicated they believed the companies value is less than £120m I doubt the BH's would settle for under £24 million lol.