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.
Hi Jonjo, 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."
Overman - how you have the cheek to come on this BB and proffer an opinion on anything anyone posts - you along with the likes of 13, Ugibear and other low lifes spent months ramping the hell out of this share and you in particular were one of the chief culprits - you ramped the hell out of this making false statements such as the bond are paid and settled, you were one of the most vociferous supporters of the BOD stating many times how great they were in negotiating the way forward. You winge and whine like a girl now you have lost your investment and take no personal responsibility for your actions EVER - now back to the home for you theirs a good chap and stop bothering me with your Kama cr4p. !!
Paddy I have already explained but for the sake of clarity I am happy to do so again: A No vote leads to only one outcome and that is insolvency mainly because without the £10m I suspect the company will be technically insolvent. If the company is insolvent it will have to go into liquidation and as a result of that the licence (according to the terms) will be cancelled and without that asset the investors end up with nothing !! In the event of a YES vote the investors still cling on to something albeit very little. The company survives and if you look at GKP as an example questions are now being asked in a forcible manner to hopefully bring in to question past actions and claims on how the directors handled the company prior to the restructuring. In short if the company is liquidated then all will simply fade away and be conveniently swept under the carpet and be forgotten whereas if the company remains there is a platform to hold the current BOD to account !!!! I like neither of these choices but the ability to screw the key BOD members for the atrocious manner in which they have brought this company to its knees needs to happen and it will NOT happen if the company is liquidated.
If there are any paid posters on this board at the moment then I would suggest their aim would be to encourage a YES vote or not to vote at all. Perhaps you could explain to us all the benefits of voting YES?
That's why I'd to see a legal opinion via the likes of this pbb in advance of this egm as to just what might be actionable, and a timeline for same. Clearly shareholders for a long time have not been getting the full picture from the xel bod, in particular whether alternative options have been fully explored. If this goes to action after the egm it could take years to settle, if at all, and if it becomes anything like a us class action lawsuit the only winners will be lawyers. I don't think xel and gkp directly comparable, what's rattling the cage of all concerned at xel is imo the oga/lease situation and getting any restructuring done there before the issue of xel solvency and/or lease termination for cause by oga becomes an issue.
Wibble!!! overman
No problem bodog - but you appear to have brought the spectre or sphincter of Overman back on the BB muttering Kama - I dont think I really deserve that just because I disagree with some posters here - There There Overman back to the padded cell theirs a good chap - here are some funny coloured meds for you - enjoy !!
Mr paddy jonjo is a coward hiding behind a keyboard
And there we have it - the very valued comments of a barking mad id10t - Yee Ha grab the BOD and over the cliff we go. By the way and just out of interest who exactly pays someone to post on a BB - it always raises a chuckle with me when people (numpties) state that you are being paid to post this or that. Please do let me know who these fantastic paymasters are because I would be very happy to apply !!
There is not a chance in hell this BOD will end up in the dock. I'm prepared & expect ZERO with Xcite. Vote NO & let new investors make there minds up about Bentley. Sorry jonjo thrown the toys out again.
Mr jonjo I see you are up to your old tricks laughing and mocking xel Holdrs who are well under water me included you are one horrible person you know I believe in karma you are sailing close to the wind just give it a rest
The BOD and BH are pushing us over the cliff so may as well grab em and take em with us! You seem to be working very hard on this Jonjo and you're not even a shareholder? What are you... bored or paid?
Hi Paddy - heeey over there is a cliff - tell you what lets all jump off together Hurrah!!!! Now before we do that we need a name for our group Aaaah - let me see What is the group name for Lemmings?????
HB have a look at whats happening at GKP and you will see that post dilution and a deal having been done there people are very liable to be brought to account. So you tell me perhaps how do you propose to bring them to account prior to an EGM?? Do you honestly think that a majority of PI's are going to vote like turkeys and vote for Christmas - all hot air and huff and puff as it will never happen and that is a fact !!
If it goes through they will not be called to account. XEL will just fade away as we will all just give up ,Cole and his BH mates will have won. We will not get a penny from our 1.5%. Vote NO ,nothing to lose and screw up the plans of Conman Cole in the process.
Ok the horse has bolted you say leave the gate open. I say close it, At some point this shower will ask for more. **** RC & the BH's
How does one call them to account after they have moved off and the company controlled by others? By then the horse(s) have bolted. Surely has to be initiated before this egm.
Hear hear, I'd sure like though the bod and ceo to be legally held to account for whatever might stick. The fact they they attempt to effectively walk over to newco unscathed absolutely stinks, completely unprincipled, spend $450m+, run this to near zero then ask shareholders to accept 1.5% in a company that's paid to retain 100% of the asset.
What I am for is not throwing the toys out of the pram and I dont see anything sensible from you being posted on this BB - Boo Hoo the BOD stole my toys so I am not playing any more - lets wreck everything and teach them a lesson - Pathetic and try manning up for a change - Your petulance would teach no one any lesson and allow them to leave without being called to account !!!!
I'm happy to leave with nothing and **** RC & the BH's plans. Such a hero jonjo all posters must attend AGM before posting. Are you for real. END this farce ASAP.....
Sure that's where the guarantee comes in, on the decommissioning. Xel always too small to give that. But for the likes of sto to accede they may as well have, as they likely will, and control, the whole shooting match.
Knew ceilingcat would be there and an excellent precis given out. Unfortunately all who did attend clearly had no inkling of the 98.5% train pulling up, driver and guard being cole and kew.
There is no 'If's - buts or maybe's' ,it always been finance & not so much the start up package but also the spend on decommissioning that is a fly in the ointment.
I believe at the last agm and prior to that shareholders were then being fed the mk.10 line of guff about innovative funding plan and guarantor plus optionally shared misery with the bondholders, plausible as usual from this crowd. it was only subsequently, no doubt afrer parachutes strapped on, the news changed to a total give away. Personally glad did not sttend the agm for the bs given out then, would have just about cost me the value of my remaining stock in xel to attend. Vote to eject the incumbents, 100% for, does it not require a point listing for the egm to be voted on?
When I say IF it will be pumped I do not suggest there are any questions as to the technical feasibility . As you rightly point out 150,000 barrels were extracted in the EWT. The "IF" question relates to the economics; the numbers. Also when you hear some of the politicians say that we need to move away from fossil fuels, ban fracking and we need to keep it in the ground; that's not good mood music for very heavy oil fields.