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.
Cyan, find the generators if possible ...Were they sold, I don't think so, did they exist !
The last full year report (published 21st March) has this comment on the FDP " In order to fulfil the financial capability requirements of the FDP approval process for the Bentley field development, the Group intends to secure a financing package which meets its long-term funding requirements, including re-financing of the Statement of Financial Position where appropriate. There is, however, no guarantee of this future long-term funding being available. " Circumstances suggests no-one is prepared to provide the 'future long term funding' The running costs of this company are not insignificant; they spent $4.171 million on staff costs, there appears to be a separately listed figure of $1.314m for directors which i can not square with the individual directors remuneration.. There are admin costs $1.73 million. And this , which amazes me $2.4million on 'Consultants'. You would think there was sufficient in house expertise; having said that , performance suggests otherwise. Doesn't look like much of the $10 million will be spent on development. Hate to think what exceptional legal expenses they may have incurred.
Probably what the bondholders thought max spend these guys wd have before lease expiry mid 2017 during which time they need to get the fdp done
"this wasn't as rosy as portrayed by the directors" You can say that again. It is amazing to read their rns regarding the possible 'UP TO' $10m; "The Company is also in discussions with principal Bondholders in relation to the provision of a working capital facility of up to US$10 million, which remains subject to finalisation of terms and documentation. The Proposed Restructuring will provide the Company with a significantly stronger balance sheet and the working capital to continue to pursue the development of the Bentley field in order to deliver value for all stakeholders in the future." 'deliver value' are they joking? Their own capex for Bentley 'development' is over $3.5 BILLION. Do they take people for fools? $10 million, IMO,, is a maximum figure for the purposes of keeping the lights to give time for a quick sale; NOT development.
You might have gotten a bit more sympathy if you didn't spend your time insulting those whose views you disagreed with even when presented with rational coherent arguments why this wasn't as rosy as portrayed by the directors.
Ha Ha ha ...you can't hide from the truth Goldy , how ever much you want to distance your self from it the truth always gets you...it here in black & white ,written by by you , mostly in a very smug & condescending way ,i might add. No, its you who is a sad ...now push oFF
They could not swing anything at $100 so what hope for $52..
You are one unbelievably sad individual. At 10.30pm last night you actually went through some of my historic posts and pulled together a summary of them. You actually spent time copying and pasting to prove what - that I believed the Bod would deliver, that I would judge them when the deal was done. I did and I have. So what? Good luck with your life Toxic, you genuinely need it. Absolute parasite. I won't be reading his brainless response so for all LTH's, as I was, I wish you the best of luck in recouping your losses in the future. I'll be offsetting mine against other bricks and mortar gains so at least there is a small silver cloud from this awful experience. I won't be investing in AIM again. One more time, Toxic you sad, sad individual. I'm still shaking my head in disbelief.
hku821 you beat me to it. Brent at $152 will not help Xcite now !!! This Bod are wrist shakers, they looked & talked like professional's. But turn out to be yet another scam on the AIM market. Did they set out to fleece shareholders at the start, probably not. At what point after spending over $500 million, did there train of thought change to. GREED, GREED & more GREED.
It could be $152 and we would still be sub 2p. 98.5% dilution tends to screw any share in the a hole!
Brent slowly gaining just under $52
quite, it's always instructive to look at the posting history of new arrivals who ramp this share. I
Never joined the body but perhaps the pbb best co-ordinating option. We really need to know what legal options possible, or not, perhaps best revolving around the bod, mismanagement, fiduciary duties, conflict of interest, collusion, whatever has a chance of sticking, to at least delay a decision on receivership or taking up this 'recommendation'. Poo now $52 range..
Something must have been proposed in principle to the d/d parties. I'd really like to know who proposed what and who rejected what and just what that what was. It had to be better than this 1.5% the bod now trying to say is a good deal. Sounds rather like the screw up in funding, yes it's there in multiples, then when push comes to shove zero. Ditto re the nda's we were told were there in plural, just wtf were they all about and now seemingly shoved under the carpet. The guys that attended the agm should have taken the opportunity when he'd broken cover to string cole up by the b•••s and got answers or proper explanations as to why nothing seems to have worked while being told things were in process. Absolute bs for years imo..
He would be going it some to out-ramp Advance123. Just seen him on NUOG and then checked his posting history. My God that person has no shame, everything will fly, share price buckling under the extreme buying pressure, rerate in the next 3 minutes etc. All made alright cos it's closed with a :))))))))) :)))))))))))))
Yes, perhaps she could hang onto something useful for a change, establish a snoc or something like that. The basic expertise is all there plus a proven field ready to go.
In the end too late for xer, a foreign oilco will get the credit for putting this quad 9 together and all the local hangers on will be hanging on in admiration to it's coat tails.
Problem is that they in the process of empire building have been promoting themselves as the best thing since sliced bread in the uk oilco patch, that's clesrly not the case, all mouth and mot a lot of substance in terms of prompt effective assistance. What's needed is something like the old bnoc or an noc.
Upanchors is noticeably absent from the boards. I bet that little man has changed his name again. His boss must have pulled him in. I wonder how many of them are paid rampers
In a similar position to sadandskint. What I have lost is however not hard earned money. It was tens of thousands £ profit made from exploiting others who had lost money on Barclays and Lloyds Bank shares. Thought oil in the ground was a safe place for these ill gotten gains! I too have written to Nicola Sturgeon saying that as a shareholder I would be happy if Xcite were nationalised for the benefit of the Scottish people and not to a new consortium giving profit to the existing incompetent board. So far no reply! Any chance of you becoming a leader of the headless chickens :)
A cock with a head could provide leadership to us headless chickens. Will support any co-ordinated policy that has a clear mission statement and perhaps a volunteer no win no fee legal advice
Agree with you to some extent ceilingcat ! Surely there is a clever lawyer that could argue that the ordinary investors in Xcite and known oil reserves are those fulfilling the objectives of the organisation ?
Probably perfectly imo capable micro manager, but the peter principle in effect as a ceo, totally out of his depth as a salesman, and on the technical and financial aspects of running this business.
dissatisfied shareholders to the proposal from this management we are supposed to vote through, there does not appear other than by individuals voting no any co-ordinated or concerted action as a group to formulate a plan, or legal issues that can be focused on by which this bod of xel can be taken to task for the way they have destroyed value, wasted a huge sum of money, and yet potentially themselves try to exit this smelling like roses. Is this private shareholder board for example able to co-ordinate any worthwhile legal grounds to contest the value being attributed to their stock, just what position are the likes ot the major shareholdets, such as there are, Cavendish, Socius etc,. taking about this, have they written off their investmemt in xel, who knows? Unfortunately the only action individuals seem to be showing is more that of headless chickens, writing to a bunch of non entities hoping for action. Short of calling for an egm to evict this incumbent useless bod the only options seem to be either sell and out, go along with this bod proposal, completely self serving as it is, or vote no to at least put some pressure on the bondholders to improve their offer, which in all likelihood if at all would be 2x the peanuts it already is. To attribute any value to xel they clearly do have to sustain this as a going concern, that imo is their weakness, can that viably be threatened. Personally I shall vote no on my remaining shares in this managed disaster, purely on the basis it may frustrate the ambitions of the useless individuals that have brought the company to the parlous state it currently rests, alternatively the company could be forced into receivership so the ceo's industry value can be tested in open market. If by this action the bondholders receive less than sufficient to cover their exposure so be it, they have put themselves into a position of risk in signing up for this in the first place with the 'mansgers' of this company. Welcome to the club.
So where will the EGM be when announced before Friday's close? I don't think it will be within an hours flight of UK waters thats for sure. Toxic. King Cole was only supposed to be a short term CEO. God only knows how he managed to stay on at this level for so long, with zero industry knowledge. The proof is in the pudding. Better known as- "The Great British Rip Off"