Member Info for 4Corners

The million $ question is if they are interested in buying 100% on 29 November....why buy when you have enough control to block anything (for eg. issuing warrants needs 75% approval - SF can easily block with their 30% voting rights)

For what its worth, 22p translates to $100m equity value. That is $500m for the entire business and "only" 8x guidance EBITDA. SF can remove further costs, making it look like 7x EBITDA. Improve fleet utilization and that multiple drops to 5 or 6x. Small improvement in rates, and they are at 4x. Not a bad deal!

Why spend all this time and money (I estimate to be around $15 - 20m including hiring Perella Weinberg for the bid) when they can go buy the vessels in the market (as they stated in the bidding statement that if the bid did not go through they would recreate the portfolio)?
My worry is that they are driving a competitor into the ground. OR they are making a bid post 28 November

Very hard to read what's going on. - Seafox's statements don't make sense either. Why resign in protest when they would have their directors of choice in a month? Either they are incompetent, and they have misread the shareholders and the board yet once again or they have some plan up their sleeves - i am inclined to think that its the former.

They still have to call the general meeting I suppose and Seafox and friends could vote out the current board, and re-elect Hassan Heikal. Another question is if they intend to still stay as shareholders

Seems like Hassan Heikal wants to be reappointed....come on Seafox make up your mind!

Something is cooking!

Mansour Al Alami
Was a board member previously......interesting

Slightly surprised that the board hasn't made an announcement since they received the Seafox letter last Thursday - probably gauging the interest of Mazroui & Horizon

And worse yet, if 10p is their intention, it will have to be next year since they paid 22p in June

With the banks seemingly holding the balls (of shareholders), I am wondering what is the play left for Seafox. Can't do value destructive moves since we are only few steps away from bankruptcy/administration. Either they bring in capital or they buy out minority (and still bring in capital). Alternately could they try to sell the rigs (with the backlog) individually to Seafox? Not a bad idea if the deal is done at 10x+ gross cash profit of the rig

10 days to call the AGM....tick tock

Just started following this stock.

@shahpd - what is the event on 1 Oct?

@GruffJ - that is preciesely what Seafox wants everyone to think :)
Let's see if they make a bid at 22p or they drive it further lower, frustrate shareholders, and then make a bid at 10p in a year

Will be an interesting fight, with the RNS out today.
@ CaptNemo - yes, i was thinking along the same lines that the $75m would be from a single party. I don't see the board having agreed to the bank debt conditions without having some sort of visibility on this.

Seafox allegations are rubbish. They talk about "ruinous agreements which rely heavily on shareholder support" on the issue of warrants.....well guess what - the only shareholders who opposed this was Seafox, Mazroui and Horizon. And of course, the company doesn't seek shareholder approval before there is a concrete plan.

Have to see the position of Mazroui because they have the swing vote. Perhaps they are sellers at 22p and Seafox has agreed on a bid post lock up, or Mazroui believes in long term value creation by Seafox (i don't trust them), or Mazroui benefits elsewhere in their energy portfolio by holding on to this investment.

In any case, I think the binding agreements with the bank makes some sort of action inevitable - will that be an equity increase of a full buyout by Seafox is the only question.

http://www.seafox.com/media/vk_1433/media/press_releases/Seafox_-_Response_to_GMS_letter_of_22.09.20.pdf

Yes, theoretically should not be allowed. Mazroui voting for them opened the doors, and I doubt they would make such a move without expecting Mazroui to support them in the case it goes to a vote - clearly they can't win without Mazroui's 12.5% stake vote. Question is what does Mazroui seek out of this ? They did not support the 10p bid. Are they happy to accept a 22p bid? Or they happy to give control to Seafox and expect things to be better?

The consolation is the debt deal. If they don't do a rights issue by Dec, then warrants have to be issued. Warrants can be issued with shareholder approval. If no warrants, banks can call the pledged assets, which is all the rigs. So there has to be something that will happen.

Yeah, very hostile. Funny thing is Mo Bisisso represents 10% ownership and they want him out too

Any thoughts on how to read this? Value destructive moves?

Equity raise is on hold.

And we had a big seller.....1% of the outstanding

I'd say closer to 5p is where you buy by the truckload :)
Yes, there are multiple possible outcomes, and its hard to pinpoint which one it will be, but action (read volatility) is guaranteed !!

You are right. Just looked at yesterday's volumes which was relatively big, still under GBP 50k though. Very hard to read Seafox's intentions at this point. I looked at the timeline of events, and noticed that Seafox bumped up the stake on 4/5th June, days after the AGM agenda was published on 29 May. Most likely Seafox saw it coming that they would lose control if the items in the agenda were passed, and perhaps this is the only reason they bought upto 30%. Luckily they still don't control the board, so again, who knows if they will make a bid once the lock up expires. In any case, 10p should be a floor.

Seems like decent seller in last few days....