Member Info for addicknt

The Frasers result were stellar, so yes, he must be confident the sector's trading well.

Q, yes, me too.

However, given the importance of this development to the state of Ecuador and its highly political nature, you could reasonably assume the government would like to know we have the ability to deliver (or that we have a partner/buyer who can). Or maybe not? Perhaps they were so anxious to get this done before Lasso disappears they were happy with what we told them? Mind you, that would seem pretty reckless to me.

Before granting the licences I wonder what assurances/evidence the government wanted to see to prove we are able to take this to production? Surely they wouldn't have been content with our word only?

If we assume we had to provide something more concrete, why hasn't the company updated the market?

Bozi, that was rather my point.

Some of you appear to be missing a key point.

Apparently Europe is warming faster than any other continent. Well, since we made the sensible decision to leave we're obviously immune to any further effects of climate change. I wonder why the Brexit campaign didn't use this fact at the time? It's no more absurd than the Osbourne's claim that we were all going to catch untreatable venereal disease.

RT, it doesn't have any other debt.

Much to my surprise the new Chris Packham series, Earth, is excellent. Unlike the ludicrous Justin Rowlatt, Packham does a very good job of explaining climate change in a reasonable and non-hysterical manner. He makes it easy to understand and places it in the context of previous extreme events.

Having seen the programmes, I'm more convinced than ever that we would be better off spending a good part of the trillions on protecting humankind from the inevitable, rather than the futile attempts to reverse the process. Something I understand James Lovelock came to believe.

Unless I've misread this, the equity raise will be at 1.7p and the investors will end up owning 80% of the company. Is this correct?

Thanks.

DBW, earlier today you posted a link to Irwin's Twitter. As I don't use it, I couldn't see his reply to the question. What did he say?

So when you admitted to being 1981 you were lying? I'm afraid to say your writing style, use of the words poppet and sweetheart (I note you've dropped those now) and overall message i.e your belief that the truth is known only to you, rather gave the game away.

Anyway, keep up the good work.

Mr Curry, you wouldn't believe this but there's a bloke on here who used to post under a different name and told us that some arbitrage product was lurking out there (lie number 1) and that it was going to destroy the market next year (lie number 2). He then said he'd manipulated the market (lie number 3) on behalf of a client (he had no client, so lie number 4).

He then reappeared using a different name and claimed to have seen some Chinese bloke going into a hotel for a meeting with one of our advisors (lie number 5). He also admitted to his previous identity and then claimed he didn't (lie number 6) Apparently, he's an ex-Royal Engineer who owns a construction company, which is curious because he'd previously implied he was a financial professional (lie number 7?). You will also note he spends his time telling us the company doesn't have a Tier 1 asset and is, according to one of his posts this morning, only worth £200m.

But the funniest thing of all is his insistence that he's a shareholder.

Bozi, in my opinion this will be an agreed deal following private i.e off-market negotiations with all interested parties. Low bidders will be immediately discounted. I do not see this turning out to be a contested bid undertaken in the public eye. In other words your observation about lower bids sparking off greater interest is not the case.

If we end up announcing a deal I do not anticipate there being any counter bidders, for the simple reason they will have had their chance during the negotiation phase, and I do not believe there will be any left of field buyers emerging once we've gone public. The list of potential buyers is relatively small and our advisors will have covered every base.

Copper, despite not wanting it, I too think a jv is looking likely. My hope is that anyone interested will ask themselves the question, why do they need us? I hope they conclude they don't and therefore make a decent offer to buy us out completely.

Q, that's an interesting point as it implies he's confident we'll have done something to address the funding issue and, as BBG says, that all permits will be in place.

It was also interesting that production won't start until 2029 and we are looking at a block cave. Any talk of a quicker route to cash flow was dismissed.

Given we've been granted the other two licences, and provided we meet the requirements, you'd assume we'd also get the water and environmental licences almost as a formality. The same applies to the revised IPA.

Has it? I thought SC said work is ongoing.

Bingo!

Ftjny, Q thought it was 245. We'll get there eventually! In any event, as you say, it's a very large reduction.

First of all I feel he's on top of the brief and although he can't tell us, I'm convinced he has a pretty clear idea of where this is going and with whom.

He constantly referred to there being a 'great deal of interest', and given what we are sitting on, we shouldn't be surprised.

I was pleased to hear Citi and Maxit are working on a contingency basis. Equally, I was interested to hear just how many people we've laid-off and that offices have closed - I assume London has gone. If I heard him correctly, he said we have 205 people on the books, of which only 5 are located outside of Quito.

Do I feel more confident? Yes, because rightly or wrongly, I believe we're further down the track with our conversations with third parties than we may think. My gut reaction is that we'll see something emerge by year end.