Member Info for adoubleuk

Slift,

"There isn't a win scenario here. It's 5% or 0%."

Balls. That's just what you and Mcadder are just paid to tell us.

Right now the scenario is rather like a casino which has a big poster outside saying 'Come in here and lose all your money !". While the bright lights still shine, and the fruit-machines remain functional. Some of us are not so much interested in shoving tokens into the one-armed-bandits, but instead, who's paying the electricity-bill.

Slift,

"Guess you're also used to losing money. Well then, for your sake.. (and others here who have suggested that the court shouldn't sanction the plan).. I hope the court doesn't sanction the restructuring plan. 0% is what you want right? Fine by me."

If you're not used to losing money, you shouldn't be in the game. And the road home in the middle of the night can be a dark and horrible place to be after a losing evening. But can be great the following week when you go back and win, wiping the grins off the previous winners' faces.

Even if now, shareholders may only win a pyrrhric victory. But better to watch one's enemy's house burn down in the knowledge that one's matches haven't been wasted, instead of using them to light a barbecue.

The latest RNS is an all-out 'declaration of war' between the BoD and the shareholders. Also, by whom has it been verified to ensure its truthfulness?

I am no admirer of Mr Bernstein or his company Crystal Amber, nor his modus operandum, nor his style, Mayfair offices, Bentley, and so on. But nevertheless I reckon he's now the biggest cannon on the deck, and is not going to allow this evident scam to continue without firing off a salvo or two.

Keep writing to your local media. This isn't some halfbrained fertilizer-mine project in Yorkshire being talked about. It's a working and still profitable oilfield being sold down the pan, for reasons as yet unknown, and to whom (?), but eventually the truth will out.

Btw: To help people keep a strong head, watch this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEPbDJ_6aBM The first ten minutes are absolutely hilarious. When your equipment doesn't work, just give it a good kicking. Then turn up the volume.

Thebestisyet,

"... why is there still anyone here?"

Because someone has to do it. Remember the bloke with the narwhal tusk bringing down the terrorist ? The latest RNS is proof that the BoD has no intention other than to fold up the company at the expense of the shareholders, or rather, pass it into the hands of some anonymous bondholders at five cents on the dollar.

It's daylight robbery, with BP's fingerprints all over it.

FatSam82,

"there is NO DOUBT that HUR BoD is now likely the most incompetent and possibly Corrupt BoD in AIM index today"

Those are very strong words. However I personally feel that many (myself included) would agree with you, despite the number of payed-lackeys who post here or bottom-feeding daytraderswho would have it otherwise.

I've got a printout of the so-called CPR on my table, beside me, which I occasionally look at again. Likewise, the 'proposed financial restructuring'.

If a British court of law allows such a scam to go through, I'll walk 400 yards down to the river, jump in, and drown myself.

Anne37,

Welcome to the board with your first message here.

A big 10-4 to all you wrote.

Either an adjournment of the so-called 'virtual hearing' (and is that really eligible in law ?) or a deferment of judgement would oblige the company to hold its annual AGM in June, at which point it is the shareholders who have the say, not the BoD.

FatSam82,

Thank you for your interesting post at 12:17.

I can only hope that the 'virtual court' will take all the questions you have presented into consideration, along with others which may potentially be raised by some major shareholders.

I fear that little PI's (such as myself) will have little or no say in the matter, nor any influence in the judgement as to whether the 'financial restructuring' may proceed as proposed by the BoD. But kicking up a lot of noise before the case comes to court won't do any harm.

RosieNas,

"As I've said before much of the legal case will revolve around whether HURR is doomed to be insolvent "

Precisely. And this is why shareholders should be kicking up a big a storm as they can, right now.

The company is NOT currently insolvent. Also, (or at least one hopes) it has maintained its interest payments to bondholders, so they shouldn't have any complaints for the present.

The BoD have come up with a couple of crazy ideas such as a water-injector well and a sidetrack of 7z which they think might 'cure the problems of the field', which is nevertheless producing around 10,500 bopd right now. Which doesn't sound like 'doomsday' to me.

Furthermore, they've said that a rig has been contracted to P&A Lincoln this year, a well which on DST flowed at more than 5000 bopd, and for which the tieback equipment has already been purchased. But instead, for some unknown reason, no.

And where is the RNS about a rig contract ?

It stinks to high heaven. It's no longer a matter of money for me, even if it'll cost, maybe. I want the truth. Hopefully, so will the judge. If he or she considers themselves worthy of such a title.

CaptSwag,

"I think you overestimate the impact this is going to have in the press etc. i believe it will just go down as hur failing and that was it. Apart from shareholders who lost a lot of money - nobody will care."

I have to admit, you may have a good point there. In that there is a good proportion of the population who are in debt, or have no savings, have no money, and couldn't give a monkey's about some shareholders losing money. Probably consider anyone holding shares in an oil company as being some sort of fat-cat rich person. So don't give a damn about what happens with Hurricane !

I can accept that completely.

Nevertheless, those who are actually in the boxing-ring or close to it might take notice. Why do you think I bought back in, even if I'm showing a 40% 'paper loss' right now? It's what's known as 'skin in the game', lending some credence.

Some people will care.

British,

"AdoubleUK, you are strong at words, please do write to the media."

Thanks for the compliment, but I try to be 'guarded' as well. I've already written to the FT, however. The thing being, I don't want to make any correspondence seem like 'another dumb punter loses out on an idiotic share' post. This is not SXX, it's not 'donate your money to flood-ravaged Atlantis'. There's something in the background. So no sudden moves, yet.

British,

"Thanks for the encouragement AdoubleUK. Today is the day to send emails to all newspapers."

Thank you.

Despite your efforts and all the links you've sent, I feel that bombarding the mass media is the best chance that shareholders have of stalling this scam in its tracks. And that's all that's necessary. Hold up the train a bit, like those environmental idiots do.

The 'new BoD' have presented everything as if it were a 'fait accompli'. With a very dodgy so-called CPR with a 'restructuring plan' following hard on its heels, over a bank holiday weekend. Nice try, guys an' gals, but do you think we're stupid?

Mass-media loves 'David and Goliath' stories.

They're not too fond of oil companies right now, though, what with the environmental stuff. However, a reminder about a scam pulled by an AIM-listed company regarding a well offshore Greece in 2005, and then amazingly, once more in 2011. It may wake 'em up. Except in those cases it was about wells which weren't. Whereas here it's about wells which are, but we're being told they aren't.

Mirasol,

"In Commercial reconstruction cases like this it's almost unheard for them to kick it out."

Well about time to create a precedent, then. If this thing is allowed to proceed, the judge (who will be unable to remain anonymous) will be considered a complete pariah, by many people, and thus their own professional reputation will be at stake. I have no doubt that he or she will be bearing that in mind.

By the way, as an aside, I (personally) detest all refences on this BB likening this share to SXX. Other than a cratering SP, the two have nothing in common.

The more I read the CPR and the subsequent restructuring plan, the more confused I now become finding myself. On some tech points. There is mention of 'requesting permission' from OGA to 'produce from well 6 at below bubble point pressure'. This is utter nonsense and flim-flam. OGA has utterly no remit regarding at what gauge-pressure an operator decides to produce from its wells. True, if Hurricane 'opens the tap' a bit more, it would mean more gas being flared, but there are already constraints about that. Or is the idea to try to 'produce like stink', ruining the reservoir, but just to honour the commitments to the 'BP Contract' for offload of the first 34 million barrels in the shortest possible time ?

Summat stinks to high heaven here.

mcadder,

Thank you for bringing this detai to our attention.

"Depending on the terms of the scheme, further finance documentation may need to be finalised and executed after sanction of the scheme and before the scheme becomes effective. Directors have a duty to provide full and frank disclosure."

For the word 'may', read 'will'. The last phrase is very significant, as well.

FlyoverE,

"There are some videos regarding this mouth-wide-opening, well-planned, well-timing scam on you tube already."

Yes. Seen some before. Unfortunately the fat foulmouthed person helps in no way.

senseman,

"Crucial info needed - has anyone yet got court, time, case no for 21 May hearing, and how to access virtual hearing and write to Judge?"

Nope, or at least, not me.

Closest I've got is this, from documentation on the company website.

"All documentation relating to the Lock-up Agreement, together with any updates, will be available on the dedicated website https://deals.lucid-is.com/hurricane. Bondholders will require a password to access the website. A password may be obtained by emailing hurricane@lucid-is.com. For additional information, Bondholders are encouraged to get in touch with the Ad Hoc Committee via their financial advisor Houlihan Lokey (ProjectHavenHL@hl.com)."

Which is seemingly only open to bondholders.

Might be worth rattling the bars of their cage, though, if for no other reason than letting 'em know that there are people left out, and prepared to rattle those bars !

British,

You wrote

"The market is not taking a chance but also believes the board will get its way which is unfortunate."

Despite your sterling efforts to rally forward shareholder-led actions and attempts to stall the 'rubber-stamping' of the proposed financial restructuring, I can't help feeling that in joining in, it's a bit of a long shot, like drawing to a low inside straight.

But heck, why not? It's an enjoyable ride, even if you know the next curve in the road may be your last one.

I've spent a bit of the day looking back through the documentation regarding this 'deal' on the company website, and the powerpoint presentation. The two go hand-in-hand, and can't be taken independently. And in some ways, I get the feeling that the BoD have got us 'tied up' in a way that actually imagining that shareholders can actually influence the 'virtual court's decision is a very long shot. Though that's not a reason to stop taking a few snipes over the berm, just in case one round actually hits a target.

What struck me most in my reviewing the whole lot is that any court decision is just the start of a process. Not by any means the end of it, leading to the restructuring actually taking place. However, such a ratification could maybe mean the disempowerment of shareholders, just a few weeks before otherwise the AGM should take place. Which is of course alarming.

I completely endorse all ideas about writing to the FCA, SFO, and other such bodies, but given their inbuilt nature and burocracy, they will be slow to react.

Hit the mainstream media, instead.

mcadder,

" in fact I have absolutely zero to worry about because I'm not the one that still has money in this dog"

If that's the case, why waste so much of your time writing about it ?

Dropped a line to the Financial Times...

Slift,

"The evidence is unaudited accounts for FY20."

The key word there being 'unaudited', ie not ratified by a disinterested third-party body.

"Which will be provided to the market as audited and signed off following the restructure."

Not good enough, and no judge in their right mind would allow that. The accounts must be audited prior to any financial restructuring.

"The presentation provides enough info for you to comprehend the situation HUR is in.."

No, it does not.

"Unfortunately, there are no alternatives. "

Yes, there possibly are.

"I suppose several things have worked against HUR - including having to assign cash as restricted for decommissioning purposes."

No, that is normal. Putting cash in escrow for eventual decomissioning is obligatory for any UKCS oil company with physical infrastructure installed.

"I don't think that the company is selling the shareholders down the hill."

Well I (and obviously some other people) do.

"Just that it's got to the stage where there is no other alternative, other than some big investor stepping up and overpaying for the company."

What's with the 'overpaying' bit ? Buying it up at a bargain price, more likely.

NGR1616,

"Your reputation is intact. As a ******* ********"

Biggest laugh I've had all night.

Thank you for all the stars you've awarded me !

And other than 'nigwit', under how many other pseudonyms do you post, on assorted BB's ?