Member Info for adoubleuk

British,

There are a further one or two things that require investigation. We (as shareholders) have not been given an explanation for Mr Stobie's 'retirement' (ex-CFO and quite a well-known person in the oilfield 'village'), not the reason for Dr Trice's 'retirement' as CEO, which rumour has it wasn't a voluntary action on his part, though that's pure rumour to be taken with as many pinches of salt as one wants.

I also feel an explanation is due as to why it wasn't RPS, compilers of earlier CPR's, who were not asked to compile the latest one. Simply stating that it was a 'revision', based upon new data received. Had that been the case, it would have been no skin off their nose, and with no loss of reputation, and any such 'bad news' (if it actually exists) might have been better accepted by shareholders, no matter how disappointing.

This is a put-up job, with some serious reputations at stake. Not least, the board of the OGA. Media like 'The Sun' will already be rubbing their hands in glee. And I suspect people like BP (not everyone's favorite oil company since Macondo), who despite their new 'going green' propaganda are still loading and selling oil from the Lancaster field on behalf of Hurricane, might themselves now have cause for worry as to what the outcome of the court case might be.

onthebeach3,

Wrt your 11:28 post...

Yes. However now, it all depends on the conclusions drawn by a court judge, and as a result whether this 'restructuring' will be allowed to go ahead or not.

A person who gets to the position of being such a judge will axiomatically not be a fool. Also, their name will not just have been pulled out of a hat before the hearing: in fact that person will probably already have received notice of the case, and is studying the facts carefully. And will doubtless be aware that should the restructuring, essentially relinquishing control of the company to the bondholders and cutting the shareholders out of the equation will create an uproar which might also bring their own reputation into question. It would also create a rather bad precedent, which would also be widely reported by the mass media, and nobody would be allowed to remain 'anonymous'.

The presence of Petrofac in all this won't go unnoticed either, and their laxity in finding themselves incapable of drilling the 7z sidetrack horizontally (a contracted to do) will probably not be missed.

So to my mind, it's all very much 'wait and see time'.

Plus I also find it curious that over the last couple of days I've received emails from people with whom I haven't had contact for over a year, essentially telling me that 'it's all over now', or 'no longer any hope'. When there has just been another tankerfull of oil offload from the FPSO, proving that the field is still viable, and that the company isn't broke.

Any judge worthy of the title will be aware that debt can be renegotiated and restructured. But that however, cutting private investors out completely seems wrong.

"From advfn bb....."

Listen, Mcadder.

If we want to read what's on advfn, we can go there

Don't need this stuff.

Taverham,

"I think those still invested should establish if the court proceedings allow for objections or representatiions by shareholders and then act accordingly . "

Completely agree, though have no idea if that is the case, nor how such representations could be presented. I am not a lawyer.

However (as a layman in such matters), if such representations were not allowed, it would seem (personally, to me, opinion only) to be a complete travesty of justice. Courts are not covened to 'rubber stamp' controversial financial decisions made by the BoD of a company, to the detriment of their shareholders, and with no consultation with said shareholders beforehand.

There's now something I'm wondering about.

What might happen (looking forward) if the BoD actually DOES receive an unfavourable judgement regarding their 'financial restructuring proposal' ?

Then things will become very interesting indeed.

Maybe the BoD should start listening to some music such as this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvpMeq_4BPM

And then examine the state of the soles of their own footware.

OK Jays1993. Please don't post here again.

ATrades,

"I took 100 quid profit on the bounce there. It’s done now"

I've almost fallen off my chair laughing. If this man (or lady) represents the sort of person posting here, I guess I'd better stop doing so myself. 100 quid profit ? Well done, at least it's profit. But I made twice that a couple of nights ago playing a tiny online poker game, buy-in two euros.

Grow up. A hundred quid might buy you a bottle of whisky, a decent haircut, some cigarettes and maybe a kebab or two. But who cares about little s*** like that ?

Slift,

"As RNSTranslator has said, this restructure is due to the fact that the company is unable to carry on the business as a going concern."

No. Instead that the current management find themselves unable to do so, while still allocating themselves some serious salaries.

This is not 'right'.

RNSTranslator,

"The current market cap is based on 2bn shares not the 40bn shares that will be the case after the court approves the restructure."

You like some others here are making a huge assumption.

That the court will approve the restructure.

Personally, as a 'little minnow PI' I hope it will not do so. That's now what I'm gambling upon. And I hope and pray that the judge will see such a point of view, and not accept having 'little people' sold down the river for the sake of the salaries possibly greater than he or she collects.

Taverham,

"Aduk , think it will need an injunction to stop the bods carefully planned action."

Yes, agreed. And I suspect (or rather hope) this is what will be sought by people such as CA (if present) or other shareholders represented. Whoever the the judge appointed to here the case may be, he or she will also be considering their own professional reputation, and subsequent CV. Probably with little regard to the professional futures of the people initially presenting the case, especially given their recent track record of having totally ignored the interests of 'little people' PI shareholders. Because that makes very bad press indeed.

I disagree with your term "the bods carefully planned action.", though. My impression of them is that they couldn't plan how to escape from a paper bag, the timing is awful, and that allthey are trying to do is an attempt to cover their own sorry backsides, or that they're acting on behalf of some other third party or parties to the detriment of the company they're supposed to be representing, and should that become published knowledge, they could go to jail.

mcadder,

"I've spelt it out this weekend just like you have but there are some that are in complete denial attacking us about being negative and having an agenda. All we are doing is spelling out what the company released on Friday and the implications of it"

Who exactly is the 'I' and 'we' you're referring to, please? I'm sure a lot of people would like to know. Not least, a High Court judge.

Please state your credentials in this respect.

Albie,

"Adoubleuk - Thanks for your considered and well worded views, very much in thinking with my own."

And thank you for your own kind, and considered response. Obviously, since Friday, this thing has been playing on my mind a bit , wondering if I've taken a huge gamble which might cause me to lose a lot of money, or whether (putting my trust in the judicial system) I might make some (though not much) back.

One way or another, I simply don't see this going unnoticed, whichever way the 'judgement' goes.

Nor do I necessarily see the bondholders accepting the 'proposition' as it stands necessarily being in their own favour, either.

Taverham,

"No doubt the Bod are engaging with CA now ."

What makes you think that ? Were I anyone in CA, especially Mr Bernstein, I'd be refusing any calls from anyone on Hurricane's current BoD.

Albie,

"Have CA Fund been caught seriously off guard here by the BOD's actions, or did the fund see this coming and have an action plan in place? Thoughts please."

My own gut feeling is that Mr Bernstein and CA, via 'the grapevine' may quite possibly have seen Friday's RNS coming, and might even be using the opportunity to be shovelling up as many more shares as they can. Remember, Berstein's offices are in London, even if the company is registered in Guernsey. And central London is a village.

"Loose lips sink ships', and in this instance, the ship in question is the ratification by a court judge in the near future of the BoD's proposed restructuring plan. And as a very major shareholder and CA's CEO, I can see no alternative for Bernstein, on behalf of his own shareholders and investors, but to go in with all guns blazing and firing torpedoes at that ship. Or at least, ensuring that he has some legal representaion at the hearing, arguing such a case.

And even if the proposition is actually ratified, and essentially 95% control of the comany is handed to bondholders, it appears axiomatic that the bondholders will immediately rally themselves together and force an EGM, sacking most of the evidently incompetent and negatively-thinking BoD, and instead installing so proactively-thinking people who might be able to turn things around, to their own and to shareholders advantage.

No judge in their right mind will sanction a company essentially (as is the case right now) still producing, and making cash profit, to be 'bankrupt', no matter what future (not due for a year) debt overhang may be. Instead, a judge with the least of common sense will tell the BoD to go back to doing some real work instead of prevaricating and wasting his own precious time, and make good on their various previous promises.

Or at least, I very much hope so. I myself have taken a huge gamble, by seriously buying back in on Friday, and I'm aware that now, it's a gamble, and nothing else. But what I'm gambling on now is justice being seen to be done, via the UK's judicial system.

If such justice isn't (in the shareholders' minds) seen to be done, there will be an absolute sh**storm of protest and cries of 'scandal !' hitting the media, and plenty of mud-slinging, and I'm not sure the wimpish current BoD have the strength to stand up against that.

precisely. quite agree. in fact they've nothing positive for at least a year.

mcaddere,

"So what appropriate action have they taken then? So far it has achieved nothing if Friday's update is anything to go by!"

Don't you remember Mohammed Ali leaning on the ropes during most of the 'rumble in the jungle' before going in for the kill ?

Kettle,

"CA will be taking a legal opinion so no knee jerk reaction. In fact i would be more worried about radio silence from CA if i was Bod."

Completely agree, and I expect to hear nothing from CA. That company and their CEO might be rather a nasty piece of work, but I now consider the BoD of HUR to be even nastier, but a lot dumber. Also, they have demonstrated their dumbness with the issue of the recent CPR and their 'restructuring plan' which both include some downright untruths.

So I await the court-hearing, and its result.

Conkclo

"FPSOs are generic to a point of producing oil & gas, tell your insurer you have bought a load of 2nd hand equipment & your liability cover will go thru the roof. Different fields flow at Different pressures Different sub sea temperatures, you as a drilling man should be aware of that much at least"

I don't disagree with any of that. But we're not talking about the FPSO here. The main 'long-lead items' the company has bought (and presumably now in storage) are a production wellhead, and a whole lot of Coflexip flowline and riser.

These can be used by almost anyone, anywhere if the conditions are suitable. Nevertheless, I don't reckon that the company could get more than 15 million, now. The Coflex (some kilometers of it, if that was part of the 'bundle') might already be considered as 'scrap'.

noelpbz,

"adoubleuk - thank you for that - yes, with Bank of England ( sorry I believe you are Scottish)"

Thanks for your thanks, but no, I am not Scottish. Pure Sassenach, born and bred in Oxford. However I do have 'northern roots'. Great-grandfather Scottish, grandmother from the Isle of Harris, though grandfather (and father) pure geordie, from Sunderland. Peculiarly, on the maternal side, my mother (and her family) were from totally other parts. Portsmouth.

But all with 'seafaring traditins in common.

My father established himself an academic career, despite occsionally going to sea for some marine-biological reserch off Scotland with the late Sir Alister Hardy, which occasionally I'd accompany on the two trawlers, when young. And then later, found myself a bit of a chip off the old block, on offshore oilrigs.

Hey ! Why am I telling you people, most of whom I don't know, all this stuff ?

Time to go find an online poker-game.

conkclo,

"Only if they 'fit' with items they need to tie into, size, pressure, rating, metallurgy, physical size etc, so probably very expensive scrap at the moment"

Sorry, sort of halfway have to disagree with you there, but halfway do agree. It's all very 'generic' stuff, and could be used by many other people, easily. But right now it's all just a load of metal sitting in a warehouse. Containing parts (especially the rubber or polymer elements) could quickly deteriorate.

So it's all a bit like hav up againsting bought a Ferrari, and put it in a shed, locking the door and not having taken the thing out for a drive.

I've run up against such stuff. Like on a dual-stage cement-job in Gabon, many years ago. The stage-packer had lain in a warehouse for a few years, under all sorts of varying temperatures and changes in humidity. Nevertheless we ran it in the hole as part of the casing string. All we had.

First-stage cementing went off no probs. But having dropped the 'dart', could we get the second-stage cement-collar to shear and open at the specified 1800 psi ? Nope. Found ourselves in a bit of an awkward situation, with first-stage cement above the collar, and not much time before it started to cure.

Luckily, I and the cement-unit operator (a Congolese man) got on well, and thought along the same sort of lines. So finally, having told all the rest of the crew to be well out of the way for their own safety, at three in the morning and under pouring rainforest rain, got the dam thing to shear at 4700psi, could displace the uphole cement, and get on with the second stage.

After having done all that, compiled and 'called-in' the morning report to base, I finally got to bed. It had been a long nonstop 36 hours or so.

Working for Shell. Bl***y Drilling Manager in town woke me up five hours later with a phone call. But I didn't see the cementer 'til the following day ! When with a huge grin, we shook hands, 'cos that had been a marathon.

Leave equipment idle, in a warehouse, and just like bread, it goes stale and hard.

noelpbz,

"At the CMD of 27th April 2020 HUR declared an expenditure of $22M on "Gas export and GWA long lead items" - surely these can be sold off at todays prices to enhance the cash balance. Can HUR advise."

Another good question. This stuff is sitting in a warehouse somewhere, costing money, and no doubt gathering dust. It's fairly 'generic' equipment and could be used by someone else if they wanted it. But now, quite possibly, at a resale cost of half the price, because it'll need to have the dust blown off, recertification, and so on, none of which comes cheap.

But yet another query which one may hope the judge brings up in a couple of weeks time.

The BoD are claiming that their company is in the poorhouse when it evidently isn't. And debt can always be 'restuctured' to everyone's mutual benefit. But instead of that, they seem to want to just shut the whole ting down. Which quite simply isn't right.