Member Info for Alaric

hilarious how you guys never debate on the facts, let alone attempt to refute them. it's difficult i guess as the facts do rather speak for themselves?

ah there you are again, junkie, with your not so bons mots. since you're on the wires, do you remember your prediction that Sun Trust would bring San Leon down? it was all to do with the assignor of their shares having to give notice of assignment and you got terribly muddled up and thought San Leon was the assignor and had guffed up. it was all very funny as it turned out it was you who had guffed up, since of course San Leon were the assignee. how we all laughed and here we all are still with San Leon still in business, no debt, money in hand with hugely valuable assets in the Niger Delta. on reflection now, junkie, honestly do you feel a bit of a chump?

as usual Sam, more blah blah but no substance and looks like dogsbody has scarpered. as i thought - another complete waste of space.

meanwhile no response from caniscorpus (which btw means 'dogsbody' in schoolboy latin). as i say no surprises there but can anyone help with wtf Afake is rambling about now? note he's gotten so excited about about me being on the high moral ground (first correct observation by him) that he's dropped out his faux West African pidgin speak. oh mon dieu quelle booboo!

contrarian value44 used $5 a barrel for his calculations, on the basis that ANS is trading around 80 bucks. i recall the Oil Search deal was done around $3.50 when the oilprice was $55, so if this proves up in 2022 with better location near existing infrastructure and high API, $5 a barrel looks eminently reasonable. that leaves plenty of 'meat on the bone' for a major buyer.

to be fair telemachus1 thinks that contrarian value44's assumptions on secondary recovery rates are a bit high, so he gets to an end value ×20 rather than ×40 but even that gets you to £16!

written by poster called contrarian value 44 on the Reddit thread, who seems to have passed muster generally with the super knowledgeable telemachus1. good bit of work imho

'caniscorpus, you asked the same queries on the other board and you have received full and excellent answers from more than one poster there. it might be an idea if you were to formally acknowledge that?'
no? why am i not surprised?

caniscorpus, you asked the same queries on the other board and you have received full and excellent answers from more than one poster there. it might be an idea if you were to formally acknowledge that?

to be perfectly honest BS. i don't get a lot of what you post :-)

i'm afraid your further comment, BS, serves only to expose ignorance of the use of time limited legal obligations in sophisticated commercial arrangements. here the expectation and obligation is to pay the dividend within 3 years. it is fairly standard practice to prescribe remedies for breaches (particularly of time limited obligations - here the extension of the period plus 10% p.a. penalty), rather than risk some court or tribunal imposing a perhaps arbitrary or draconian one. an everyday example of this is the use of liquidated damages provisions in building contracts, where typically the contractor agrees to pay a fixed amount of money to the client for every week the building is late. this doesn't mean there is any expectation that it will be.

what's your point exactly BS? as usual you seem to be selective in your quoting. you omitted this: 'To the extent that less than US$40 million of dividends are declared and paid by the Company during that three-year period, the right of the holders of the Preference Shares to a preferred dividend will continue in respect of the shortfall and the shortfall amount will increase by 10 per cent per annum until the full amount of the shortfall has been paid.'

trouble with gone girl, sam, is he just doesn't like the truth - particularly about himself. and because there is limited proper research and intelligent comment on this board, over time we have seen many variants of gone girl infesting the board, albeit each time less virulent than before

ha ha ha

so we have the results of the Xmas quiz in. although the *predicshun* that Eroton should have gone bust by now (given their recently announced $750m financing package with Afreximbank) ran a close 2nd on the Laughometer, the *9p predicshun* just pipped it. it seems the judges' reasoning was predicated on the fact that the SP had trebled from the *9p predicshun* by the end of the month. mr. justice dodd presiding said that in all his years with the diddymen he had never laughed so much and the result was simply *tattyfilarious*. so congratulations go to this year's winner, our very own resident troll, Afakey, on his absolutely bizarre *9p predicshun *. 3rd place went to the *Sun Trust predicshun* with the house troll making history by taking all 3 podium positions.

'oil is another story'- really Junkie? dunno where you got that from but feel free to quote your sources. no? i didn't think so. meanwhile back on planet earth oil demand is projected to continue growing for a long time yet. maybe time for you to digitally extract and read some actual FACTS before your brain completely ossifies. start here:
https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/World-Leaders-Have-To-Face-The-Truth-About-Oil-Demand.html

don't know about Chinese but you guys are speaking Double Dutch as far as any serious investor on this board is concerned. hilarious. so do keep it up, as good to have a couple of fools around to amuse us occasionally . and the old ones are best like how Sun Trust were going to ruin us and that one about Jite going bust. we were rolling im the isles

'we will hopefully end up with a smaller % of a more valuable entity in the end' . indeed, tb37, that was just the point i was trying to emphasise in my last post. and the value adds here really should not be insignificant for the reasons i gave. if it's going to be good enough for Martin Hughes to back, that'll do for me

maybe, with over 72% of the company today, Martin Hughes may have some idea of our prospective worth? and be under no Illusion - Oisin would not be pursuing this rto unless Tosca had given its full blessing. whatever value we notionally ascribed to our 10.5% of OML18 previously (and let's face it this was never reflected in the share price pre suspension), it would have been based on $27 oil (the prevailing price when we funded Jite's first move on OML18 in 2016. that and, whilst clearly a world class oil field, OML18 had been self evidently under invested over time by its previous operator - Shell - and most particularly in relation to its oil evacuation. so it was and remains hugely underperforming. the question investors should be asking themselves now is what value might now be ascribed to 45% of this licence (assuming as indicated that Sahara get taken out) with a well funded and well connected regional operator and a brand new secure oil export system at $70+ oil? i recall the original submission docs projected OML18 selling well over 100,000 bopd. so here we are a bit late maybe but with the maths improved beyond measure - roll on the rto.

"Eroton's new loan term sheet and its consequential proposed acquisition of an additional interest in OML 18 demonstrates the widespread and ongoing support for OML 18 as a world class oil and gas asset."
so bluerill was calling it right when he said
'the massive refinancing package at Eroton ...is going to anchor this RTO and the creation of AIM's largest independent oil and gas company'
so we now just need an update on the ACOES to complete this most virtuous of circles. the facts that Eroton has done this huge refinancing on the back of OML18 and that the proposed deal sees a 'new' San Leon take a much bigger interest in it, announces loud though that all's well with the new pipeline etc