Member Info for Alaric

anytime qf. yep i felt they well chosen and quite witty.

unsurpringly perhaps, i see that our saint of the cheeses has ignored my advice and rather than contemplate the theological foundations for rules of disclosure affecting AIM companies and the complex relationship enjoyed by our kind and Old Nick, he has spent the day gazing at his umbilicus. and despite that he has neither found inner peace nor discovered that is a far more knotted issue than our ceo trying to buy 20% of the company he leads.

Ha ha

OMG maybe some time in a monastery contemplating the relationship between God and CEOs of AIM companies would help unburden your troubled mind, St. Camembert. This gets tedious. First the Nomad released the RNS. He would only have done so on the basis that Oisin had a contract to buy the shares. That Tosca did not enforce the contract will have had more to do with the excellent relationship Oisin has with Martin Hughes than the fact he evidently suffered no loss from its breach. The language used in the subsequent RNS, as bluerill helpfully pointed out, strongly suggests a deal will be reinstated, once Oisin can sort out his banks. My labrador has worked out that isn't going to happen at 21p. What nobody has yet commented on is the one big loser here is Oisin himself, who will no doubt also have incurred wasted legal costs, including his bank's, for the ignominy of having them turn him down at credit committee. Actually I feel pretty sorry for him. He has worked incredibly hard to turn this stock around and build the remarkable story we see today. Any suggestion of foul play is utterly spurious and candidly you can shove your morality lesson where the sun don't shine. Now off to your retreat and not a word - it's a silent order!

ummh... dunno i give up. surely can't be your whole morality tale thing again around big O's non share purchase, which seemed to put you on the road to Trollheim? as you said yourself qf, probably noboby cares what you say but you really should stiffen your backbone now. we have a big news horizon.

sorry meant to add these rules state every man is to be presumed to be sane, and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his acts, until the contrary be proved ; and that to establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or, if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong.
as i was saying tricky area. that said i think he's got enough going for him here to beat the rap

when you're examining the levels of actual risk involved in the redevelopment of Oza ( an exercise all those now putting the funding up will have had to do in detail over the last few weeks and months - so to remind that's us, a Nigerian Bank, Decklar and an oil major - you need to remember this is not an exploration project. these wells were extensively production tested back in Shell's time. from the RNS: 'The Oza-1 well and new horizontal development well are anticipated to generate significant production levels and cash flow in an abbreviated time frame. The Oza Oil Field development is anticipated to then continue with one or two more existing well re-entries and additional development drilling with the potential for eight to ten wells being drilled in total for the full field development.' put another way, they didn't spend 50 million bucks on the pipeline and associated production infrastructure because they thought there MIGHT be oil but because they KNEW there was oil (and loads of it - bonny light -black gold - it doesn't come any better). deals like this don't come around very often (think Haley's comet) - put simply it's an oil man's dream. the fact it has here is down to a a rare combination of remarkable circumstances (Shell's strategic decision to exit the Delta marginals in the noughties, Millenium needing the wherewithal to develop production, Nigeria being an incredibly difficult and very expensive place to raise development capital and, last but not least, San Leon's emergence as a cash rich London quoted true Delta specialist lead by an extraordinary dealmaker). so as i say, on any analysis anywhere in the world, this is an outstanding deal and all involved in it will be winners.

BS' posting remains detached from any logically argued position or empirical evidence. yet again one is left asking oneself what his point is or so what? but he leaves a dark impression along the lines of 'we've all failed to realise that Millennium have somehow outsmarted everybody, cunningly using Oza as collateral to refinance itself'. ignoring for the moment the bleeding obvious (if one is looking to raise funds to refinance and to develop the value of an asset, looking at the asset itself first seems a possible starting point) the 'everybody' here in no particular order is presumably the Nigerian bank, the major oil company, Decklar and us. and we know that the diligence has gone on considerably longer than expected (that kind of dedicated professional approach fits the MO of an oil major looking to provide funding; another poster has surmised this could be Trafigura or Shell, both massive heavyweights and both remaining closely involved with Nigeria, in Shell's case directly with Oza as its former operator. anyway looks like we shall find out very soon now). and yet despite all this BS wants us to believe they and we have all had the wool pulled by Millenium for their own ends? he fails to comment though on the fact that to achieve this agreement Millenium have had to give up control of and a huge percentage of future revenues from the Oza licence. the alternative view that this is just a cracking deal for all concerned, facilitated i am sure in no small degree by our involvement ( as a company quoted in London) and by that of an oil major, is just too sweet for him and anyway doesn't fit his agenda. which brings me neatly back to Harry Frankfurt and his observations on fakes.

In 1986 the philosopher Harry Frankfurt wrote an article called ‘On Bull****‘ in which he pointed out that there is an epistemological and therefore morally significant difference between lying and faking. When you lie, he argued, you inadvertently disclose that you have some concern for the truth. To fake, on the other hand, is to reach for whatever bull**** you can spout in service of your desired end.

This lack of concern for truth is what makes the chancer worse than the liar. The faker, having lost any interest in separating the true from the false, will inevitably end up deceiving himself. He has no skin in the game. The liar is at least theoretically capable of being brought to book; the faker is beyond help. His world is fundamentally distorted.

you're spot on as usual, bluerill, but honestly I wouldn't waste your breath on him. in years of posting on San Leon, BS has shown himself to be a serial bad actor. the hallmark of all these phonies is the intellectual dishonesty displayed in their discussion, which doesn't flow logically from the evidence, is full of non sequiturs and is always tainted by negative spin. the acid test is when you have to ask yourself what is their point? the point is they don't have a point - that's why they're phonies.

so the $64m question is how long before Oza is in production now?
the September rns said Decklar estimates that first production will be three to four months following the drawdown of the financing.
but it looks like they've somehow kicked on anyway and completed all the preparation for drilling to commence. my guess is that there are going to be some very happy faces round the board table at Decklar well before Easter. and since we get a seat at that table, one of those faces will be ours. and i don't think it will take much longer before we exercise our option to increase our holding in Decklar to 30%.

worth just rerunning from bluerill's excellent post below:
'Looks like we'll have some good news to start the week as Oza deal near done, but in addition it appears that field work has been progressing even while Decklar and San Leon were waiting for financial, so it would appear Oza may be in production sooner than we could have imagined:
'....Well Site and drilling location preparation for the Oza-1 well re-entry and first horizontal development well have moved forward, and we are pleased to report have now been completed. The road to the well site location has been rebuilt and construction of a concrete drilling pad, concrete mud pit, buildings and related infrastructure have been completed. Long lead time items needed for the Oza-1 re-entry have been secured, and a drilling rig currently located near the field has been identified and contracted.'

Highlights from the RNS last September

· Initial US$7.5 million loan to Decklar, 10% per annum coupon;

· 15% equity interest in Decklar, with an option to increase to 30% equity interest based on drilling results;

· Decklar is the Risk Service Provider to the operator of the Oza field, onshore Nigeria, having exclusive rights to develop the field with the operator;

· Cash sweep in San Leon's favour until loan and interest repaid; and

· Attractive fiscal terms on licence and existing infrastructure in place.

- The Oza Oil Field has significant export and production processing facilities and infrastructure already in-place and operational, which will allow for the export and sale of crude oil from the Oza-1 well re-entry, the initial Oza horizontal development well and future wells.

- Decklar estimates that first production will be three to four months following the drawdown of the financing.

The Oza Oil Field was formerly operated by Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd. ("Shell"). The field has three wells and one side track drilled by Shell. During the period when Shell was the operator, there were two periods of extended production testing from the Oza-1, -2 and -4 wells. The field was never tied into an export facility, nor was it fully developed by Shell and put into commercial production.

Since 2003, approximately US$50 million has been spent on infrastructure in support of a restart of production including an export pipeline that connects the Oza Oil Field production into the Trans Niger Pipeline (TNP) which goes to the Bonny Export Terminal, a lease automatic custody transfer (LACT) unit fiscal metering system, infield flow-lines, manifolds and a rental 6,000 barrel per day early production facility ("EPF").

Decklar intends to fast-track the initial development of the Oza Oil Field including a re-entry on the existing Oza-1 well, anticipated to test three oil bearing zones and place the well into production from two of the three zones tested. The drilling rig is expected to then be skidded on the same location as Oza-1 to a new drilling slot and a development well is expected to be drilled horizontal into the third zone tested in the Oza-1 well re-entry. The Oza-1 well and new horizontal development well are anticipated to generate significant production levels and cash flow in an abbreviated time frame. The Oza Oil Field development is anticipated to then continue with one or two more existing well re-entries and additional development drilling with the potential for eight to ten wells being drilled in total for the full field development. Additional early production and central processing facilities will be added as required to accommodate additional production levels from the Oza Oil Field's development activities.

any chance of a translation, so we know what you're talking about?

good for you Qf. like bluerill I trust you to be a good actor over time here. please don't take this the wrong way but, if you hadn't noticed, you're beginning to attract some lowlife company of late on this board.

that bearing from Tema, where she's been laying off, points her across the Gulf of Guinea towards the Niger Delta. i can almost hear the howls of anguish in Trollheim tonight.

bluerill just beat me to it - TEAMWORK ( really ??). the only thing that's dodgy here is you. well that and your handle and your crassly stupid observation. btw it's also libel and you need more than one O-level for that.

the problem exists that nothing about Eadwig is 'straightforward' or as it quite seems. if as he suggests he is long San Leon then why ? i know why i am long - the value case makes itself. but he says he doesn't believe that, so we are asked to believe he is holding because he think the price will go down ? or what exactly? there is another negative poster on this board , callasjunkie, who has posted on san leon on various boards over time. he says he doesn't hold stock in san leon but posts for the greater good of mankind. take your pick...

does rather look like Eadwig has now moved onto this board, so prepare to be bored rigid everyone. and he's now shown his true colours as a troll. he always maintained he had a holding here but, as you can now see, that's clearly a lie. he chooses not to see the value case here. it has surely been late in its fruition but that doesn't mean it's gone away. to remind the following are on the immediate horizon: 1) commissioning of the ACOES and with it commencement of oil field revenues for the interest holders in OML18 ; and 2) financial close of our agreement to acquire 15% (with an option for a further 15%) in the Oza Field. with the company barely valued above cash and secured debt (we still have ~$100m due from Jite) and a dividend strategy to deliver 50% of free cashflow to shareholders, investors now need to do the maths on the initiation of our multiple revenue streams. that and on what they think our 10.5 % interest in OML18 will be worth? there and i haven't even mentioned Barryroe

indeed as you can see from mclean's last post, Zak Mir puts it this way: 'While the pandemic is clearly going to be an influence on any company currently, San Leon’s income and quality of assets can help it ride through any delays / bumps in the road. Interestingly, the shares are less than half the 59p Panmure Gordon price target – off the back of the broker’s appreciation of San Leon’s lend-invest strategy – hence de-risking exposure in the present environment. Indeed, the only downside so far of this approach seems to be that the stock market does not yet appreciate the value and income creation at San Leon Energy. Therein lies the opportunity for 2021. This certainly appears to be one of those stock market situations where investors – apart from those who fully understand the momentum San Leon is building, continue to look the income delivering gift horse in the mouth.'