The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I really want to know 'Officially' who these Bond Holders are!!!
Maybe with CA Execs on board we will finally find out.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/hand-cash-back-to-complete-the-year-rlht5k5d8
Wind of change
Anyone might think Hurricane Energy’s imploding board was in line for a bung from the bondholders. Float the notion of a “side-deal” and a spokesman for the Aim-listed North Sea oil outfit declares: “It is truly ridiculous to even posit it.”
Apologies for being ridiculous. But at least bribery, which to be clear Hurricane strenuously denies, would have offered an explanation for the board’s bizarre behaviour over the past two months. Under chairman Steven McTiernan and chief executive Antony Maris, it cut a deal to all but wipe out the shareholders, giving 95 per cent of the equity to bondholders. And all to pay off just $50 million of a $230 million debt, due in July next year. On Tuesday, a High Court judge threw out the plan: the cue for the five non-execs to resign en masse.
Their plan was outrageous: a point driven home by activist investor Crystal Amber, with 14.2 per cent. Yes, Hurricane’s operations in the Lancaster field, the first to produce from a “fractured basement reservoir”, has had setbacks. And the debt must be repaid. But, whatever Hurricane says, there is nothing in the “directors’ fiduciary duties” to compel them into such a one-sided deal. Or for them to run up a ludicrous $17 million in legal and adviser fees pursuing it. Or for McTiernan to try to strong-arm shareholders into it with dark warnings that the alternative was “insolvent liquidation”.
Luckily, Crystal Amber put up a fight, calling an EGM that’s no longer needed to oust the non-execs. And the judge agreed that, with the oil price up to $75, there is a “reasonable possibility” the funding gap “could be bridged”. Two Crystal Amber nominees have now joined the board, one as chairman — even if Maris is still in post. And, yes, it needs to raise cash and strike a deal with bondholders. Even on shares up 29 per cent to 3.6p, it’s valued at just £72 million. But you’d expect a better deal without McTiernan and his cave-in crew.
Staggeringly large number of trades of late and not one holding RNS - Goes to show how these Vampire shorters who are allowed to sell 'our stock for heavens sake' and then buy it back influence a companies sp.
Rant over - Good work done by the folks on here these last few weeks.
Nighty night (there'll be a holding RNS in the morning now..)
You gorra laugh:
'The Board notes the results of these resolutions and the significant vote against them.'
Ok, good.
' We have engaged with shareholders to understand their reasons for voting in this way and understand their concerns, in particular in connection with events connected with the Company's proposed Restructuring Plan.'
Yes but only after losing a Court case and spending $17m in the process! If they'd won the Court case we'd be toast!
'The Board will consider further changes to the Board in order to comply with appropriate corporate governance standards in the near term.'
Yes you can stay but only until we have replacements with the right experience, drive and vision, then off you go. You lot with your continued undermining of HUR have: Cost me a fortune: Crashed the business with a continual diatribe of negativity and would have given HUR away to Bond Holders for peanuts and I suspect you'd have considered you'd done a good job too and have been paid royally for doing it.
What a state of affairs, mein gott.
TopCat81 - Good shout out for the Judge, he showed the direction our BOD was heading for what it was, an unnecessary disaster for us share holders.
If it hadn't been for RB of CA we'd be absolutely stuffed and wiped out by the direction our BOD was taking us, shocking!
Antony Maris & Richard Chaffe should move on now as soon as suitable replacements can be found - They come across as a pair of doom merchants out to appease Bond Holders with little if any regard to share holders.
"as we aim to maximise the value of our West of Shetland assets for the benefit of stakeholders."
I really look forward to the day when the Bond is paid back and any future RNS says:
'as we aim to maximise the value of our West of Shetland assets for the benefit of share holders.'
Great news so far today. My personal thanks to RB of CA too and to all others that have promoted our cause, well done everybody.
46,795,998 2.6p
Anyone think we might get a holding RNS from CA today / tomorrow?
'As crystal clear by now, Kerogen/Chinese affiliates are highly likely the ad hoc bondholders'
Yes that remains a worrying strong possibility - I'm with Barclays and the information sent out regards voting is sparse to non existent another worry given the number of shares in their Nominee account.
We'll soon see via the numbers where the true allegiances lie....
This from Judgement is interesting!
Having reached this conclusion on the evidence before me at the hearing, I received a further witness statement from Mr Bernstein of Crystal Amber late in the evening of 24 June 2021. This exhibited an email to Mr Bernstein (which he described as unsolicited) from Mr Michael Bonte, the Vice President Business Development with Bluewater, with responsibility for all commercial activities within the Bluewater group. He said that he had been listening to feedback from the hearing with interest and wished to correct the impression given as to Bluewater’s position by the Company and the AHC. In particular, he stated:
“...we of course remain very keen to progress discussions and investigate solutions and proposals to extend the charter of the [FPSO] with any existing, or new, management of the Company. We would be keen to enter into conceptual discussions around such extension constructs/scenarios with [Crystal Amber] now if you feel that this may assist clarify to the court? Various constructs could be put in place such as rolling six or twelve month extensions. Such constructs are typical in the sector for FPSO’s ‘on station’ if formal contractual lease extension options don’t quite ‘fit’ - and to prolong field life and maximise economic recovery for the benefit of all stakeholders.”
" It is especially concerning that the current board was seemingly willing to exploit legislation introduced in response to the Covid pandemic to do so."
Really unprofessional the way 'OUR'.......BOD have acted on our behalf. I've never seen the likes of it.
'on this unnecessary scheme which has been rejected by the High Court'
And share holders too. Absolute shocker the way they've spent $17 million given where HUR are with a Bond to pay and planning for a forward work program, $17 million and absolutely no discussion with share holders, truly awful management.
'The existing Hurricane board is considering all options' Plenty of good paying jobs in the service sector according to Radio4 this morning.
'including an appeal' Good luck with that one, I can't see it happening myself given the Judges ruling.
' Unless the Company or the Ad Hoc Committee successfully appeals the judgment, the Restructuring Plan will not be implemented.' Yes that's the message that HUR share holders have given you, WE DON'T WANT YOUR RESTRUCTURING PLAN!
'The Company's convertible bondholders have certain rights under the terms of the convertible bonds which, if enforced, could result in an acceleration of the convertible bonds and ultimately an insolvent liquidation of the Company' Genius idea, stop 11,000 barrels per day production and who would gain from that, NOBODY!
' As a result there is a significant risk of no value being returned to shareholders. ' And yer mates the Bond Holder would lose £Millions too, so a very bad idea all round.
'The Company notes that a number of its shareholders have indicated that they were not supportive of the Restructuring Plan and, as a result, have indicated an intention to vote against the re-election of those Directors of the Company that are standing for re-election at the upcoming AGM on 30 June 2021 and/or to vote in favour of resolutions proposed by Crystal Amber Fund Limited to remove all of the non-executive Directors of the Company at the upcoming EGM on 5 July 2021.' Quite a large number of share holders actually and yes we want change.
' It is the Company's understanding that, in the event all of the Executive Directors are removed from the Board, the Company's Nominated Adviser is likely to resign with immediate effect. This is likely to have the result that the shares of the Company are suspended from trading and, if a replacement Nominated Adviser is not in place within a period of one month, it may result in the shares of the Company being de-listed from AIM. ' I'm sure CA have that one covered too, check, your move!
Typical HUR RNS, veiled threats in every paragraph - This BOD just don't get it.
The next RNS from the BOD will make interesting reading.
Terrific day for share holders though, great outcome.
10M @ 2.2215p BUY
"If I may so impertinent to say so, you're mentioning points which I've been banging on about for months ! But no problem, and they remain worth repeating."
adoubleuk - I think we are both batting for the same side here, anyway points are points and as you / we say, something doesn't feel right here.
If I were to be totally benevolent to our BOD, I could make a case for BOD nativity and being steered by the 'AD HOC' group to make a series of totally bizarre decisions maybe. But I'm not and they have to go.