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.
This is speculation as I really don't know but:
We strongly suspect that a large HUR share holder is also a major Bond holder. Has a Bond buy back not occurred (the 'no brainer' option as Steven McTiernan called it himself because that would scupper the sale of the century to Bond Holders.
If McTiernan had bought back Bonds ('it's a no brainer') and reduced debt our sp would be considerably higher than it is now and we wouldn't be in this ridiculous position, WHY DIDN'T HE DO IT THEN?
If you're speaking tomorrow please try and stay non emotional and on message. The Law is all about facts and presenting the strongest case that you can, not: "I'd like to see the BOD" Flogged/Keel hauled under the AM/Made to walk the plank off the Paul B. Lloyd oil rig etc,etc.
Sorry to sound like 'Big Brother' but I'm sure you know where I'm coming from, good luck all.
Alb
"they are bond holders albie."
We all suspect that to be the case Maqsood7, I was hoping someone might ask that question in the Court to show just where true allegiances lie.
KEROGEN? Not a mention that I've heard reported, a little odd to say the least don't you think given they own 16% of HUR?
CA certainly seem to be playing a very important role and delivering for themselves/us and I thank them for it.
I want the Judge to deliver in our favour now!
"might need to arrange fraction of it!!??"
Exactly, current BOD are shocking in the way they've handled this and have treated S_Holders, they've go to GO!
"Hard hitting start!"
In what way Latino?
"BH want sensible BoD that make sensible decisions and not in pocket of shareholders"
Can't argue with that, only problem is it isn't this BOD who are in pocket of Bond Holders!
"Stephen robins talking at present and he unfortunately seems quite persuasive in his motions. He is reiterating that a change to the deal would be highly speculative and that a high court judge may not be best placed to evaluate such."
Cheeky b*gger, a tad worrying though I must say.
Going our way would you say?
Cheers Oil_Beast, keep em coming:-)
Anyone.
"Would be turkeys voting for Xmas - against their own commercial interests"
I used exactly the same words and argument on here a few weeks back. I wonder if the Judge has been reading this BB?
"but they just been handed an unbelievable deal...hence supporting it."
Latino - Sorry to be a bit dense here but what 'unbelievable deal' ? Could you clarify for me please?
"Term is not an issue - plenty of flexibility and compromise available - surely that is what negotiation and business deals are all about - it makes the business world "go-round"
Yup - BOD have to go and I hope someone asks about large shareholder having some / greater interest in Bonds, I'd really like to see this point clarified.
Has anyone asked about large share holder being a Bond holder or owning Bonds via a third party etc?
Has anyone asked about vested interests, namely large share holder being a Bond holder?
Well when are the Bonds due and what would change if the B_Holders have to wait and sit things out?
For a company that has no future according to its own BOD, having a future work program lined up does seem rather at odds with the narrative wouldn't you agree?
How would you rate how its gone so far for us share holders?
Does major share holder have any direct or indirect financial interest in Bonds?