Member Info for aligator

It is quite evident to me that there is a leak within IOG as this is can be the only explanation of the share price declining ahead of subsequent negative announcements. I sincerely hope that AH and colleagues are doing all they can to locate this source and remove it.
There has been radio silence since the Operational Update dated 1 June On 23 May, when the company stated "As previously indicated, modification of the second compressor is expected to take approximately one further week. This will then enable Saturn Banks production to be gradually restored to its prior stabilised levels of 55-65 mmscf/d over the following weeks." It is now almost 2 weeks since that announcement and we have heard nothing. Yes, this has not been unusual for this underperforming BoD to fail to meet deadlines but, this time, I have a creeping foreboding that more bad news is on the way. I am not being pessimistic, just realistic and sincerely hope I am wrong.

Wolster, My view is that the MM's have, like us, seen too many hiccups in the past 2 years to immediately react to such news. However, I am now hoping that demand for the stock will increase over the next few days/weeks leading to a gradual recovery of the sp in parallel. That said, I don't have a target price in mind simply because my and other posters' thinking has, so often, been shot down in flames by various events. I will of course be happy to see the sp back in the 30's, very happy to see it in the 40's and delirious to see it in the 50's. Should 66-80p be achieved you will hear me yelling from my rooftop...

scored, are you on the rights board with this message?

Curator, Blythe/Elgood have just started production and are currently shut in while problems at Bacton are resolved and Southwark is not due to commence production until Q4. So I would sincerely hope that decommissioning is quite a way off. Further, as I read it, tax relief from qualifying expenditure will almost double so, on the basis that development expenditure remains a qualifying expenditure, IOG should not be faced with significant Energy Profits Levy for some time. Has anyone done any figures on expenditure v income from fully producing Blythe. Elgood and Southwark fields?

For those of us long term investors, this news and the sp reaction simply creates even more disbelief and frustration. I am not technically minded, but surely IOG would have requested that PUK prove the adequacy of the receiving facilities in parallel to the refurbishment of the pipeline?
Of course, the BoD will seek to imply that the fault is someone else's but the reality is that there have simply been too many problems with the phase 1 development, comparative to other companies/developments, to allow the directors/executive team to seek to imply that it is all someone else's fault.
I have said many times before, much to the disagreement of others, that Hockey and co need to go. I think this development is the straw which broke the camel's back.

If the 26p current share price confirms one thing it is that investors in this market are completely at the mercy of the MMs. The stark reality is that, notwithstanding the collective background, knowledge and experience of posters and their educated comments, predictions etc, this all counts for nothing when brokers/investment companies are able to manipulate the supply and demand factors by dropping or raising the share price to suit their own positions. It simply nullifies any attempt by honest investors to read a stock and trade accordingly. I don't have an answer or solution to the situation but it is nonetheless wrong that such behaviour is allowed to exist by the regulators.

Mole, my take on the LOG holding is that S&W should be partly aligned with our interests. They have a primary duty to maximise recovery for LCF's investors and, therefore, if they are doing their job correctly, will be interested in not only the short term but the medium term as well. Admittedly, they are not in for the long haul but will be aware of broker forecasts and future potential so it must be part of their thinking. I have no doubt that IOG is in contact with S&W and hopefully have sought to reach some form of agreement on the way forward. As other posters have said, it is the IIs who are the potential spanner in the wheel. I could only see S&W aligning itself to an II if it was convinced this would lead to a bid at a price appropriately north of the current figure.

gg, As you note, IOG has no control over who buys and sells its shares, or at what price. That said, the continued silence from the company in the face of the the price decline since first gas either suggests that it is not in close contact with the IIs (albeit must be in contact with the LOG administrator) or has little idea how it might go about correcting the situation if such sell offs are replicated going forward.
What this share needs is a statement from somewhere which gives the shareholders confidence, if not optimism, about the future. Sadly, IOG does not appear capable of doing this which just heaps more questions on the BoD.

scored, hats off to you for predicting the 27p level over a week ago. I am not a market expert so not in a position to comment professionally on what is happening to the sp. That said, I have consistently claimed that the MMs and, possibly, the IIs have and continue to collude to manipulate the market for their own advantage. Given the known facts on past occasions and currently (first gas achieved, significant cash flow accumulating to the company, Southwark drilling underway and prospect of high gas prices for some time) there is simply no other logical explanation for the sp declines.
Let's hope this saga is now behind us and your 33p target is achieved this week.

ggits, Thanks for the clarification. I was personally hoping that 27p would be a relative floor but still shocked at the price drop since first gas (40%), exacerbated by yesterday's global equity selloff. With regards to a bid, I am assuming that S&W would be aligned to the expectations of other shareholders, albeit the large IIs are the potential spanner in the wheel, so LO's recent buying and TR1 has me slightly nervous.

Total silence from IOG suggests that the BoD are like rabbits caught in the headlights of a car. That said, could it be that, given the LOG administrator is aligned with shareholders in most respects and in view of the events of the past week, we might see some form of statement from S&W in the near future.

...is deafening and speaks volumes about its attitude towards its shareholders.

Enough said I think.

Wolster, Interesting thought. That said, any such activity would still require market manipulation by more than one institution. That is completely against the concept of laissez-faire and the regulations of the London Stock Exchange.

Peak, Not a hobby horse but a quest. I think, like you and me, most posters/professional investors will agree that there is simply no reason for the share price to be where it is given current production, development drilling, high gas prices for the foreseeable future etc, etc. The only logical conclusion is that the market is being manipulated by those that are most able to influence it and profit therefrom - i.e. the MMs (dunderhead, irrespective of whether they are hedge funds or brokerage houses). It would appear to me that this situation is not only acknowledged in AIM but has been allowed to continue for reasons beyond me. However, market manipulation is unfair, regulatory busting and illegal and those responsible for market oversight/regulation need to be brought to book for ignoring conduct which has no doubt caused losses to thousands of investors, which has ultimately boosted the profits of these perpetrators.

dunderhead, My crusade here (as futile as it sounds) is to achieve a share price which reflects the NAV of the company's assets. When you consider that Blythe and Elgood are now producing into a high price market, Southwark drilling is underway, the gas situation looks as if it is going to last for some time and the company is netting cash flow of ca £1m per day, the issue of the LOG overhang sort of becomes less important. However, we have a share price, almost 25% down from the first gas achievements and trading at a discount to broker targets of over 50%. How can the company be so undervalued if its share price is not being manipulated by MM's - be they hedge funds or brokerage houses? We all know that these institutions are anything but leak proof but what is clearly happening here is a concerted, collaborative action by them to hold the price down for their own trading purposes. This is illegal.

dunderhead, I am hard pressed to conclude that 33p is the result of the natural equilibrium garnered by the MMs, not least given broker target prices and the fact that the price was 36% higher following the announcement of first gas. MMs may supply the liquidity in such markets but no one is going to convince me that the current sp is not the result of manipulation by a few of their kind to suit their own books. It is shameful.

Finding it hard to fathom how the 6.25% decline in the sp so far this morning is down to the LOG overhang. There has been no new information and only modest trading. On the basis that any MM's "isolated" bid/offer prices would be primarily based on its assessment of risk/reward and supply/demand, one can only shake one's head in trying to understand how just any one broker's actions could translate into a 6.25% loss in value. Unless of course, this is the result of a "coordinated and harmonised approach" by MMs in general to manipulate the market for own benefit. Totally illegal but I suspect it goes on unchecked because so many people in the upper echelons of the London stock exchange and further abroad have their snouts in the trough.

Manofnomeans, I have long given up trying to interpret/predict/project this share price. I have little to no idea of the current NPV/NAV of Blythe/Elgood, Southwark or the other fields to be developed (any estimates welcome) but presume them to be significantly higher than the original core project projections contained in the FDP. The brokers estimate an equivalent sp of 66-80p which I would have considered modest a few weeks ago when gas prices rocketed. The fact, therefore, is that a sp of ca 35p is, as you say, a gross undervaluation of the company and a situation wholly manufactured by the MMs - that said, slightly influenced by the large shareholdings of the LOG administrator and a few IIs.
When you think about it, this is not just a wholly unacceptable situation, but has to be bordering on illegal. How a group of broking/investment companies can be allowed to influence and manipulate a market which is supposed to be based on the laissez-faire principle, is simply beyond me but it is clearly a scenario which the authorities have allowed to continue and, indeed, appear willing to brazenly ignore the regulations for which they are responsible. In essence, you could not make it up. Small experienced investors like us can undertake whatever risk analysis we feel relevant and derive underlying corporate values but it means absolutely nothing when these institutions are capable of moving a market in order to line their own pockets. It is shameful and time for the authorities, if not the government, to bring about much needed order.
Rant over.....

Cannot say I was impressed by the slides or the what appears to have been discussed at the meeting (I was abroad unfortunately). Clearly the LOG overhang and persistent selling is going to cause ongoing pain to the sp and I was rather hoping that the BoD might have presented some thoughts about the way forward in order to eliminate this situation. However, in the absence of any confirmation of contact with either the LOG administrator or BH I guess it looks as if the situation will rumble on for the foreseeable future. As someone noted, the existence of the large II holdings does put us in peril of a cheap takeover bid and LOG merely exacerbates the situation.
Peak, I think the evidence is not only present but quite clear that previous negativity by posters has been justified. Indeed, you yourself have previously commented on the company's lamentable PR/media activities and even ggits has commented on this specific shortcoming. Sadly, I do not believe that, collectively, the BoD/senior management team has the right skills, background and experience to take the company forward and would openly question the role and contribution of the Chair and the NEDs.