Member Info for belisce6

Wellll.. i am trying to understand when those numerois neighbouring brazilian drills are supposed to happen..

Shell will be doing their 2 sthern namibian wells now.. so if any success it might have a smallish positive effect on char with its 10% backin option on a sthern namibian tenement..

Would be good to understand the actual cash saved from forecast prospect s cost to actual cost, seeing the whole operation will take less than half the time that was planned for...

Anyone have any idea when those neighbouring brazilian drills will get rolling ?
I guess that in namibia if shell gets something half decent.. down sth.. it may give the char sp a little kick upwards due to their 10% backin rights in the sthern namibian tenement..

Kindof strange.. i doubt that moderators took it off so quickly.. must have been the poster him/herself ??

What did this Grants charakter say ?

It actually finished at 8p or so.. Just look at the last trade..

CrudeTrader, Yes.. i agree.. they should farmdown some in order to preserve cash for potential prospect s failure.. We shall se how it goes...

Farming down to 20 to 25% net now is best for preserving current cash on a failure scenario.. It would still leave circa 100mmbo plus on a success case.. I was hoping they would do the farmout before results of first well are known.. Farming out after a success of first well to cover second well costs, would be silly.. cos they could easily capital raise at much much higher levels or do a roghts issue to very happy holders... Either way.. it does appear a bit strange now.. in regards to farmout.. there doesnt appear to be much reason for it to not have been done if it was going to be completed for prospect s... i imagine they wouldve told us that theyre in final talks stage.. but nothing so far... Looks like its a roll of the dice on the prospect s having oil :-)))

Does anyone believe there will be a farmout any more ?? Just asking. :-)))

Well the loan term sheet is contingent on 100mill service contract and shorecan bringing another 66% of the final trafigura loan amount (either 20 to 33mill or so).. Therefore i would think that the loan can only be closed off AFTER official service contract is delivered.. At that time.. would expect 2p levels...

Jimarillo.. Its a tough one either way.. Would expect that either they are now post-trading halt, drilling into the cormorant and so pcl decided due to the materiality of the situation, to go in trading halt and wait for the outcome.. OR.. theyve drilled right thru and it looks to be a duster.. The terminology in the announcement doesnt pursuade it either way.. cos although it says "results of drilling" it could be interpreted as though the drilling is almost at conclusion.. this wouldnt be good.. too fast.. usually means duster.. Nevertheless.. char is hobbling close to lows again, so on merit of its own prospect its worth getting in..

Haha.. Being silly.. in fact.. sometimes.. does take balls :-)) Afterall i got my stash at average 0.35 And getting into copl these days is rather silly.. :-))

Guys there is nothing at all in the document that indicates the level rises from max needed 3.5 or so pence to triple that and triple again..

It clearly states the start point as Performance Rights Allocation Price being the 60 day vwap before Rights issue(=15th october).. this would be 1.2p
There is nothing indicating that the next yrs base level will be triple the previous yr.. nothing at all can be interpreted in the document as such..

The rising element is part of the performance test..
It is done each yr for 3yrs..
It is comparing 60day vwaps over that yr with respect to the Performance Rights Allocation Price..

The Performance Allocation Price is only determined once... the document does not indicate anywhere that it changes after yr 1 or after yr2..
So the 1.2p level is the one used each yr to determine if at least 50% to 200% of that level has occurred on 60day vwap..
Ie; max needed each yr is only 3.6p...

Coòpz

Why do you use 3.45p as start for yr 2?
Why do you use 10.35p as start for yr 3?
This is completely wrong..

This does not change at all..

The start is 1.2p
Performance Rights Allocation Price..
It is in the formula which is used every yr independantly..
It is only determined once.. 60day vwap before 15th october..

There is NOTHING in the documemt that indicates the 3.5p level rising each yr cumulatively... sorry.. but thus is wrong...

1.2p is the start figure.
At 1st then at 2nd then at 3rd anniversary; ie 15th october each yr..
The rising table is measured against 1.2p...
And if the sp is 50 to 200% higher than Performance Rights Allocation Price (which is only ever determined once) then the CASH or shares are awarded..
200% is the 3.6p level..
When this calculation is repeated every yr.. basically the bar is only ever as high as 3.6p

Not the ongoing cumulative rises which some of you are stating...

Guys..
I thought MrMartini reported back after the presentation..
Unless my memory is bad, he asked DW and got confirmed it meant 6.3cent over the 3 yrs..
Which unfortunately means equates to the flat 3.5p over each yr..

It is true that it is rising.. but NOT from 3.5p at all..

The start is like 1.2p or so.. the Performance Rights Allocation Price=60day vwap before 15th october..
This part never changes..
Yes each tranche is calculated independantly.. but the 1.2p level above never changes.. it is only determined once...
Nothing in the document states anything that directly indicates that the start point changes .

Nothing of what any of you wrote indicates that it does.. unfortunately..

This 1.2p level only has to go up 50% to 200% then DW gets something and it can be CASH.. meaning it can very likely NOT be aligning him with shareholders in this sense...

So unfortunately it is very clear that it is a flatish level of 3.5 or 3.6p each yr which will be the bar for DW to get his yearly 6.4mill equivalent shares in CASH or shares...

I am aware of the Resources and Reserves tranches..
They are strange in that apart from winx virtually nothing until 2020 with the drill.. for resources stated 400mmbo they will need discovery drills tied with 3d.. it can only be acheived across 2 to 3 projects being successful..
The reserves figure will need multiwell longerterm flowtests meaning hrz is best candidate for that one.. but without definite hrz farmout and without definite committed wells who knows whether this would even happen within the three years...

So for me it is rather strange that the incentive program is what clearly appears to be for 3.6p bar in each year for the majority of the program... while the other minor parts will be very difficult to achieve in that time...

I believe this effectively leaves longterm holders open to a potential serious shafting...
Because based on this incentive package for DW... then he can easily maintain the 3.6p bar over those years and hit those other targets by diluting the hell out of the shares on issue over the nxt two or three yrs...

In fact this is why i donot understand why all the longterm holders are not concerned at all...

With the assets at hand the sp targets should be much higher..
DW is obviously not having an easy time with farmout.
There msy be no reason to state that he is fantastic at raising cash but he has never done a farmout in his life... not at this magnitude..
It doesnt mean he cant pull this off.. but if this program was presented for approval after at least one farmout then the risk of there being no actual completed farmouts but just further cash raisings would go away...

Which ever way i look at it.. i donot understand why such a low sp bar for incentive program nor why all longterm holders are not concerned..
I believe it is so concerning that one should be voting NO so that they present later.. after a completed farmout perhaps or raise the

Mickey, lemajor, brombarb, jiddy..

You guys ok with the bar being ONLY 3.6p for the nxt 3yrs ??
You are aware that is the incentive bar for DWs performance CASH or shares rewards over the nxt 3 yrs ??

HarryGatto..
Posters have placed opinions..
I havent received response from anyone stating why 3.6p level is an acceptable bar for 2019, 2020 and 2021.. none at all..
Unfortunately just silly remarks..

I do not question what the document infers..
Effectively a 3.6p bar across the three upcoming years..

I am happy with what i read being reality..
There is nothing at all there to suggest otherwise..
Therecis no need for me to call DW and ask whether something exists that is NOT written in the document .
It seems clear to me..

If someone else can explain any other numbers using the document directly then feel free to.

Amnesic.. will you still be voting yes ??
Are you able to tell me why?
Considering such a low sp bar for the nxt 3yrs ??
I donot wish to be proverbially shafted by this sort of incentive program.. so i am posting here about it hoping other longterm 88e genuine holders can either prove me wrong, or explain why such a low sp level would be good, considering a holder of 88e securities can only get decent return the higher and higher the sp is.. and NOT just above 3.6p over course of 3yrs...

Funny thing is..
15october as the Performance Rights Issue date upon approval, means the performance term begins from that day..
The Performance Allocation Price is determined on 60day vwap leading up to it...
So the 60days up to 15th october.. roughly 15th august to 14th october..
The current period we are in..
So 1.15 or 1.2p ish is the base for each years calculation..
Cos this Performance Allocation Price does not change..
Nothing in the documents neither states that itll change nor can be interpreted as such...
Triple this value is 3.5 to 3.6p.. ie; the bar for 2019, 2020 and 2021..

If i am not wrong..
That means it is in DWs personal vested interest, for the sp level to remain as low as possible over the roughly 15th august to 14th october period...

I was wondering why no RNS came out telling us that 3d seismic gives 88e .25bill prospective oil lift on icewine conventional..
That would have been a material market sensitive announcement probably pushing sp somewhat higher.
Maybe it will still happen..
I donot hold my breath though..

If i have anything whatsoever factually wrong.. as always.. i stand to be corrected :-)))

Each year on Vest Date (1st, 2nd, 3rd year anniversary of Performance Rights issue date) the performance calculation is made in relation to Performance Rights Allocation Price.. which is 60day vwap leading up to Performance Rights Issue date.. which should be the date of GM.. ie; upon approval the Performance rights are granted to DW for the max. 32mill shares performance plan..

The Performance Rights Issue date is a one time event..
The Performance Rights Allocation price will be the 60day vwap up to Performance Rights Issue Date. Ie; GM date which is 15 october..
So that one figure of probably 1.15 or 1.2p is used for performance calculation on each Vest Date anniversary...

Therefore it can only be 3.5 to 3.6p level as the bar each time over the 3 yrs...

There is nothing stating the start point changes after each yr...