Member Info for Blubay

"Bigger question is why we still so far from 0.15p placing when producing"

I think because the company is currently still operating at a financial loss overall, and therefore still at significant risk, albeit with one opportunity to correct that (although the well is covering it's own costs it isn't covering corporate costs).

"I'm speaking factually based on years of experience."

Says the man who turned up here out of the blue claiming to have zero knowledge of shares and trading

Apart from the company brokers, Cantor Fitzgerald is the obvious corporate finance actor involved. They have an O&G investment division that was established by Sarah Cope when she was employed there previously. No conflicts of interest of course ;-)

I don’t understand how you can be bothered about one RNS and ignore others Coco. You know Tai is not dead, you know it’s been cased to go back and drill deeper, you know why they couldn’t do that straight away, and why they moved to drill Itumbula first. Keep up.

Has Joe's account just disappeared?

Why do you think that the spud date is not going to be early January? I'm interested in evidence rather than short speculation, if possible.

You’re talking nonsense Coco

That’s nonsense Joe, it makes not the slightest difference to the bottom line if you trade in one account or two

Follow the money… why Cantor Fitzgerald… and which former AIM NOMAD previously developed their oil and gas investment franchise… ;-)

Fingerprints all over it but names unlikely to appear on a TR1

If all goes to plan, then think my interim valuation target would be 0.5p and see where a revised business strategy can then steer market confidence from there

They can name their price because they know the company is over a barrel, more finance or bust. As the broker in this case happens to be also the company's regulatory advisor (different different desks in the same office) they can pretty much dictate how much they can raise, at what price, and how they communicate about it. If you take into account that the NOMADs/brokers on AIM have been really starved this year due to lack of new listing placements, and this particular one just reported it's first ever annual loss, you can see why such institutions might be particularly hungry to fleece their existing client companies even harder than usual at the moment.

The date period from 5 December RNS up to the formal admission of shares on 28 December also allows all the numbers to be reconciled within one single month accounting period.

No doubt, at least from 2p on announcement of the funding need to the placement at 0.25p (but similarly from 10p down to the 6p placement).

I'd need four bags to dig myself out of this hole, which would be something at least

Results RNS = 2,420,842,500 new ordinary shares + 25,708,500 Fee Shares

Revised RNS = 2,420,842,500 Fundraise Shares + 25,078,500 Fee Shares (just a typo)

I do them a disservice, the discrepancy is much smaller :-)

Funny how the NOMAD was so meticulous in forcing a pre-announcement of fundraise and missed proof reading the number of shares issued in the placement result

...waited until markets closed to RNS the omission of 25m more shares from the total (although to be fair they were in the prospectus)

I would manage expectations and calibrate well below 900bopd, that's just a reasonable best case, it will be lower. Let's see if they can get to 250 first, and hope for 500. If it's 750 or more then great.