Member Info for Blue-Eyes

They are still whittling on about it ad nauseum on twitter - specifically that in the RNS the company only offered an opinion that is was a certain type of ..... rather than a fact that it was

When I read the RNS the quote was "confident" so IMO it's a little stronger than " We think" which is the more normal preface for a subsequent "opinion"

Sigh

joesoap has been around for years - he makes alot of good observations. I always read his posts

As for HUR - let's just say it's been disappointing to see the sp action. I don't keep much in AIM shares anymore as least when they manipulate the FTSE100 stocks you can get in an out in the blink of an eye. I'd like to see the sp stabilise before I make a move. My small position here has plenty of wiggle room to add on the way up and still bring my average down considerably :))
GL though anyone feeling braver than me!

Excellent news it was a rubbish offer for CEY - short term traders will exit but better for LTH.

I think it's interesting when you go back and read the original financing RNS all the machinations over the CEO's financing, rewards etc. It's very complicated for a scam why not just offer a straightforward loan for 4.5% your arm would still be bitten off when you look at, for instance the rate on the Seplat loan. My point is was the CEO blinded and seduced by what the loan could do for him and forgot that his first duty is to the company itself (not even the shareholders).? The company advisors who looked through it and judged the terms to be fair to shareholders - were they similarly more concerned with making sure the CEO couldn't be accused of feathering his own nest?
I think that if this whole thing ends up being a case of naivety mixed with a little laissez -faire then he absolutely needs to do the honourable thing and fall on his sword,

I think people are entitled to examine what might be the outcomes here - I was trying to work out the odds of them getting that 600K back. The RNS states that QIA are questioning the validity of the agreement therefore the implication is that the issue is that end. So far LEK haven't said that they are questioning the validity of Seawave itself. Who knows but it doesn't hurt to discuss it amongst ourselves

You also have to question the "legal fees" one would assume that LEK's advisors were in on this as well

If they've been had over by Seawave as opposed to Seawave being had over then it implies a lack of due diligence by LEK. Luckily I only tipped a toe in after the pullback on that financing RNS but even so it's pretty poor

From Energy Voice
Thus far, Lekoil said it had paid out $600,000 as a good faith payment to Seawave Invest, which arranged the proposed QIA financing, and legal fees.

Seawave was to receive a fee and the counterparty was also to receive an upfront fee worth 2.75% of the amount drawn under the facility. This was to be payable on drawdown of the facility and no cash has been paid out under this.

The QIA financing had an annual interest rate payable of 3.72%, which is attractive among Lekoil’s peer groups. Seplat Petroleum, another Nigeria focused London listed company, has financing paying around 7.7% interest.

The question is were LEK conned by Seawave or Seawave conned by their introduction. If Seawave are legit then surely they just pay the introduction fee back?
I

Tend to agree with that - ultimately they have a fiduciary duty to protect the company funds. Time for the new NED to get to work.

Looks like I will be averaging up in a minute! Another thing I hate doing but if you see value.......................

Dipped a toe in the water. Remember these from a few years ago. Didn't buy then but like the backing they have now and the recent appts.. Always a little wary buying when the sp has advanced but taken in the context of the recent news still looks like exceptional value.

Thanks for the insight :) Happy Christmas all

I noticed that too - what was that all about!!!

Yeah I saw that. Gotta look after the hedge funds. Happy Christmas to you too :)

Nice strong finish - didn't get all the shares I planned but hey ho! Interesting to see what tomorrow brings :)

I think the idea was that Dave (if that's his real name) was being passed with more than just offload information, that's what I felt we were being implied.

Mix a bit of real with the other and it's a toxic concoction.

Bought a few over the past few days. Seems like a decent RR at these prices.

We all get dirty hands at some point:)) I'm not above taking a trade where I can see a quick return on the back of mindless ramping on a pile of junk with my gamble money (AIM is full of it atm) but my own rule is that I won't post on the board if I don't have a genuine more LT position. If he is short than it's been a decent call so far. I just couldn't see the point of this mornings post. I tend to do similar to you and rotate around a core holding. It's served me well so far over the years doing that but you have to accept the fact that at some point you may end up on the wrong side of it. I'm trying to add atm but frustrated by the spread and mystified how they somehow trade around an order left on the book without filling it time and time again.

Why would they we've only recently had interims. As an aside I for one believe they are chasing oil assets but to take this licence makes sense as they have to ability to take it out of round as it is adjacent to Rhum. It would be daft not to. It's not earth shattering but to knock it for a sensible move in light of what it does have is churlish.