Member Info for bluerill

Hard to believe - but then, given how long the BATM share price has gone stuck in treacle, maybe it isn't - but as much as 12% of the company turned over yesterday. We don't know the exact total and some or all of it may have been double counted, but the trades were confirmed to be genuine so we are likely looking at RNSs of a major reduction and another disclosing a new material shareholder or a significant increase for an existing one. For now, as always sadly, the market is completely nonplussed about it all (obviously some in the market know the identities of the 2 sides of the trades), but I still think there's scope for a genuine surprise later today (TR-1 RNSs have a habit of dropping intra-day) or Monday.

If you want to understand how strong sle's claim is here (and - hint, hint - start to appreciate how sle has likely ALREADY advanced that claim), READ THE BLOODY RE-ADMISSION DOCUMENT, and maybe retire your google-finger in the process once and for all, you dopey coward.

oh, and a quick P.S. to bs: The legal 'opinion' link provided by this board's r*cist parasite regarding Bridgewater was in fact, redundant and therefore meaningless, as was quickly pointed out by others, yet you once again went out of your way to try and signal-boost it, no matter how transparent the intent or odious the source. You are an irredeemable coward who's only interested to soothing your wounded ego while trying to maintain the appearance of a legitimate contributor. Oh yeah, and you really suck at it because you're kind of a moron. So there's that.....

Yes, that's certainly true.

Yes I know, hector, that's why I mentioned it. Maybe 'shelved' was a bit harsh but its also just as overly ambitious to describe it as a simple 'delay' to the end of March. The truth is that the deal has been in the works for a while so the 'delay' is more akin to a recognition that the original valuation being sought is very likely too high and the deal will have to be restructured.

Easy there, hector. That was a number being tossed around early on, but among other things, Boxable's SPAC/IPO has been shelved for now and I don't think anyone close to that deal thinks 3.5B is or was ever a realistic valuation, and in fact, their product - which is more a house-in-a-box and therefore not really a true comp for Eco - is apparently reasonably impressive. However, I certainly agree that even at a fraction of that mooted figure, ECOB looks awfully cheap down here, particularly after watching that wonderful video again.

Also, at the risk of being seen as his PR agent, here is another useful take from bluerill on the other board, which was part of a longer response to the resident troll over there:

'....This tiny, barely £17m company, is now clearly a key project manager and materials supplier to one of the region's biggest construction companies in building out a major luxury complex 45 minutes from the Albanian capital, barely a year removed from finally getting its single production line up and running. That is an objectively big deal, one that the market is understandably skeptical of due to Eco's history of disappointments, but which the last several months of newsflow is slowly reversing, producing a 5x recovery in the share price price and some genuinely earned excitement. Yet you seem clearly set on doing anything you can - up to and including producing the most bone-headed theories and outright fabrications - to sh*t on that enthusiasm. Why, I'm not quite sure, but when dealing with someone as intellectually corrupted as you, that's almost always a wasted effort...'

I guess I understand the market's skepticism, but as echoridge just wrote on the other board, this project is 'proof of concept' from the Company to potential partners and customers around the world, showing off not just the Company's building materials but also - as Eco is also project manager here - a 'how to' in putting up the buildings themselves. It's not just about economics, and belies Eco's still very modest enterprise value!

Also, there are his comments about the significance of the project itself:

'...Reviewing the video embedded in the RNS again. Notice the focus on the 'Rolling Hills' billboard in the background, which is likely the luxury development referenced in the RNS. Here's a link to what the Company's previously mentioned partner, the Balfin Group, is up to with this development. In short, this is a genuinely upmarket project where one shareholder tells me property is going for at around E7k/sq m, which would put the average flat at around E700k...' :

hxxps://balfinrealestate.com/rolling-hills-by-the-lake/

Https://www.thetimes.com/article/c1127b95-52b0-477a-8f12-02de4e758e29?shareToken=89d192380d3571ad662b0bc037adf708

What was it you snarked at me, gtsd? Oh yeah, 'Like to see you talk your way out of this one....'

Couple highlights:

'....In the past few weeks, however, events have accelerated, even by San Leon’s standard. First, the company says it is closing in on a fundraising of up to $300 million that would wipe away its financial troubles and provide vital cash for opening up that lucrative exploration prospect..."

'....At the same time it has swooped in to take a significantly larger stake in the oilfield by purchasing shares in one of the companies that forms part of the complex ownership structure of the oilfield. That carves out for it an even larger potential slice of those future revenues...'

'....That is largely based on about $400 million San Leon is owed, which is reflected on the balance sheet and “would have been clear to see by the judge, if the lawyers had been asked for this...'

'....While the injunction has been lifted, it does not necessarily follow that the company will immediately file to have San Leon wound up. After all, as Justice Kennedy noted, it has shown significant forbearance in the past and might well be happy for the gun to sit on the table while it waits for Fanning to announce whether he has finally secured the financing....'

'....The Sunday Times has seen documents [WONDER WHO COULD HAVE SHOWN THEM THAT??] that show San Leon has taken a substantially larger stake in the OML 18 oil and gasfield, by exercising its right to shares under the provisions of a loan note from 2016....'

'....The owners of Eroton are, broadly speaking, San Leon and another company, Midwestern Oil & Gas...' [IMAGINE THAT]

'....which now gives it [SAN LEON] a 50 per cent stake in Eroton — or, to put it another way, a 15 per cent indirect stake in OML...'

This is the first time I can remember that so much of the bulk of this crucial information has been made public in a legitimate publication until now, but much of it, particularly the final 3 points, would have been made apparent to anyone who bothered TO READ THE RE-ADMISSION DOCUMENT! Sure, there are still hurdles to clear, but at least now this board can be left to debate from a platform of relevant issues, real assets and genuine economics instead of the constant stream of ominous distractions and irrelevant trivia pouring out of the clown car all the time.

Happy days, bs. This filthy little pustule just insulted Sam and me, so you can jump out the clown car again and laud him for his genius, right? And his spelling. You must be so proud to have such honourable allies....

I can't remember for certain, but I'm sure I've addressed this relative non-issue already, but the lady persists, so here we go again: first off, tbc, this IS NOT any kind of financial judgement against sle, despite some superfluous, colourful language in the decision around the company's solvency, etc., and gtjd's spectacularly disingenuous and dishonest comments ("....So pleased that BW won this one and in the hometown backyard. They, like many other creditors, have spent a ton of money chasing this. Looks like the winding up petition of SLE PLC can now be advertised let proceedings begin...." OM-f-ing-G. Again? Really?!?). This is simply a judge's denial of sle's request for an INJUNCTION against what they (and every lawyer who looks at this) feel is an entirely frivolous claim against sle. That's all; nothing else contained - no matter how ominous some may want to make it sound - has the force of law). There is no 'victory' here of any financial consequence, and certainly no 'winding up order' to be announced, not least bc, as Red patiently explained, 'BW's claim (btw gtsd, I love the cringey attempt to try and imply you're chummy with them by using their initials. Nice touch), is against Eli as San Leon have never had any contract with them and is thus very very unlikely to 'win' this nutty suit no matter the superfluous language in the filing, and never mind the lifetime still ahead of everyone in court with the inevitable appeal.

What we have therefore - and part of me honestly cannot believe I have to do this again after all the previous dumbf*ckery foisted on us by this confederacy of dunces - is yet another example of the intentional, malign distortion of 'news' that contains just enough nasty-looking language like 'insolvent' that is guaranteed to shock and concern genuine shareholders here who may not have the time to do anything but a cursory review of a villain's post.

I've now spent a non-negligible amount of my life carefully curating for readers the other, very similar-sounding instances of this phoney's intentional misrepresentations of various events in order for him to try and 'back' - every single time - some kind of dramatic, existential conclusion that is severely adverse to sle (that of course never emerges). And what do I get back from them for this effort? Crickets. That is until the next time some 'news' breaks, and they all suddenly reappear and spill out all over this board, like the passengers in some kind of digital clown car, vomiting out nonsense and ad hominhems indiscriminately, for reasons, as I've said, I cannot fully fathom.

Finally, a quick P.S. shout-out to our resident coward: BS - I closed my eyes and tried to visualise your lovely message to me and it very nearly brought to mind Stephen Frye reciting Tennyson at the Albert Hall, the prose was so well crafted...Do us all a favour, mate: take a time out and read the re-admission document and stop hanging out with the wrong people. Not healthy

What we absolutely don't need is any kind of primer from you on what we need, coward. I'm not going to let even the tiniest attempt to sideswipe me with faint praise or convenient misrepresentations of your past behaviour anymore, bs. You have consistently signal-boosted a variety of bad actors and genuine rogues and have stubbornly refused to condemn or correct any of them, not least the most objectively r**ist poster I have ever encountered on this or any business chat board. And for what? Because you need to feel you have allies when I'm mean to you.

You have exactly one role here from now on: download the re-admission document and study the corporate structure that will determine whether and how SLE is able to re-emerge from this suspension/de-listing nightmare and then come back with thoughts or questions. Otherwise step away from your bloody keyboard and spare everyone here another second of your dusty information and 3rd derivative insights.

Last public comment on the litigation that I recall from the company or winny, we were led to hope for/expect some kind of progress around Q1 this year. And while I have explained in a number of posts here or on the other board some months ago that the re-admission document is clear that Eco shareholders would be eligible for around 25% of any net proceeds after the litigation funder is paid, I'm also not especially bullish of a successful outcome and/or a substantial payout if we do succeed. But hey ho, we can hope, right?

Those are the only 2 choices?!? Neither frankly. The highs the sp took out during the rush of news was nearly 10x the lows and clearly a dramatic overreaction (for now), so measuring from 28p is unrealistic. The sp was always going to settle around the low 20s, and we have certainly drifted off from there on no new news. However, there is decent buying around here for now, which is still 4/5x the lows and a reflection of interest in not just the next development to emerge, but also on the back of a rapidly improving macro backdrop in the developed world (e.g., see Trump's latest government overreach, this time in the housing markets in threatening hedge funds from buying up private houses).

Pizza - maybe take a moment to consider that there seems to be a reliably inverse correlation on this board between the relevance of certain misinformation/trivia merchant's content and the quality of its presentation. Then I suggest you scrunch up your face and power through. My posts are worth the effort.

'.....may even require a small fundraise at some point....'

I appreciate the spirit of your comments, LL, but for the record, I think its pretty clear that I was describing the 'risk' of a fundraise much more aligned with how you described it and not that its 'likely' and certainly not 'inevitable'. Regardless however, I don't really care. If they decide to do small raise to further advance Albania or Chile to meet increased demand, etc - if Senegal is further delayed or even if they want to raise funds in addition to Senegal - or another project emerges that is attractive enough to warrant meeting a very tight timetable of a new partner, or any other reasonable demand, I am, in principal, not at all concerned. In fact, in that type of scenario - carefully articulated by the company - I would welcome it. As long as the company - any company - can demonstrate that the return on the capital raised will exceed the cost of that capital, then the theory goes, there is no 'dilution'. Now I appreciate that you are using 'dilution' more colloquially, and you are steeped in the pain of AIM of the last 5 years around equity raises generally, but firstly, with the FTSE now over 10k, I believe the horrible AIM era is over and small shareholders need to realise that and alter their behaviour accordingly (more on that another time) but more importantly, ECOB's business model is so flexible and the product so in demand, that I'm increasingly confident that management can persuade the market on specific opportunities sufficiently well that the sp can and will rally on such targeted raises.

Sam - while I wouldn't use such florid language to describe anyone except the r**ist poster here who has thankfully slunk back into obscurity, the constant drumbeat of misinformation out of gtjd - and then the inevitable reinforcement from the spineless one - and his stubborn refusal to acknowledge any of it after I debunk it, and instead, to just forge ahead to his next bogus module presented under the rubric of 'I'm on the ground here in country, so trust me....', is certainly getting exceedingly boring. gtjd has bounced from existential risk claims about multiple court cases which have turned out to have been of little or no consequence (remember the 'Ocean Pearl Case' and Petrolex 'end-of-times' scenarios? I do), to nonsense about how the German bond market works and how it would affect the Company's potential position (remember gtjd's insistence that weakness in the German economy would impact sle's borrowing position?!? I do), to his constant, ominous invocation of 'AMCOM' and how that distressed debt fund had likely ALREADY bought SLE bank debt off of GT Band at distressed prices and was about to foreclose, even though the GT cannot (and obviously has not) even sell debt off their books unless and until those loans are sufficiently in arrears. Instead of providing evidence that GT had indeed designated SLE debt as distressed and that AMCOM was 'ready to pounce', he simply ASSERTED the latter so that he could ASSUME the former, as devious and corrupt an argument as is possible in that space (ironically, because there has in fact been NO evidence at all of any reclassification of sle debt at GT Bank, we can fairly assume the very opposite is true! ie., that sle's debt is CURRENT and the most likely reason for THAT would be, as Redeye suggested a few days ago, because Midwestern has in fact paid off some/all of the principal owed to sle. Oooooops....But I digress...). Remember all that gtjd? I think the last time I painstakingly pointed out your miserable record of hysterical exaggerations and misinformation, you tried to deflect and accused me of being juiced-up on stimulants and then nitpicking at your every word (believe me, the very last thing anyone would willingly choose to do). If you don't recall any of that, fortunately for real shareholders, I do and, despite your constant, flaccid attempts to dismiss and/or insult me (and then return to your bogus, sickly sweet rhetoric as if i will forget your comically undeserved smugness), I will continue to remind you and this board of those spectacular own goals unless and until you either acknowledge them, go and read the re-admission document and come back contrite and ready to ask real questions related to relevant issues, or you simply disappear back into the ether you emerged from. Either way, everyone benefits except of course bs, who loses his favourite bosom to retreat to in order to salve his bruised ego.

Gtjb - first off, spare me the phoney bonhomie. I haven't forgotten your past comments and misinformation. You remain a highly suspect interlocutor In a nutshell, your post is your usual mixture of reality-adjacent factoids, and complete gibberish. If you would go back to the re-admission documents - for the love of god, go back and read the document - you would see the whole banana is SLE/Midwestern's 60/40 joint ownership in Martwestern, which in itself holds some 30% of Eroton, which stands behind the c170m loans mentioned. While perhaps principle payments have been made as you (kinda) mentioned, significant interest and penalties likely remain outstanding and therefore Midwestern's 60% of Martwestern is clearly at risk, if it hasn't been forfeit already. Meantime, though Eroton is now a private company, the next time you and your cohorts are doing 'DD' you might tap a couple of your 'local contacts in Nigeria' on the shoulder and ask how much Martwestern's stake in the company might be worth to San Leon, and then come back and report.

bs - aside from trying to once again signal-boost a poster of dubious origin and intentions, you and your childish attempts to sideswipe me in order to try and sooth your bruised ego, are getting tiresome. Stay down.

Read the document thoroughly, you stubborn nabob. gtjd was spectacularly offside

Ding, ding, ding, and we have a winner!!! Thank-you Redeye. Finally.

This is largely why I have been begging this board - especially it's self-appointed google 'journalists' who only ever seem to 'uncover' issues which are not just largely trivial (e.g., personal lawsuits, the umpteenth article on government corruption, anything appearing in long-since debunked Nigerian on-line 'newspapers'), but (shock!) consistently negative - to go back and read something truly relevant: the original re-admission document. I have always known that just having me repost that information would never have the impact of another, genuine poster here - no matter how I might feel about some of them - doing it instead. So, while I would have preferred bs or one of his dopier allies to have finally listened and done the work instead of a legit analyst like you Red, I'll take it. The next step is for anyone interested in what's truly relevant for the immediate fortunes of this company to continue Red's great work and try and divine what foreclosure on that unpaid MLPL debt might mean for SLE in terms of asset seizures and then maybe we can ask the board's googler-in-chief to do one of his periodic updates on Eroton's current fortunes for some useful background, and then we may finally be able to have a crack at clearing much of the misinformation and mindless speculation that has clogged up this board for the past few years. HNY indeed....

User - Echoridge on the other board is by far the most knowledgeable poster on this name and he addressed this the other day:

"....You're spot on, ss. They can certainly use the dough sooner rather than later, but given how undemanding the current valuation (ie, the market remains skeptical of the growing order book), the Company's NOMAD would have demanded this update along with credible evidence for the payment delay and commensurately, of an expected February arrival. Frankly, I'm relieved on balance as I was afraid that no comment on the matter through December meant the contract may have been cancelled altogether. With that said, a vetted RNS which not just confirms the deal remains active, but that the initial deposit is only 6 weeks delayed - particularly on a contract which is far from a core part of the order book - is in fact, pretty reassuring...."

This matches my own view. Yes, a delay in much-needed cash is unwelcome and may even require a small fundraise at some point to make sure the company can maintain their current momentum and deliver on recent orders, but the most important thing to appreciate here is that the market is not valuing any of these recent wins at all. We're capped at less than 20m quid (with little or no long term debt btw, making our EV around the same amount) at the moment. Sure, that's like 5/6x from the lows but it is still near-nothing relative to the potential of just the business growth in Albania alone, never mind the enormity of a E400m+ revenues-over-the-next-5yrs order in Chile. None of that is in the share price yet, and certainly not smaller, but still potentially wildly profitable smaller deals in Senegal, Sudan, etc.

And the reason for this severe undervaluation? Clearly it is skepticism based largely on ECO's difficult history of underestimating engineering and production delays in getting the factory in Duress operational, poor judgement on very early orders combined with overenthusiastic communications and then not adequately addressing those missteps with the market. Again, I agree with Echo: This Senegal RNS is more a positive reflection of a company trying to do better, overseen by a NOMAD who is being more diligent, and is addressing a promise on a non-core order which is credibly seen by management as delayed, not denied, and I believe that's why - particularly in light of an enterprise value that barely registers - the market sees the positives here as well the downside, and the share price hardly fell.

You know you're not allowed to address me directly until you show you've done your assigned reading, bs. Read the re-admission document and come back with some relevant questions about Mid- and Martwestern, Eroton ownership, etc, and then maybe you can share a new, dopey comment in - I assume - some cringe, obtuse attempt at humour.