Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video here.
and demand destruction is coming, control your joy at these crude prices.
Latest...from The Telegraph
Over 15 countries have called for a special meeting with the UN's shipping agency to discuss the safety of ships and their crews sailing through the Black Sea and Sea of Azov after Russia's invasion of Ukraine and growing dangers to vessels.
Many shipping firms have suspended sailings to affected Black Sea ports and other terminals in Ukraine. Insurance premiums for voyages have soared since Russia's invasion on February 24, an action Moscow calls a "special operation".
An Estonian-owned cargo ship sank on Thursday off Ukraine's major Black Sea port of Odessa, hours after a Bangladeshi vessel was hit by a missile or bomb at another port. This followed at least three other ships being hit by projectiles in recent days.
Australia, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Sweden, Turkey, Britain and the United States jointly called for the meeting, which is also backed by Ukraine, according to officials involved and a public document.
"We are in close contact with the captains of the Greek and Greek-owned vessels which have Greek crews sailing in the Black Sea," Greece's Shipping Minister Ioannis Plakiotakis said separately.
Appears also to apply to ship on the water.
Estonian-owned cargo ship Cargo ship sunk Thursday by mine in Ukrainian waters close to Odessa., near where Russian navy vessels are waiting.
Does Russia now "own" the Black Sea?
The downside to this crazy oil price is the sheer devastation will cause to economies. The few pennies dividend are already gone - swallowed by rapidly rising prices at the petrol pump, in the supermarkets and soon followed by huge jumps in inflation which will devastate many sectors of many economies.
It might give a nice glow at the moment as your GKP shares creep up but the price to be paid by everyone has still to be seen.
The more the Russians are forced into a corner the greater the risk of nuclear conflict.
How long can the West retain their "no boots on Ukraine soil" mantra?
Lest we forget...
None of these Laundromat Oligarchs could have succeeded in washing their dirty money, whether in London, Monaco, Switzerland, Virgin Islands, or wherever, without the aid of the pack of UK Lawyers who know best how to "butter their bread".
They don't ignore the law - they use it, and very well too, to their best advantage - see Bill Browder and his attempts to get justice for his murdered lawyer Sergei Magnitsky. Bob Seely MP raised the issue again in Parliament today and we should never forget that without those who help these crooks into their saddles the problem would be very much reduced.
A sewer with many sewer rats...
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) a famous German philosopher hit the nail on the head when he said:
"But what experience and history teach is this, that peoples and governments have never learned anything from history, nor have they acted according to lessons learned therefrom."
The possibility that the Kurdish PSC’s could be drastically revised or even revoked, and then managed by the Iraq Oil Ministry as TSCs, seems to induce spasms of acute anxiety.
While the prospect of dealing with new people in Baghdad could certainly be very challenging and working relationships would have to be rebuilt from scratch, the Bottom Line might not change all that much.
Consider:
Assuming PoO at say $80/bbl, the actual Profit Oil element for SH Contractor Group is about $4/bbl, give or take (for the eternal optimists my $100/bbl calc shows $5.50/bbl PO at 50Mbopd). That of course must be qualified by pointing out only IF the outstanding Costs are still substantial (R-factor). Should the Outstanding Capex greatly reduce then that $/bbl PO will shrink substantially. As far as I can see, the return of Capital Costs via the TSC appears to be a touch faster than the Kurdish PSC. The main (negative) point of the TSC remains the inability to state the Reserves as being “yours”; you remain just a contractor paid a $/bbl fee to “get it out of the ground”.
Back 2009/2010, Sonangol bid for, and finally obtained, the TSCs for some of the northern fields close to Mosul, including the Qaiyarah- and Najmah heavy, sour crude fields (API ca 15, so quite close to SH crude). At the start of these negotiations the $/bbl remuneration being discussed was between $10 - $12/bbl, but the final number agreed with the Ministry in Baghdad (what we consider the Profit Oil element) was $5/bbl for Qaiyarah and $6/bbl for Najmah. Targeted output was/is somewhat similar to Shaikan at 120Mbopd for Qaiyarah and 110Mbopd for Najmah. Planned Capex was said to be in the region of $2Bn.
It's an opinion, based on some facts, and perhaps worth some discussion...?
Sonangol recently revised their contractual agreements with Baghdad (Oct-21) so if anyone has $/bbl numbers that change the above view please post them!
Good morning to you SS,
I made no reference to international law but to international scrutiny - quite a different matter. The law of Iraq is what it is - sovereign law. In parts, however, it is quite open to widely differing interpretations.
I mean the scrutiny of others, well versed in interpreting the meaning behind such national- and international laws or indeed judgements.
Concerning the validity of the KRG "constitution", and particularly their Oil & Gas Law, there are already several opinions that have been published over the years by well qualified people, well-versed in interpreting such matters. These opinions carry weight, a lot of weight, when these matters are placed before international courts.
The ISC is weighted against the Kurds in these matters, of that there can be no doubt, and the struggle to have a more equitable judgement made (in their favour) is not over.
The ambiguities within the new Iraq Constitution have all been well aired, here and elsewhere. That's why we are where we are - the law was, in part, poorly drafted and allowed far too much free interpretation of what was meant to be.
(The much-touted and poorly drafted Minsk Agreements are similarly behind much of what is happening today in the Ukraine.)
In the Iraq constitution, for example; Article 115 says something to the effect that:
"The priority goes to the regional law in case of conflict between other powers shared between the federal government and regional governments".
In a similar vein, Article 121, 2 says something to the effect that:
"In case of a contradiction between regional and national legislation in respect to a matter outside the exclusive powers of the federal government, the regional authority shall have the right to amend the application of the national legislation within that region".
Finally, Article 126 states:
"...articles of the Constitution may not be amended if such amendment takes away from the powers of the regions that are not within the exclusive powers of the federal authorities, except by the approval of the legislative authority of the concerned region and the approval of the majority of its citizens in a general referendum".
There are no clear articles defining the powers of the Federal Government in respect of these matters; indeed the constitution states that in the event of contradictions between central and local laws of any regional administration, authority is conferred on the local administration.
I do not see this latest ruling holding up under international scrutiny; if anything it's just another opportunity for international lawyers to stir the pot and earn more millions.
@Barrik,
I have to admit I have not (yet) had the pleasure of visiting your beautiful country, but I have visited almost all of the adjacent countries (for security reasons that I cannot expand upon here, I could not visit Belorussia).
Maybe one day...
@putup,
I think the +10% might, just might, apply if Putin restricts his takeover to the Eastern regions where he (supposedly) has a lot of support - the regions bordering Sumy-Kharkiv-Luhans'k.
In the event that his troops advance to the Dniepr river (a tempting new borderline?) and even take Kyyv, that's 50% of the country - and the market's reaction IMO would be much heftier, perhaps up to 50% drop in EU markets for a few weeks until the fighting dies down and it becomes clear what Russia's new SW border strategy is intended to be.
The West did nothing about the 2014 annexation of the Krim/Crimea, so it's a distinct possibility that the poor Ukrainians will, again, be fed to the wolves.
Of course, Russia lost a real jewel when the Odessa ports were lost to them - perhaps that will also act as a magnet?
The west has affectively said "we will not fight Russians on Ukrainian soil", so it's got all the makings of a wet glove fight at the end of the day.
A lot of posturing, a lot of hot air, then a fast, clean surgical cut?
@tm,
as you seem rather interested in just how the Transition could work out, perhaps you might also be interested in exploring the potential implications of PSC Clause 26.7.
An interesting twist - here are the first 2 paras (the remaining sub-paras, plus the subsequent 26.8, are equally convoluted) :
"For each Semester, starting from the 1st of January of the Calendar Year following the Calendar Year in which First Production occurs, the CONTRACTOR shall Calculate the "R" Factor applicable to the relevant Semester within thirty (30) days of the beginning of such Semester. The "R" Factor to be applied during a Semester shall be that determined by applying the Cumulative Revenues actually received and the Cumulative Costs actually incurred up to and including the last day of the preceding Semester.
If the CONTRACTOR is unable to calculate the “R” Factor for the relevant Semester before an allocation of Profit Petroleum for such Semester must be mode, then the allocation of Profit Petroleum for the previous Semester shall be used for the relevant Semester. Upon the calculation of the "R” Factor for the relevant Semester:"
NB: Semester is defined in the PSC preamble as Six Months.
@tm, I haven't seen anything official about the FDP approval changing the terms of the PSC.
Acc to the 2013 Annual results, published on 24-Mar-2014, this FDP Approval is given as June-2013.
Reading thru the PSC I cannot find nothing about "FDP approval delays" having consequences for the contract term; if there had been any such adjustment agreed with MNR it would surely have been published as early as possible?
You don't mean the (still ongoing) dispute about payment for the oil produced during the Exploration Period ?
The Shaikan field was declared a Commercial Discovery in August 2012.
The initial FDP was submitted in January 2013.
This remains one of the best articles ever written about Kozel's crooked behaviour:
The Rise and Fall of a US Oilman in Iraq, by Daniel Balint-Kurti and Will Jordan for occrp.org.
May 2021
Should be required reading for every new GKP investor.
In addition to the prison sentence, KOZEL, 55, of New York, New York, was sentenced to two years of supervised release ...
It's quite clear the BOD are out of their depth - insofar as their understanding of the Eastern side of SH field goes .
The announcement of a ca 17p dividend would appear to be their attempt to divert criticism of a miserable performance.
Well, we shall see how far that gets them.
Expect enormous pressure from major holders - I'm sure the BOD would welcome a bid now at almost any price, just to get their heads out of the noose.
It is both silly and uneconomic to have each and every operator deal with their gas issues individually; far better to develop a gas-gathering plan & -infrastructure to serve several hi-volume fields. For that you need experienced people - people the Ministry does not (yet) have.
The 4 fields Jebel Simrit/Shaikan/Atrush/Swara Tika all have gas issues to deal with and, together, their gas output could easily justify the building of a gas treatment plant. There is also a major E-generating station very close to the SH block SW corner which was intended to utilize gas but, for various reasons, actually runs on oil.
Getting 4 operating consortiums to agree on such an added value investment takes time - and the exercise of leverage.
Some may want to use the gas for EOR, as DNO has done - if they can.
Others don't give a fig and just want to flare as long as possible.
It may well be that GKP (currently) has the money to move along with what they had planned - but that plan might no longer be the road the MNR now wishes to take, and the tempo might be changing.
We shall soon hear more about this.
Until the financial implications of any "approved FDP" are known, it would be most unwise for the BOD to splash out any, or much, more cash on buybacks IMO.
Apropos an earlier posting today, that particular risk, and other associated risk(s) relating to the poor flow of information regarding the latest drilling results, is very difficult if not impossible to quantify for people who have not been made privy to certain information; heavyweight shareholders have always had this info before the general retail trade.
@TM,
...the "rather poor reading" remark was in respect of the SH-13/-14 issues.
Any underlying payment issues pale into relative insignificance, IMO, when viewed against the leverage that MNR currently has over the company's mid-term financial planning - in relation to the updated field development plan, the gas issue and the move to 75Mbopd.
On the one hand the field, at current PoO and output, is an ATM on steroids.
On the other hand we are being told almost nothing...