Member Info for BroadfordBay

Invstrat; and this is essentially the main issue here. The Profit Oil ($3/bbl at $68 Brent?) is, as it says, the "profit" you earn (allowed to earn?) from the deal. The Cost Oil ($11/bbl at $68 Brent?) is just the return of borrowed(?) money to those from whom you borrowed. The Kurdish PSC is not a good deal at such oil price levels. At $100 or $150 Brent it all looks so much better...

Was it you on the other board asking about the SA stitch-up (80% WI etc)? Do you think it's feasible that Todd accepted the SA licence in the full knowledge that, if hydrocarbons were found, the company would agree to "back off" (exit) some time later and allow the MNR to appoint another? What sort of deal / compensation would have to be offered to make that attractive to a company? Do you see any evidence of such compensation element having been introduced? What sort of safeguards would a company require, insist upon, to ensure that they came out on the right side, financially, at the end of the day? Would such safeguard agreements be written, and would the present BOD be aware of these? What roll do you think the TKI 5% holding might play in all of this? Could any such safeguard agreements be "hard enough" (so tightly written legally) that even a new BOD would feel bound to adhere to them? Would the departed Peart know of any such agreements?

By my calculations, the net effect for GKP is as follows: At $70 Brent and 37Mbopd $16M net to GKP per month (excluding any and all other compensating elements) At $70 Brent and 35Mbopd $15.15 net to GKP per month (excluding any and all other compensating elements) Jumping ahead a bit: At $70 Brent and 55Mbopd bridging target output level $23.8M net to GKP per month (excluding any and all other compensating elements) I take the announcement to mean that all transportation & handling fees are included in that $22/bbl discount. At current Brent price, the SH discount being applied appears to be approx. 25%.

I posted this last week over on triple eye, and I make no apologies for posting again here, there are other (positive) things to be taken into account apart from the daily penny swings: Without further guidance from the company we have to assume that their recent statements ref SH Discount to Brent remain valid - the last figure given was $14.70/bbl. Taking this discount into account, and even assuming a continuation of the $5.20/bbl transport & handling costs (as it was at one point), the PSC should return $16.7M per month, at 37Mbopd and $70/bbl Brent. IF the terms of the PSC are honoured (yes, I do understand the weight of that IF) that's an annual sales-generated revenue of $200M - it doesn't include any other top-ups to cover other sums that may be owed by the MNR. (It also assumes CO WI of 64% and PO WI of 58%, both of which may change very shortly with the 2nd Amendment) Notwithstanding the very challenging and difficult payments issues, the company remains a VERY interesting speculative investment. I expect much more guidance to be given by the company within the next 8 weeks to enable a more balanced investor view of what the chances actually are of making this whole adventure work. I don't expect any Baghdad oil contract- or border issues to pulverise our chances either. --------------- Further to the above and for those interested, dropping the Average Output over the whole year, to 35Mbopd, reduces the contractual revenues to $15.8M per month - excluding any and all other compensating elements that may be applied (that works in both directions of course!). Even at that reduced output the sums due would be approx. $4M per month higher than at present, should crude stabilise around the $70 mark. The $12M per month being received at present is justified only around the $55/bbl Brent and 37Mbopd levels, alt around the $58/bbl Brent and 35Mbopd levels) I expect pressure from shareholders in the coming days (those who have a voice, not the emasculated smaller holders) to press ahead with the 55Mbopd bridging plan as the contractual revenues will (should?) then increase quite substantially. All my opinion of course.

Yes, same name all three boards. No other avatars, no duplicates, WYSIWYG

duffy, the information released to larger holders is not of the "down at the water cooler" type, but requests for "clarification & concerns" meetings, as well as quite specific "keeping you up to date" meetings with powerful shareholder (or bondholder) groupings. Such requests are generally made thru the Chairman's office. It's only illegal if you get caught. Mums the word...

Hi gyp, I'm not at all sure that Denning , Dobell and JA didn't give a jot - I know for fact that at least 2 of them tried to get some things done at board meetings and were almost reduced to using their fists; water under the bridge now. The 9p placing stinks, big time, I agree, and yet no-one has come out of the woodwork and blown the whistle. What a bunch of pollutants. Ref OM's visit, I think it was to an analyst's meeting (these are normally by invitation only, but sometimes they allow analyst's guests if they're vouched for by the analyst) - not an AGM, but I'm sure OM will put you right on that. Re SHAG, I was actively involved in that and I do not regret it one bit. The fact that the new oversight people never quite managed what we had hoped for is neither here nor there. Todd's freeloading had to be stopped, and it was - although the costs to all innocent parties concerned was high. I had hired a room in Paris, but as you say there was no support and it all turned to ashes. I won't do it again. For reasons you are aware of I cannot comment on NZ's possible relationship with K, although much is said in the various leaked papers. Perhaps more will leak out in the near future as al-Abadi gets to grips with the stuff he's starting to find re MNR dealings etc. I'm told Nouri al-Maliki has decided he will stand again - that should put the cat among the pigeons. I try now to restrict my opinions now mostly to technical- and associated matters. You have a much better handle on the particular US-IR connections. Cheers, J

Tony, just prior to the last AGM I was actively involved,one of several and all off-bb, in trying to get him removed. I'm slightly more hopeful this year - but the motto of many of these types seems to be: "don't cut off your nose to spite your face". I'll just keep ploughing my furrow, and be as you say, a nuisance but, like the mosquito, a nuisance only until it finally does for you. J

One of the main reasons smaller investors are dissatisfied with the CEO in particular, and the company's general attitude in respect of shareholder information, is the complete lack of benchmark numbers being advised by RNS. For along time now we have not been advised of: - daily production rates - cash at bank - export routes & tariffs - field performance issues etc. The only detailed information now received, at least by smaller shareholders (apart from the irregular payments receipts), is via the H1- and the Annual Results. So twice a year the smaller shareholders are given something more meaty to digest. I am very sure that the major holders are being given regular- and detailed information in order to keep them on board - but NONE of them feel in any way obliged to pass on that information and place it in the public domain. It would also appear that NONE of the directors, including the NEDs, care a whit about these Double Standards. Remember this when you vote at the AGM. Remember too that the Chairman is the one who sets the tone for the rest of the Board - it's his responsibility to ensure that the board "functions well". That functioning includes ensuring pertinent information is released to ALL shareholders. If he's a stinker then you can bet your boots the rest will probably buckle and STFU. That fair distribution of information does not appear to be happening and therefore I am calling for the Chairman to be removed. Be assured I am active off the bulletin boards as well. Write to the senior NED at the company's registered office (you will possibly receive a reply from their outsourced lackeys) and to the editor of the Financial Times, the Sunday Times, the Daily Mail, etc., expressing your anger at the state of affairs - if enough smaller do so there will be some interest taken, I can assure you.

Hi gyp, yes of course, the forward selling arrangement with Vitol and the other trading houses is VERY important, is KEY, to understanding it all. A major part of that IMO are the Refinery Deals that were made. If you change the crude mix then the refinery will have to change it's processing and it's offered price. In an extreme case the refinery might want to drop out of the agreement as it cannot, or doesn't want to process the new crude mix. The trading houses might then have to scrabble for takers. The current KRG crude mix, since the Avanah and Bai Hassan crudes have now dropped out of the mix i(and Taq Taq went off the scale!) s a very different offering - and the trading houses and refineries will have something to say about: a) how much of it they want, and b) what price they are now prepared to pay. MNR can juggle a little, for example, by limiting just how much SH heavy crude they allow to mix with the other pipeline grades. The recent rise to $70/bbl for the Brent benchmark gives Vitol and the others more profit, but that leads to demands by their suppliers...as you point out.

Or perhaps the person who made the 55k statement has knowledge of some technical issue(s) that caused such a drop during the last three months...?

According to data released by the company, 2017-H1 output was an average of 36,664bopd (181 days) As per RNS of 19th Sept the average "so far" in 2017-Q3 had been 35,350bopd (79 days to 18th Sept.) So, in 260 days, the output was 9,428,834stb. That's an average of 36,265bopd between 1st Jan 2017 and 18th Sept 2017. During colder periods, above-surface flows will naturally tail off somewhat. Also, during connection of PF-2 to the Export line crossing the SH block there may also be limited disruption as necessary control equipment is incorporated .

h1970, one of the problems with GKP, both in its previous incarnation as Todd's Baby, and in the present under Mr Health & Safety, is that there seem to be so many "off the record" (as in off the PSC) items and so many guesses at how these might be quantified. I don't remember any pipeline write-off; perhaps it was one of JG's "moments"?

and this was my reply to that post: It would be more than prudent NOT to count on payment of these outstanding sums in Q1-2018. Any advantages gained by GKP and reflected in the 2nd Amendment will almost certainly be offset against such sums - look at what DNO "agreed" with the MNR in their last deal. As to whether the Q1 might also include one or more regular $12M payments for 2018 deliveries...I don't know. Bearing in mind how late such payments have been I wouldn't expect there to be any more than one such payment in any case, so max another $12M. A good offset would be a pipeline from PF-1 down to the larger pipe and I have already estimated the cost of this at max $30M (there are no signs yet of any ground works for this). The Atrush pipeline runs right past the front door of PF-2 and may already be just about connected to the PF, so any day now we could get an announcement to that effect. As an aside, I see that MNR has agreed to refund TAQA their pipeline costs within 2 years - so, some wriggle room there for any set-off agreement sums perhaps. My guess is that the SH - Faysh-Khabur pipeline transit fee might be in the region of $1.20 - $1.50/bbl. If you look at the volumes, that's a very fast payback for greedy KAR's efforts.

It's really difficult for me to understand just how little research & understanding of all the issues is done ref. Kurdish Oil. That remark applies not only to BB posters but to some (most?) of the so-called Serious Media who often just spout what Barzani's PR machine seems to feed them. It takes a little work it's true, but you can tie-down quite accurately just how much oil and condensate is being produced in the KRI - and it GREATLY exceeds the exported volumes of ca. 250Mbopd - 300Mbopd. My limited research indicates a volume in excess of 600Mbopd (crude plus condensate, ignoring gas) is produced by uncontested fields in the KRI - and that's excluding those Kirkuk Domes and associated fields now reclaimed and run by NOCo / SOCo. Some of that output goes to local and recognised refineries (e.g. KAR & Bazian), some goes to local Teapot / Kettle (simple distillation) "refineries" (many run by friends-of-friends) and some gets trucked elsewhere for the benefit of Messrs XXXX. ALL of the crude & condensate produced has value - but much of that value is not being declared, and is certainly not shared by, the Kurdish people. Baghdad has been aware of this for many years and for that reason (but not only for that) have not been transferring the 17% as defined in the constitution. gyp8, to his credit, has been highlighting these and other issues for some years, but many still insist in seeing Baghdad as the only Bogey Man in the house. It's not a Democracy as we understand it...

Just to thank you for the link to George Ogilvie's presentation. Going now to check if the variois trigger dates around Nov were all adhered-to. If so, I'm well minded to put some cash into this. Thanks again.

albeit with a very nice profit, but very sorry to see this great UK company swallowed by Emerson. acd47: hope you made profit while you were in! GL

I hope ABB do try to come back and top this offer, but I will be very sorry to see another British success story "sell out". What Anthony Bamford and John Rose have been saying this last few years is so very true - the UK needs desperately to invest in engineering/manufacturing, just as the Germans have been doing. Mr Cable blowing the Japanese trumpet for Toyota is just not enough, nor is assembling foreign designs of wind turbines. This is very much a niche market, albeit a very lucrative and hi-tech one. It would be a pity to lose one of our jewels.

We still only have one - ABB - actually making an agreed bid. Emerson are expected to come back and increase their bid, but this is not at all certain. I've seen figures bandied about about suggesting they might force the TO price up to about 370 or so - but unless CHLD's profits have exploded in the meantime that would be overpaying. I can see this sticking around 340 until Emerson show their hand. I don't expect Eaton Corp. to bid.

Doubt it...small but important market segment and Emerson is the well-known co who have been eager to swallow Chloride for many years. I've been a shareholder for many years myself and will be sorry if they do get taken-over, although my purchase price was 41p, so I'm in the money anyway.