Member Info for BuildersBum3

Sorry buffet, I was a bit blunt and I'm sure you had read the rns plenty, apologies..

I get a clear understanding that 30 days from the decision, means 30 days from this communication of that decision, that they must find agreement and notify them of the mutual agreement which mitigates the perceived risk. If no agreement can be found then they will hear RKH's proposed solution instead (within that same timeline) and ROI will have 10 days to state the reasons why it doesn't work/mitigate the risk upon which the committee will then decide (unspecified how long this decision would take in my view, but likely pretty quickly followed by a lifting of the stay conditional upon the perceived risk mitigation vehicle being used).

BB3

Buffet,

I suggest you read the rns again.. its quite clear in terms of timeline. It also isn't telling italy to lodge any money anywhere... just for ROI and RKH to come to an mutually agreeable way to protect any monies paid / assets seized or frozen in relation to the payment of the award until the annulment process is complete to mitigate any issues with recovery of said assets.

BB3..

Agreed Paul,

I think enforcing the payment via the courts by freezing and seizing assets will have to be funded externally, but this is a different cost schedule (probably quite costly) from the annulment process (which should be a relatively light cost) and can be handled / financed differently, it may not even need to be lawyers familiar to the arbitration/anulmwnt case but probably will be.

The bigger point being, this may not be needed to be undertaken as it may curently be a case of who blinks first! With RKH not needing to blink untill after the 40 days, and ROI possibly preferring to not to be subject to the actions post 40 days thus blinking first...

Either way, recovery of award only needs to be funded once possible which hasn't been the case until this 40 days plays out.. will be interesting.

If ROI don't fold (settle with RKH in full or part and withdraw from the process) and decide to pay into an escrow, then we can read into this their confidence in gaining a full or partial annulment. Allowing RKH to go after assets would be stupid either way (but I guess its still possible, just can't see the logic on their part).

BB3

Happy, your original post.

ISDIS will not have any want or wish to throw out an annulment attempt, its completely ROI right to seek one. They will purely be following the procedural steps to conclude ROI's option to seek one. There won't be any care towards either party, just a middle of the road and fair approach as you can see in the RNS.

If any settlement were to happen it will be when the game is over and in ROI case this could be:

1. At or just before the time the stay is lifted - Likely in the next 30-40 days (if they were just trying it on to delay for as its still in their interest to do so- having assets seized or frozen wont be in their interest) 95%-100% of award IMO as RKH will have them by the short and curlies.

2. At the end of the failed annulment process next year (if they truly believe they have a chance/case to have it part / fully annulled) 100% pay out to RKH if they loose.

The time for 80% or sub that, would have been before the award was rendered in August 22 as thus would have prevented a president being set for future cases against them and fully worth the point to settle.

Again All In My Opinion

BB3

Re. Legal costs and why RKH are self funding this.

I don't believe the costs will be high as this is not ROI battling with RKH on the merits of an annulment. The annulment will be against the award so thus against the process and ICSID actions, inactions and judgements... RKH are basically there to bat down any miss truths, and object to anything nonprocedural which is a far cry from trying to prove ROI had wronged them in the eyes of the law and how much it had cost them (that bit is already done, dusted, and decided upon), this is not an appeal which would aim to reopen evidence etc.

So a much smaller legal team and a lot less strategy, mitigation tactics, and evidence that need to be prepared, reviewed and submitted.. I would imagine 2 lawyers involved in the original arbitration on 10 hours per week would be sufficient (the arbitration would have needed 8-10 fold with many more specialists).

All just my opinion
BB3

Your right,

There are 3 reasons italy would want a stay.

1. If they win a partial or total annulment, they wouldn't want to have to chase their own money they were wrongly forced to hand over.

2. They wouldn't want RKH spending / loosing their money before they had to hand it back (very likely problem with Sam at the helm and the financial posioin of RKH).

3. Kick the can down the road in the hope of RKH going bust, world events have a massive black Swan event, shifting the blame and music which must be faced to the next itialan in power in 18 months time.

Paying isn't the issue as they have plenty of money, problem is they don't want to.. This decision is telling them to poo or get off the pot.

BB3

The conversation between rkh and Italian lawyers, as this is to be negotiated and agreed within 30 days will be:

Hi italy would you like to

1. Pay the full amount into an agreeable bank in escrow, to be paid out immediately according to the result of the annulment in 2024.

Or

2. Nominate an agreeable bank where the proceeds from the sale of seized italian assets, such as diplomatic buildings, aircraft, or infastructure etc can be stored, in order to be paid out immediately according to the result of the annulment in 2024.

I can't see why option one wouldn't be far more appealing considering Italy won't be able to stop rkh going for whatever assets they want, which would cause them a huge headach dealing with the loss of critical infrastructure or operational buildings at short notice etc.

This judgement has just rubber stamped RKH actually get paid in 2024, (assuming a success in the striking down the annulment attempt).

BB3.. UP WE GO

I'd take 40p right now, 50p on the stay being lifted, and 60p on a failed attempt to get the award annulled, £1 on fid, and £2 on first oil.

Reality will be a sell down of 20% at each. Lol

BB3

Interesting-investing

Totally agree Ovets.

Was just making comment on it being possibly a hindrance on multiple fronts re. Finance and farm-in partner options and value to date. This can easily be imagined when investment criteria of some, financial or oil related, may have not been interested or barred from investing due to policy of interesting in regions with the assurance of the energy charter. Same could also be said for investors in the stock and thus lacking the extra impetus on the sp it could have also supported.

I'm thinking along the lines of, why hasn't this share seen more interest from a wider range of investors over the years, very private investor and hedge fund orientated.. this may well be one of the reasons, and each step until the oil flowing removes more of the risk as we go (can probably include the argies in that risk pot as well).

100% the FI would never pull the plug because of a knee jerk reaction e.g. an oil spill in a similar environment and public support going the other way... but we all know politics, revolution and world events play their own tune and can rarely be predicted in the whole...

Anyway it's a completely mute point, as if they were signatories and pulled the plug, it would bankrupt the island if awarded against at arbitration... and thus highlighting my point of value not being reflected in the sp due to risk factors which are being and will be reduced to very little by the time the oil is flowing.

Onwards and upwards... BB3

The FI not being a signatory could be part/one of the reasons big oil hasn't piled in during early stages of exploration & development so far etc.
No doubt this dynamic would change if the risk of regulatory rug pulling was mitigated massively once producing.

Risk of all different sorts will have been removed once producing. This company and its acreage is going to be worth a fortune and be in big demand once the oil is flowing ?? ?? ?? ??

BB3.. looking forward to the day we get taken out at a huge premium.
BB3

My buy of 1.7m just came up as a sell too..
?? for a stellar wire line result??

There were some dark days as well as the fun ones.. anyone remember the flash crash?

I forget the price / % it dropped within a single trading session only to ride all the way back up again (120p down to 20p and back up again?)... 100% manufactured to clean out anyone with a stop loss.. that I think was part of the bhslcf fan club after telling people to protect their initial investment /capital (apologies if not).

BB3

GClark.. spot on my man Hoppa.. though I think it might have been GClark23 or something and GClark as a handle got spoofed to take advantage of the inside track (could easily be wrong though... 11+ years is a long time).

BB3

Hey paulD.. How's it hanging?

Long time..

BB3

No, oilbrat was someone that explained the quantum of the opportunity very well with regards to prospects and how oil volumes related to value and how that related to the average and other play types and prospects etc..
marlon monkey was just shed hot at his geology and drill knowledge and graced us with his thoughts on how the drill results / prospects being drilled related to commercial wins or losses.. I.e. did 10net pay over X sq km with X porosity mean a 1/10 result or 9/10 result and what depths water being hit would mean.. e.g full to spill or not etc..

Never ceased to amaze me thoes guys so grateful for sharing their knowledge.

Full of stars was JDPM / Fezza or that guy that turned up and posted just before announcement but when markets were closed... always seemed to have the goods but not the exact detail to save himself from litigation (can't remember his name though.. mythical poster never wrong with timings of an RNS).

Blue horse was always knowledgeable, certainly at trading and the money side of investing and would be the first to advise all to protect capital, known for being able to move the share price on his comments but ultimately shown up as a charlatan and using the boards to benefit himself at the expense of others (or at least that was my impression, private boards etc).

Loved thoes days, warts and all... BB3

French Connection UK?

Following talks between Rishi Sunak and Emmanuel Macron in Paris, the British prime minister said the UK and France had agreed "never again" to let Russia weaponise energy.

I wonder how they plan to do this with France having FAll oil and gas and the UK having tapped out the North Sea, Nuclear being a 10-15 year horizon and energy demand expected to go through the roof in that time frame...

Or is that way to mystic Meg??

Ducks, lines, and full of stars. X x x BB3

Can't imagine anything other than full payment of the award would be of interest to RKH..

As for interests / opportunities in the ROI, I can't see them wanting to make further development investments / deals based off of previous experience.

I guess that means sealion isn't coverd by the treaty which is a risk of getting compensation if you deem the FI gov. To pull the plug unfairly at any stage in the future..

Won't make a blind bit if difference to RKH's successful claim against Italy though.

BBC News - Palestinian anger at possible UK Jerusalem embassy move
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-63006670

The Palestinians have called a proposal by the UK to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem a "blatant violation of international law".

UK PM Liz Truss is said to have told her Israeli counterpart, Yair Lapid, about the review while at the UN.

Such a move would be highly controversial. The opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem in 2018 was met with outrage across the Arab world.

Mr Lapid tweeted his thanks to Ms Truss for "positively considering" it.