We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
SLE executed a 50m USD refinancing deal with MM Capital on 8 July 2022. Terms are 10% and generous repayment dates. Soon after the Company announces its seeking an alternative lender. No explanation given that I can find.
Meanwhile it would appear that SLE can't pay its employees. Bizarre.
Alaric, have you any conception of the gravity of today's RNS?
Spending your time on diversionary issues that I can't believe anyone gives two hoots about. And I don't need any lessons in law from you, I had considerable exposure and success through my working life.
What is truly alarming in this RNS is the disclosure that employees are now creditors of the company!! So Tosca has so little confidence that it can't stump up a few bob to keep the show on the road. Speaks volumes that Directors are mentioned first.
Regarding the FSO, why are ELI seeking "renewal" of regulatory permits? Did they have them and let them lapse?
Again stating the book value of Decklar holding at $5.6m is misleading. The current market value is $1.4mm
Calm down ...you really mustn't get so upset
By the way, it's spelt 'scenario'.
For balance, here are Eroton's counterclaims:
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/1107/2020 – Eroton Exploration & Production
Company Limited v. Guaranty Trust Bank plc and OML 18 Energy Resource
Limited (formerly known as Sahara Field Production Limited).
Eroton claims that it is the agreement of parties that where there is dispute arising
from the performance of terms of the JOA acceded to by Sahara via a deed of
81
accession, the parties should refer such dispute to arbitration under the arbitration
laws of Nigeria. In this regard, Eroton commenced arbitration proceedings against
Sahara for failing to liquidate its share of cash calls and costs/expenditure incurred
on the joint operations of OML 18."
Eroton suing to have dispute referred to arbitration..... lol
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/1080/2020 – Eroton Exploration & Production
Company Limited v. OML 18 Energy Resource Limited (formerly known as
Sahara Field Production Limited).
This is a petition filed by Eroton against Sahara seeking an order of the FHC to wind
up Sahara on the basis of Sahara’s inability to liquidate the outstanding debt due to
Eroton.
It is the case of Eroton that it expended several sums for itself and Sahara in respect
of the costs/expenditure incurred in the joint operations and cash calls for OML 18.
Sahara is obligated but has failed to reimburse Eroton for Sahara’s share in the joint
operations and cash calls.
The total outstanding debt due to Eroton is US$72,111,096.72 being the sum paid
by Eroton in respect of Sahara’s participating interest in OML 18. As part of this
claim Eroton also sought and obtained an Ex Parte injunction restraining Sahara
from utilizing its bank accounts."
"Appeal Number CA/LAG/CV/104/2021 – Eroton Exploration & Production
Company Limited v. OML 18 Energy Resource Limited (formerly known as
Sahara Field Production Limited) & 2 others;
Eroton is the Appellant, Sahara is the first Respondent, Bilton OML 18 Limited is the
second Respondent and Bilton is the third Respondent."
Litigation is about legal jurisdiction...no amounts specifically claimed.
Now Alaric, you claim to have A-level maths (although they have failed you do date).
Maybe a bit of adding and subtraction is not beyond your capabilities.
Alaric , I shouldn't have to do this but seeing that you are unable to look up this publicly available information yourself...here are the references from SLE's Admission Document....unless of course you dispute its veracity...
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/976/2020 – OML 18 Energy Resource Limited (formerly
known as Sahara Field Production Limited) v. Eroton Exploration &
Production Company Limited.
Sahara is the Plaintiff and Eroton is the Defendant and the claim is related to the
recovery of a disputed debt of US$72 million arising from outstanding legacy issues
regarding the acquisition of OML 18.
Sahara alleges that by an agreement dated 14 October 2019, Eroton had agreed to
pay the sum of US$80 million in consideration of Sahara’s participating interest and
contribution towards the acquisition and operation of OML 18. Sahara alleges that
Eroton has only paid US$8 million in this regard. Sahara’s total claim is for the sum
of US$72 million being the alleged total balance due to Sahara from Eroton under
the agreement."
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/977/2020 – OML 18 Energy Resource Limited (formerly
known as Sahara Field Production Limited) v. Eroton Exploration &
Production Company Limited.
This is a petition by Sahara against Eroton. Sahara is seeking an order of the FHC
to wind up Eroton on the basis of Eroton’s inability to liquidate the outstanding debt
due to it.
Sahara’s case is that it is entitled to the principal sum of US$47,944,072 being its
alleged share of the profit oil accruing from OML 18 during the period from March
2015 and June, 2019, being the period when Eroton held 16.2% participating
interest in trust for Sahara. Eroton made an application to stay proceedings in favour
of arbitration in the FHC. The FHC declined Eroton’s application on the ground that
matters of winding up proceedings are not arbitrable in its ruling of 9 September
2020."
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/1232/2020 – OML 18 Energy Resource Limited
(formerly known as Sahara Field Production Limited) v. Bilton OML 18 Limited
& 2 others.
Sahara is the Plaintiff, Bilton OML 18 Limited is the first Defendant, Bilton is the
second Defendant and Eroton is the third Defendant. Sahara is seeking judicial
interpretation of certain provisions of a financial service agreement (“Financial
Service Agreement”) between it and Bilton and payment of approximately
US$45 million being the sum Sahara claims was expended by Sahara on the Bilton
entities’ acquisition of 1.8% interest in Eroton’s OML 18."
"Suit Number FHC/L/CS/1231/2020 – OML 18 Energy Resource Limited
v. Eroton Exploration & Production Company Limited and Notore Chemical Industries plc.
Sahara is the Plaintiff, while Eroton and Notore Chemical are both Defendants.
The Plaintiff alleges that by a farm out agreement dated 20 March 2020 (“Farm Out
Agreement”), it is entitled to 36% of all sums received by Eroton pursuant to the
JOA, Shell Offtake Agreement and
Alaric, you are deliberately conflating the amounts due by NNPC with the amounts in dispute between Sahara and Eroton.
In litigation between Sahara and Eroton, which has been going on for years, Sahara is claiming well in excess of what Eroton is counterclaiming. It's because of this morass that Eroton want to pay off Sahara with the now stalled Afreximbank loan. Read SLE's Admission Document.
Alaric,
you posted below that NNPC currently owes Eroton over $100m in unpaid cash-calls.
SLE's 2022 Admission Document put the figure at $37.2m.
See Section 4 (c)
If you have more up to date information, would you kindly provide a reference to such public information.
'Ad Hominem@....now play the ball and not the man.
Thanks, BS.
To show that that I'm not all negative, I think that Nnpc taking over the
operatorship could be a better outcome for all. Very much depends on their attitude to the ACOES. Nnpc has no shareholding in ELI but as far as I know they own 55% of the NCTL. However they state that they agreed to the barging plan. Interesting.
I don't know if they can sell the gas elsewhere but that would also be a positive.
Redeyesmine,
I think you miss the point.
One can be positive or negative in assessing a share.
There's no particular virtue in positivity, particularly where it is post-justification for a bad purchase decision.
What matters is whether assertions posted as facts are actually true and if opinions are couched as
such and not dressed up as fact.
In this regard some of your fellow posters have been shown to be disingenuous to say the least.
To use a sporting analogy, when they cannot contradict inconvenient facts they play the man and
not the ball.
Above all, what really matters is whether the posters have been shown to be consistently correct
in their facts and opinions. In this regard the negative posters have proven to be consistently
correct over several years!
I may not agree with your opinions, but having read your posts regarding GCM, I would not categorise
you as disingenuous.
By the way, BlackSwan may be a shareholder..up to him to confirm.
Pythonissa's other posts all relate to Pantheon Resources (PANR). Little Sam's posts, other than SLE, all relate to Pantheon.
Funny that.
Pure coincidence, of course.
Afemafuna, thank for reminding me of that classic post by Pythonissa (aka Alaric).
Here it is:
"There are gaps in your Greek mythology as well I see, tut tut. The Hydra was slain by Heracles . However my line of Stheno and Euryale live on - they are immortal - oh dear you didn't know? Just reading all the B- shyss about this timeline brings on one of my bad hair days and I tend to get hissy fits - so to correct you - the present statement from our board is as follows : 'The proposed new dedicated export system for OML 18 is forecast by Eroton to be online during 2019.' There has been no change to this position announced, as far as I am aware . If I have misunderstood please specify - btw. quotes from the Nigerian press don't wash with me."
Well I have to agree with AlaricPythonissa in one regard....he/she is an expert in mythology.
Unfortunately I cant recommend him/her for the Mystic Meg Award for forecasting.
Two interesting things in the NNPC statement.
First NNPC state clearly that Eroton is unable to execute the agreed barging operations.
Alaric and his poodle are adamant that barging contiinues to the mysterious mother ship and its full to its reputed
capacity of 250,000 bbls and in a matter of days (now weeks) will be transferred to the FSO.
Someone is telling blatant porkies.
Second, NNPC highlight the non-remittance of payments for gas by Notore as a primary reason for the assumption of
the OML 18 operatorship. When I highlighted this months ago, Alaric chose to ridicule my so-called obsession with a fertiliser company, even though he should have known that Notore, at the time, got all their gas from OML18. Much later he acknowledged the non-payment but represented it as only a quarter of the actual publicly available figure due to the OML 18 operators.
Here are excerpts from NNPC's OML18 statement from its website:
"In order to protect the Joint Venture (JV) investment in OML 18, the non-operating partners, NNPC Limited (55% interest) and OML 18 Energy Limited (“OML 18 Energy” – 16.20% interest), jointly owning 71.20% equity, removed Eroton as operator of the JV in line with the provisions of the Joint Operating Agreement (JOA). NNPC Limited and OML 18 Energy further appointed NNPC Eighteen Operating Limited as operator of the JV.
The change in operatorship has been notified to the Nigerian Upstream Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) and communicated to Eroton.
While the key business reasons that made the change in operatorship are compelling, it is publicly available information that production has declined from thirty thousand barrels per day (30,000 bpd) to zero. The persisting inability of Eroton to meet the fiscal obligations of the Federal Government led to the sealing of Eroton’s head office in Lagos by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) for more than twelve months due to non-payment of outstanding taxes to the Government. Eroton is also not able to remit to the JV parties the proceeds of gas supplied to its affiliate, NOTORE. A number of audits and investigations, including by the EFCC, NURPC’s work programme audit and others have been undertaken or are ongoing. Some of these audits are regulatory steps that may lead to licence revocation under the relevant Laws if drastic steps are not taken by non-operating partners.
NNPC Limited in particular, as majority shareholder with a unique stewardship responsibility to the Federation, is committed to assuring that the energy and financial security of the Country is uppermost in its business decisions. Removing an operator in these circumstances is therefore inevitable in order to protect the JV from Governmental or third parties action from entities, including Eroton's lenders and other service providers.
Following the equity acquisition, Eroton became NNPC’s partner in the OML 18 JV and Eroton was designated as the Operator in accordance with relevant provisions of the Joint Operating Agreement (JOA) between the parties.
From 2016 to date, OML 18's net crude oil production has significantly fallen from approximately thirty thousand barrels per day (30,000 bpd) to zero production, despite conscompliance to the joint venture’s funding obligations by the JV partners over the same period. In recognition of the impact of the challenges in crude evacuation via the Nembe Creek Trunk Line (NCTL), the operator proposed, and partners approved an Alternative Crude Oil Evacuation Process by barging. Eroton is unable to execute this alternative, leading to the current zero production status of the asset."
I've explained why I wouldn't touch any share associated with Fanny with a barge pole (excuse the pun). Sonny, you really need to clean up your gutter language and get a sense of humour.
I guess the fact that Pantheon, the other share you promote, dropped yet another 5% today, may have upset you.
It's taking so long that it could well become the 'grandmother ship'. lol
Alaric
More waffle.
You posted on 11 April;
"well no rns today, which means it's safe to assume the FSO anchoring is complete. so first oil should be delivered by the mother ship to the FSO in a matter of days now. and that means oil revenue starting soon and then continuing every day. no wonder the trolls are getting nervous lol!"
Well thats 35 days now. we still have no confirmation that the FSO is operational. You dont know if the famed 'mother ship has reached its reputed capacity of 250,000 bbls and when it will be offloaded, let alone when it might be sold. You dont even know the name of the mother ship.
You seem to know nothing. Your incapacity to meet your date predictions is all too reminiscent of your guru , Oisin Fanny. Could it be......................?
Guessed as much. All waffle and no substance. What happened to your much vaunted local contacts. So much for your superior research skills. You prattle on about the 'mother ship' And you no nothing about it at all.
Alaric,
In recent posts you have suggested that both Black swan and I have limited research skills, whilst yours are vastly superior and can tap into your local contacts. Let's see how good they are:
What is the name of the 'mother ship'?
I would have thought that a civil action through the courts to have Energy Link Infrastructure wound up was a substantive issue.