slift - there was mention of cash - 168million(?) but some has been earmarked. i was a little distracted at that moment
as i posted earlier - i do think a lot will depend on how the bondholders want to play it. the longer there is production the more chance of getting back more of their money - and i think that is what the judge is thinking . however once the bondholders have had a sniff of getting the company are they going to let go easy? their lawyer may indicate if the restructure does not go ahead they will call in the chips regardless. of course the judge may not take such a threat favourably but what can he do to negate it
the judge is in a tricky place as this could easily be a reference case for future courts. i sense he is sympathetic to the shareholders but he also knows a delay and the bod is toast.
i think i would just give the edge to hur today- their lawyer dragged the session on got their points made. the judge had him on the ropes a couple of times but potentially let him off the hook. however he did similar in the first hearing and came up with the right decision.
hopefully they will quickly move on to the bondholders lawyer - and he will just concur without repeating it all again. then we can move onto CA. it will be interesting how they play it...obviously their expert v maris/erce but how much emphasis on the obstructive behaviour of the bod?
dyor - yes he seemed to me that he was fudging a lot and also trying to paint the most negative picture as possible - to be expected of course as the company say there is no shareholder value. he just seems to talk a lot to disguise when he doesn't know something. however unfortunately at times it does seem to work the judge looked like he had lost to will to live at times
hopefully the CA lawyer will point out that even though BW have advertised the AM they still have 2 vessels not currently used and their own debt issues...so there should be no issue if the company can quickly arrange an extension
the judge pointed out that the poo was currently higher than the projection in the may hearing for this time - the "waffler" started up
Jeepers that was hard work today. The Hur lawyer just goes on and on...he spent 2.5 hrs saying what he said in the first hearing..in other words that there is not enough oil and therefore no value to shareholders. Therefore please let the bondholders have the company and they can then decide what they want to do...
The judge had some good questions but just gets lost in a sea of waffle..the history of the company didn't need to be gone into - you can read the pack..should have gone straight to the argument between both sides..
The crux will be what pressure bond holders will exert...and whether the CA lawyer can persuade the judge that there is enough doubt over oil in place to warrant more time..
The judge seems sympathetic to share holders but the real question is how much of a barrel the bondholders have us over
i think it will come down to whether the bondholders are going to want to play hard ball.
it is their interest to keep the well running and extend the lease on the AM - more return. however are they going to try and play hardball and get the company signed over to them? will the judge allow this?
unless they play hard ball there is no reason not to delay - but then the bod are gone and the plan.
RE: HOW TO ATTEND 21 JUNE SANCTION HEARING + MAKE REPRESENTATIONS TO JUDGE20 Jun 2021 19:12
mirasol - my argument with CPRs is that the company wants repeat business. there will be a pressure intangible or not to give the customer what he wants. there are enough disclaimers that they can absolve themselves of any real responsibility. i always think of it like an mot or gas safety cert. on the surface they are impartial..but.....
the other thing is that they are only working on the data supplied - they don't turn up on site and do their own tests. i wonder how often they disagree with the company supplying the data? i am not saying hur have faked data - but from reading the statements there is clearly an issue over what data to use even before the interpretation
RE: HOW TO ATTEND 21 JUNE SANCTION HEARING + MAKE REPRESENTATIONS TO JUDGE20 Jun 2021 16:47
very very interesting reading - and backs up much of my questioning over the last few months we were told that the 2017 cpr was proved wrong from acquired data - can accept this. however we were then expected to believe the ERCE cpr was bulletproof - personally my spidey senses were tingling with halifax going to zero. seems that another CPR could well give a different opinion - if follwing Law's modelling.
As i have long stated theses CPRs are seemingly flawed - you get what you pay for. 2017 they needed a good one to get the project off the ground and got it ....2021 the bod seemingly needed a poor one to support of their low estimation and giveaway and got it.
an interesting question is - if the giveaway happens would a new "better" cpr then be available? once the company was practically "private"
will be very interesting this week and a headache for the judge. i would like to think there is enough doubt to justify a delay. if so bod changes - flotsam ditched. and game on..
wonder if they will now suspend shares? should have been done on first hearing imo.
at the current price defo worth a punt - if they get near the amount of the possible govt contract of £374m - and you would think that even calamity king should be able to - in a pandemic - then there is considerable upside on the SP. just need him to not shoot the company in the foot with their PR. i am hoping they have learnt the painful lessons but who knows?
RE: Double Vaccination & Isolate for 7 days20 Jun 2021 13:43
good news for LFT...we needed some positives after all the mess on innova
even Colin "can't sell a test in a pandemic" king must stand a chance now? as for the 200+ staff - they have been paid for awhile now - hard to know doing what? the big launch seemed to be a bit more "big lunch"