We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Part 2:
Cameroon does not belong to the presidential family and his minions. These practices, that were born under the so-called "Renewal" regime and that are transforming our respected country into a thug state, endanger the interests of Cameroon, and even its security. Our country can no longer accommodate this descent into hell, where even the Presidency of the Republic would become the high place of mafia affairs. Need we point out that Chad is the only country in Central Africa that sided with Cameroon in the darkest moment of the fight against Boko Haram in 2014? This is a brother and friendly country, which historically has always had very good relations with our country. By way of evidence, this is the one country in the sub-region where Cameroonian citizens suffer the least harassment and humiliation from all kinds of authorities of the host country. The people of Cameroon do not want their relations of friendship and brotherly understanding to be sacrificed on the altar of the private interests of a clan or a group of individuals abusing their position in the state apparatus, in this case, the Presidency of the Republic. Our country must maintain the best possible relationship with this ally.
At the opening of the regular session of the National Assembly on March 3, 2023, senior Member of Parliament the Hon. Laurentine KOA MFEGUE, after listing an endless list of scandals, said: “We condemn with all our strength the reprehensible cases that constitute all these cases. This has got to stop. Cameroon, our dear and beautiful country, must not turn into a land of scandals. I therefore wish that those in charge of running public affairs should show patriotism and moral uprightness. They must know that they are invested in a sacred mission, that of promoting, each at their own level, the development of Cameroon." She was unaware, as were we, that the worst was yet to come. Following the strong words of the Honorable Member of Parliament - all the more notable since such confessions are rare from the ruling state party - I call on the Cameroonian Parliament to open a parliamentary investigation into this unnecessary scandal, to give itself an ounce of credibility. Also the courts must urgently open an investigation into "Savannah Energy GATE", and hear all protagonists, irrespective of the positions they occupy in state structures or presidential entourage.
Yaounde, 22 April 2023
The National President
Maurice KAMTO
_ _ _ _ _
For balance perhaps, Wikipedia has this to say about Maurice Kamto:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Kamto
Another interesting view, seemingly from Cameounian opposition party?
CHAD - SAVANNAH AFFAIR.. Cameroonian opposition tackles BIYA regime
STATEMENT ON SAVANNAH ENERGY PLC CASE AND RECALL BY CHAD AMBASSADOR IN CAMEROON
*By Maurice Kamto*
We have learned with deep concern the recall by the Republic of Chad of its ambassador to Cameroon. The Government of the Republic of Chad denounces the mafia-type practices of some Cameroonian figures who it believes are trying to control Chadian oil through a dark company "Savannah Energy Plc". Press reports reveal that Mr Franck Emmanuel BIYA has travelled to Ndjamena in September 2022 as part of this case to intervene on behalf of the company. This movement of a person without official function in the state, is said to have been followed by that of Mr. ELUNG Paul CHE, First Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency of the Republic of Cameroon, from 21 to 30 November 2022, with the same objective of leading the Chadian authorities to negotiate with Savannah Energy. After CANGATE, COVIDGATE at the national level, and GLENCORE GATE internationally, so here is SAVANNAHGATE that is already delivering its first consequences, at the diplomatic level.
All of this naturally makes one think that the Cameroonian personalities to whom the Chadian Government alluded in its statement are gathering around the President of the Republic in office himself.
It is therefore urgent that he clarifies the situation and explains his son's role in public affairs where he is leading steps to defend private interests under an official guise. Failing which, public, national and international opinion will be forced to the suspicion that he is personally involved in this other scandal of our grievously wounded Republic, through this unnecessary "business".
[continued]
for the avoidance of doubt, I am NOT multibagger and don't know him/her!
Morning LTI. I can't help you on why you're not seeing the image - but I found the original source, although it's not user-friendly and will take you some searching:
https://www.tenderdetail.com/Indian-tender/smart-meter-tenders
Hi LTI, multibagger illustrates his 08:12 post with an image of three separate tender alerts:
#32033807 (due date 13/5/22) is for Shimla Himachal Pradesh, quantity/value not stated
#32085580 is for Assam for design/development/testing deployment of 6.2 lakh - i.e. 620K - smart meters, value not stated. This is clearly the tender to which mb was referring.
#32127121 is for Mumbai Maharashtra and has a tender value of 708.54 Crore - that is, c £74m; quantities not stated.
I know of nothing to suggest that there is a direct connection between any or all of these three tenders, apart of course from the general theme of smart metering. So far as I can see, therefore, the £74m tender (the third one on the list) has nothing particular to do with Assam. Naturally I'm open to correction if you think I've got this wrong.
Hi LTI, timed at 08:12 this morning.
apologies, #3686
(See multibagger's post #3656 on advfn)
LTI
"According to some interested parties on ADVFN, that I noticed earlier today, they have calculated that the total contract for Assam, could be between £67m and £74m."
Sorry but I'm afraid you have misinterpreted the posts on ADVFN. The figures quoted are for a TENDER, not a contract, and for Mumbai [The Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking], not Assam. The due date for the tender is not until 6 June. There is no direct nexus with the order announced today.
Fall is in my view overdone. Market cap post-merger will be c£23m FD, of which cash say £7m net of pension fund exposure - and cost synergies alone are f/c to add £1.5m-£1.75m pretax, not to mention sales synergies and cross-selling opportunities. I acknowledge that quality of management has come under fire latterly, but fully expect to see positive evidence of real turnround within the next 12 months and a share price of 150p or better within 2 years, perhaps sooner. Have bought today.
Colour, I have at no time taken sides in your ongoing (and on and on and ongoing.....) dispute with tonyj. The rights and wrongs are beside the point: what you don't seem to realise is the offensiveness of your constantly reiterated disrespect for any views other than your own. I beg you to give it a rest, it's getting exceedingly boring.
Sorry guys, but I for one have had more than enough of your using this board to constantly bicker and snipe at each other. Please, I beg you, could all of you now leave off. Time will in due course show which of you was wrong and which was right.
Any more sniping and I will be reluctantly obliged to consider filtering all three of you. That would be a shame, as all your perspectives are interesting, notwithstanding your differing points of view.
I may be mistaken here, but I had the impression that the contract was between the reagent supplier and the hospital running the trial - thus the matter was doubly outside AGL's control. It's also my understanding that the reagents in question are themselves among those used in Covid testing, so that it wasn't a question of a different reagent taking priority, but of a different and priority need (Covid) for the same reagent. Happy to stand corrected if need be.
I've been battling my way through the admission document, and would be grateful for informed comment on the following.
Page 223 sets out an unaudited pro forma statement of net assets of the Enlarged Group, as at 30/6/21 except that credit is given for projected completion adjustments of $321m (see note 4 on page 224).
What struck me about this is that the adjusted net group assets of $943.7m do not [or don't appear to] make any deduction for minority interests (MIs). In the case of Doba this is sort-of understandable, as Doba is an unincorporated "joint arrangement" between Exxon, Petronas and (indirectly) the Chad Government and is accounted for by Exxon and Petronas on an equity basis. In other words, the numbers reflect their combined percentage interests, rather than the whole thing, so to deduct an MI would be double counting. But I can't see that this applies to Totco and Cotco, the Chad and Cameroon pipeline companies. The adjusted figures (penultimate column on p.223) add $228.1m to the value of $378.8m in Exxon and Petronas's books, making $606.9m - but that looks closer to 100% of book value for Totco and Cocto, rather than the c. 71% I'd have expected. If I'm right, that would knock (29% x $607m) = $176m off the NAV, which isn't exactly peanuts.
While I can't easily see myself as the little boy pointing out the emperor's new clothes, I struggle to see what I'm missing. I'm hoping that more learned posters will tell me to stop worrying, on the grounds that the book assets are really of limited relevance....
Could I make it clear that my enthusiasm for the enlarged group is undimmed. It's only the accuracy of the admission statement itself that I'm calling into possible question. As I say, in the final analysis it may not matter.
We used to be taught "be careful who you get into bed with" - literally perhaps, but certainly metaphorically. Any protection offered by that particular government would be, I'd suggest, like the fox offering to guard the henhouse.
I'd have thought South Sudan is something of a poisoned chalice; an unattractive country to get involved in, and it's quite hard to see how acquiring assets there even at knockdown prices could be made to securely enhance SAVE's long-term reputation. (As PF points out: Sudan, as distinct from S Sudan, hasn't been on the table AFAIK.) On the footing that we are now travelling the Vitol-backed acquisition road, personally I'd much prefer Tunisia.
"Red herring" (draft SEC prospectus without numbers) for Innovative Eyewear, Lucyd's 84% owned operating subsidiary. Dated 13 Dec 2021. Makes interesting reading.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001808377/000182912621016248/innovativeeyewear_s1.htm
I'm not a lawyer - all I'm suggesting is that leaking insider info might be running close to the wind. Hey ho, whatever. At all events, let's assume there is indeed a placing and that certain PIs have been invited to participate. For non-insiders only: you have until (maybe) 7am tomorrow to guess what the placing price might be. Any offers? I'd go for 30p, although I mused about even as low as 25p. At which price it should be a basement bargain.
Or to pass it on!
Agreed. There's a similar situation with RNSs that from time to time get emailed overnight to shareholders on the mailing list of the PLC concerned - they always come with a standard health warning, but what's the point, as there's nothing anyone could do with the information anyway while markets are closed? But notwithstanding that, it's the law as it stands.......