Member Info for CitizenTS

Buzz makes sense
Ephemeral/Kurgan/Godawful, all complete know nothings
Just provoke on here hoping - someone else can tell the something!

@Mogger
Well done on Godawful. What's his name on LinkedIn?
Guess he's offered his services to rkh and been rejected. Godawful's longstanding abuse of social media on here puts him the wrong side of many lines.

OMG, is goza the old gozi? Has our St Petersburg sham poster crawled out again?

Agree with Ovets. Not a direct translation.
Most importantly an OM award would collapse and quite possibly eliminate any requirement for Rkh to fund raise on a FID for Seal Lion. It could even leave rkh with some funds left over!
As imho the share price for a long time now has anticipated chunky dilution to get Sea Lion to first oil, the OM piece of the puzzle could be transformational.

zzzzzzzzz

@Godawful, it's spelt "loser".

Some stuff that might be news for Xi Jin Ping.
South China Sea isn't his. Taiwan isn't his, Falkland Islands isn't his.
Who are his friends? Nuttters in Argentina and one or two corrupt autocrats like Vlad, and not even them really!
But as he aspires to be the colonial power of the 21st century what should he expect.

Godawful's just the same as the "wouldn't want ..." really. Just a load of ego self-massage.

so Godawful's the only person in the world who knows how OM will progress ???????

@LTT The way these projects work is that all external financing (including vendor financing) comes off the top of the total project cost, whoever arranges it. What's left is then the equity cheque that, one way or another, has to be provided by the partners.
So if the proportion of the total cost funded from external debt was to follow the same proportions then yes, your answer is correct.
Navitas' outstanding track record on financing should strongly support a high proportion of external debt funding. Obv the more they can arrange the less of an interest free loan they end up giving to rkh.

@LTT, you're a good guy but as mistaken as Cyan on what the Navitas deal is. The 8 Dec rns is as clear as daylight that rkh have to find their 35% of the remaining costs AFTER third party debt financing. And 2/3rds of those remaining costs are met, for Rkh, by an interest free loan form Navitas. Providing these bits of the puzzle is Navitas' cost of entry.
So it's not USD120m. More like, say, only 40% of that, depending on how much external debt financing can be raised.
You are absolutely correct that we should indeed anticipate a very significant share of the costs would be met by the external financing. Navitas have an outstanding track record on that sort of thing so I guess saying external financing would provide 60% is realistic, or conservative?
What FIG need to do, as Sam's quote that you mention suggests, to break the financing logjam is to sort the details around admitting Navitas.

Expect Navitas to sort the external funding anyway. And then for the costs that remain net of that "third party debt financing" Navitas will in addition be meeting 2/3rds of Rkh's costs with an interest free loan. Really doesn't leave that much for Rkh to find/raise.
Just need to work through the FIG stuff.
A higher sort of OM award, should it happen, could even mean some left over!
Fingers crossed ...

Do we know if the case is closed yet? Have not seen that it is. So guess might expect outcome soon but not exactly tomorrow.

Even if Italy were to backtrack now and say, ok you can develop OM and, as buzz has said, it was sold, that surely can't he the end of the OM saga.
All that delay, disruption, opportunity lost/cost, even bankruptcy risk!
We'd get interest and then some, in addition to selling the asset. Has to be? ???????

Some strange variants have suddenly appeared on here. Our world is changing;.
Looking forwards with anticipation!!

10.24 trade where I'm looking. I'm in danger of getting hopeful ...

Seems I was wrong on what part of the funding Navitas are providing to rkh at 0%. It is 2/3rds of Rkh's total 35% venture share of the cost, rather than 2/3rds of rkh's slice of the cost after any borrowings. Thanks Cyan for putting me right on that!
The way I see it now is that Navitas will arrange borrowings for two-thirds of the project's cost in Israel/Norway or wherever has been mentioned and Navitas will bear all the interest cost for that. From Navitas' point of view this is debt that will have to be obtained in any event. I would still be surprised if this debt, when it is obtained, gives the lenders any security over Navitas's assets outside of Sea Lion and in that case it is project finance by any definition of the name even if it does not come from UKEF.
The upside for us is that if rkh do the rest of their share with equity then rkh's whole share of profit from the partnership will be interest free. This will be wonderful for profit in the early years. I had been assuming a serious interest cost when those profits are reported and am very happy to delete that!.
And No doubt Navitas ill

Remarkable that a sovereign state would not pay its costs. Its that sort of thing that gives ICSID an essential role as a recourse.

Hey guys
Think we've just discovered Cyanide's putting some serious work into an attempt to mislead us all.

Cyan
Keep it brief next time, it's an art.
You'll find there is expected to be project finance available for 65% of the project. It's only the rest (the "equity" part of the financing) that the partners will have to write a cheque for.
Furthermore the prospective agreement is that what Navitas will provide and I test free loan for is 2/3rds of rkh's equity slice. So rkh would only have to find about a third of the amount you mention.
IF you are to be taken at your word then you have just discovered the whole shebang to be hugely better than you ever realised. And even that's just looking at the first 200mln barrels out of a quite possible 1bln plus.
Or you're some kind of very peculiar reptile.