The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
That's one of the main gripes here Sycho, the lack of updates. Habib's removal was interesting but we never heard anything else. I do note that RosyLee (RedLee, great poster who drops in here sometimes) pointed to the fact that it seemed as though Habib was keen on getting Amur involved in some sort of debt instrument in order to pay for a BFS and perhaps that was something that lead to his removal. Otherwise, no idea. Whoever orchestrated his removal certainly had the pull to do it.
There was talk of a 'media week' in Autumn of 2018 which never came to pass.
The PFS seemed to take ages to create and release and when it did, the competent person behind it was not affiliated with a serious organisation. The PFS itself had many holes in it.
With something like the TEO there is no messing around. There is back and forth amongst the consultancy hired to refine it and the Russian gov't and Amur itself. There should be no room for gimmickry within it, and should therefore be the first such valuation document that can be perused that will give an indication of how AMC will go about economically extracting the metal. So, let's see; when it's released we should all have a better idea of what we are dealing with here, and so should the market.
Hey Sycho. I distinctly remember that date I believe it was 30/31 Oct 2016. Shares had a little pop on it, and then around two weeks later they started to properly move on the back of this to around 18p from what I recall (note at the time we had something like ~500m shares in issue). No, there hasn't been any other update since then. The cynic in me tells me that that RY probably got them involved in order to read their proposal for how they would construct the mine in order to inform his thinking about how it could be done.
Best
CBS
to be clear that dodgy webpage appeared in the days after the license approval in May 2015; it was clearly created to goose the price further at the time by someone with an interest.
with all respect Moneyman64 there weren't any strong hints of an offer. I do distinctly remember a webpage that appeared that said that the CEO of Norilsk was seen touring the site with his CFO and others. The webpage disappeared a few days later. It was a scam, clearly. You dont tend to get business paparazzi hanging out in Amur oblast.
RY has mentioned one offer, one time in the depths of the GFC in around 2009. Some unaffiliated persons called RY and made a seriously low offer (note where the shares were trading at the time), and said if they have to call back and ask again the offer will be half what was offered at the time. That's the only time I've ever heard him about speak about an offer and he quite rightly turned that down (this was at one of the proactive events in I think 2018). If there has been anything since then there has been to my knowledge no published relevant information related to any offer. We have all imagined hints and so on - from 2016 when we signed a non-binding agreement with Jinchuan (only, and this is important, for engineering and procurement activities). To my knowledge we have never received a bid.
Best
CBS
Yes I get the frustration. I think that's been the opening line to my messages here going on about five years. This should become more and more irresistible as the Ni price rallies. I remember saying the same thing years ago and using 'recovers' instead of 'rallies' yet here we are today at $10+/lb. There is no real hard valuation document (the PFS was not it), and it's my hope the TEO will allow the market to shine a light on many unknowns. Let's put it like this: Ni price at at ten year high while stocks have been clobbered. Lack of valuation material that should be in the TEO, which fingers crossed should be released into the public domain while Ni is trading high. Narratives will start to be constructed about nickel; you'll start seeing more stories about it in the press and other media about it's economic scarcity and so on. Cash will start to pile in as we've recently seen with Talon. Jurisdiction sensitivity will hopefully be less of an issue in such an environment. If anything RY has perhaps been treading water here for a while, but perhaps the conditions under which he wants to start properly marketing us are coming in now. If that's the case, 2022 could be our year (as I've previously said about 2021, 20202, 2019, 20XX).All the bestCBS
One further point and just to summarise: Euroclear will be used yes by banks but also by pretty much any other professional outfit out there. Funds and the like for example. Whatever the entity *may* be that seems to be acquiring shares, then I'd say then it is almost certainly a larger professional outfit.
A reasonable theory TDT. I work for large investment banks, and just about every one of them use Euroclear. I'd note that Euroclear is not something you or I would use. They are a large central counterparty that, at least in my business, manage the business of netting off client orders in the bond trading world / facilitiating triparty transactions and so on. I digress. Every one of the other nominees that you listed are typically associated with retial broking (hargreaves, etc...).
I would argue that if there was one single entity acquiring shares, then I would point to Euroclear as being the entity in which these are being bought and kept.
Well said Cbaron. Was in here in Jan 2016 when the oil complex was being hammered and 88e along with it; just prior to the drilling on Icewine...2 I think? or 1? Can't recall. The hype on that was astronomical. Same thing happened with Merlin last year. What's different wrt to last year is that the oil price has recovered. Will the Americans bring their fervor to the party in the same manner they did last year post GameStop and the like? Remains to be seen. Either way keep an eye out on market cap as and when the sp rallies. I got out when the market cap briefly touched £500m which was enough risk for me to bow out prior to the drill ending, as I recall that was around 4.5p last year. 500m seemed simply like a nice round number to make my exit. Yes as you say a good drill result and the sky is the limit.
It's spec at the moment.
To the old hands here like Brom - glad to see you're still around and I hope you make your payday.
All the best
CBS
lol sorry senseman, I get you!
agreed WellIntervention. The speed with which the debt has been cancelled suggests a focus on moving past this issue and onto something else. To think the outsanding debt on the cbs was priced at around $70m when they were trading at 30%...criminal that the cash balance wasnt used at the time to repurchase.
don't disagree and not to p1ss anyone off here but as NGR and Bart often refer to, there needs to be some sort of forward plan here. I think DiveCentre made a good point some time ago that it would be difficult for the co to release forward plans while they are dealing with the debt issue. I suspect that Michael Wolfe guy hired with the deal making background at UBS and HSBC gives a clue as to what the intentions are here: some sort of sale. If 6 keeps on flowing the good stuff, the remaining $80m in debt paid off over time and a good cash balance retained, then this should go on for a re-rate. I can't diminish what the doubters say here though, ideally wed have more than one well. A deal/sale looks like the most sensible outcome. Best of luck to all here.
CBS
well that's a change, the ask on HUR bonds is above par at 102
agreed. The virtue signalling around the climate is going to get very expensive.
After all, I don't think these global leaders meeting at COP26 are flying around in battery-powered jets. Oh whatever will they do if we don't have fossil fuels to transport them in their G5s to lecture everyone on the imminent catastrophe that is going to destroy the planet as of ten years ago?
hi Potato
The entirety of the dog5h1t show run over the last year to send this co into an arrangement was immense.
Indeed, yes to your question.
The bond holders were willing to forego $50m of the $230m in order to agree to restructure. The flip side of that was that they were willing to accept a risk of $180m for something that they deemed as worthless.
Doesnt compute.
It was a clear grab for a producing asset on the pretext of covid 19 ruining oil prices and the application of restructuring legislation. The judge fortunately looked through this in part 26 A and B of the companies act and found that part A was not satisified (both A and B must be). Generally he could see that other stakeholders (the FPSO for example) were willing to work with HUR. The existing cash balance at the time. The judge probably also wondered why the ex BOD were not taking reasonable steps to reduce debt when the bonds were trading at around 30 cents when the cash balance of the co was above $100m. I suspect he could smell a rat with the restructuring action given this. And also that the covid 19 was, in oiler terms, a blip (though a giant one), and that a return to business would adjust prices.
This could also be seen in the bond prices. The debt outstanding trades here:
https://www.boerse-frankfurt.de/bond/xs1641462277-hurricane-energy-plc-7-5-17-22
Prior to CA's legal action the debt was trading at 30 cents on the dollar. That essentially was what, in other liquidations (see Xcite) that was almost exactly what was recovered (30 cents on the dollar to bond holders). CA kicks off legal action and prices to move to above 50 cents. Some clues were being signalled by the bond market at that point.
The CEO seems adamant in reminding the market that this is an oil company with a single well, and that it could fk up at any time. Slow clap for that b3llcheese. Could happen to any well, any time.
But here we go. If consistently producing oil at a conservative lets say 10,000 per day
month production 300,000
cash cost 30
spot 80
monthly 15,000,000
csh bal 100,000,000 (current, my estimate)
Hurdle 150,000,000 (outstanding bonds)
diff 50,000,000
months 3
Nov
Dec
Jan default risk at zero
Conservative assumptions here such as cash cost per barrel (probably too high my estimate) and spot price (80 seems reasonable) and production at 10,0000 (also seems reasonable).
if 6 keeps on going past Jan then using the same assumptions:
Feb 15,000,000
Mar 15,000,000
Apr 15,000,000
Jun 15,000,000
Jul 15,000,000
cash bal ex bonds 75,000,000
So need to have faith that 6 keeps on flowing. But generally speaking i'd say the default risk is all but removed now given bonds are trading at almost par.
Good luck
thanks GD, that makes lots of sense, much appreciated.
If all banks and financial institutions are effectively penalised for raising money for oilers (bond issues and so forth)then the price of oil will go on a mind bending trajectory upwards. Initially, Oilers will reduce their capex even more than they have in the last 7/8 years. Prices will explode upwards, and stay there. Oil Majors will not need banks as their cash balances will be so high they can fund their projects themselves. If bs like that happens from the chancellor 3 figure oil will become a new normal.
This will happen while the govt, which p155ed £40bn on test and trace will fail, and fail again, to install charging infrastructure for vehicles. They couldnt get an app to work for £40bn. They aren't going to be getting charging infrastructure rolled out in a competent manner.
Oil will do very well the next decade.
Hi all
Trying to get my head around the October uplift and sale numbers.
HUR sold 530mbbls (going to just call it 530k). Now...if they were lifting *on average* 10,450 per day, that means they would have been lifting it out of Lancaster for around 51 days or so. Does that make sense to anyone? I thought the offload to the Aoku Mizou was once a month (30 days).
On another topic. I'm trying to work out costs.
It seems we have $150m of bonds still outstanding. With a 7.5% coupon and eight months left to run on them, then assuming 240 days interest from here to maturity (240 days, 8 months * 30), then were looking at ~$7.4m interest.
On the Sales side of things. there is a $2.90 to Brent discount on what we sell to BP via our agreement with them (this is after they've chosen their option of which 5 day period of the month to pick the average sale price). Was going through an old RNS yesterday and trying to figured out the cost per barrel for the FPSO. I've seen on here variously $29, but I note in the Annual Report from 2020 that there is a range depending on various factors (that I don't understand), i.e. at one point it was $17.90 I think.
Thanks for any input all.
CBS
sure thing Kamakiriad - let's hope for some further updates and increasing brent price next few months.
Hat Tip to the poster whose moniker starts with 'GD' (cant remember the rest of it) who pointed this out yesterday.
Spoke too soon, it is there, just not alongside the monthly production RNS:
"As of 30 September 2021, the Company had net free cash(1) of $73 million, compared to the last reported figure of $144 million as of 31 August 2021. This follows the completion of the repurchase of approximately 34% of the Company's outstanding $230 million 7.5% Convertible Bonds due in July 2022 at a cost of $62 million (including accrued interest), as announced on 15 September 2021."
So add whatever figure you can dream up that would have been the proceeds of the recent sale and add to $73m. Must be closing in on $100m.
kind of annoyed. Typically these uplift and sale RNSs contain a Financial update which shows an updated cash balance. This update was buried in the end of the report without a financial update. Par for the course I guess with these guys. 530mbbls in the Oct uplift impressive.