Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
So do I TBTB (take mental illness seriously) but this is a toxic place that, based on some of the posts here, appears likely to cause or at the very least exacerbate such issues.... Some people would be better off avoiding it.
Anyway way one and all I am off for the weekend, there is little point conducting a one way conversation ;0)
I wish you all a lovely weekend - I hope it is warmer than those of recent weeks!! Bbbbrrr
Oh dear here we go gain - firstly there was a review of ALL historic PSA's in 2019 and the rights of the TPDC were changed and now (so I have heard from BoD) now stan at 20%. Furthermore each back-in is negotin its own merits and so will not necessarily reflect those signed n the ast - the assumptions that applied to Kiliwani and other PSA's have been totally superseded. But then of course haggismctripe always knows best....
Nothing changes Baramara - the back-in rights apply to the combined shareholding of the JV partnership -whether that is ARA, AEX and SCIR or just ARA and AEX makes not a jot of difference they will take whatever %age they choose (up to their maximum) of the "whole", of the 100%.
Yes BG exactly and that was the reason for the delay in the approval of the M&P offer for WEN - the original agreement supercseded the TPDC's preemption rights; it had to be renegotiated to allow TPDC to exercise those rights. Note also that their purchase was funded from income....
Absolutely RJ, anyway as haggismctripe has me filtered he will not see my responses to his queries, so maybe you can summarise them for his consumption; he may even give them some credence if they come from you! ;0)
It is not a "given" that backing in would necessitate contribution to historic costs, or indeed, if so, how far back they would go or what they would include; it would be by negotiation.
Though RJ, if we are to believe the headlines the GSA has been agreed for an eternity, we were simply kept waiting interminably for it to be approved..... I suspect that the imponderable was what event acted as the trigger for that back-in? You might argue that until such time as the Dev License was approved there was very little point of backing into anything? TPDC being a 20% shareholder in what?
Lump of cash coming in from the back-in - highly unlikely if you are to believe the BoD. Contributions to past and future costs likely to come from TPDC's share of future income streams. So cash in future but not likely in the short term.
It is often suggested that post Covid and increasingly thereafter the UK and the wider world population has struggled more and more with poor mental health. Is it real or is it just a reflection of there being more focus on people's mental wellbeing? Well it would be appear to me to be more than true, evidenced by the number of posters on this and other boards that are seriously deranged; angry, anxious, paranoid or otherwise troubled.
Yep, as I suggested - that would be a good outcome.
But with only 2 -3 trades in the last 2 hours RJ. Volume is what we need RJ, isolated trades at whatever price are of little consequence and indicative of very little. Executed more for effect or opportunism than for substance by and large.
We will need a massive increase in volumes to achieve that RJ methinks. I would like to think it possible but it is a bit of stretch... 1.15p bid close though I expect.
"Shut up Tom"... oh, the irony! Lol.
Now Rojo, that is amusing ;0)
It might only be my perverse way of looking at things BUT, if the TPDC had ALREADY exercised their back-in rights of whatever that might be , surely to goodness that would justify an RNS - to suggest that such a move would not be price sensitive is surely ridiculous...?
Maybe in the same way that the recent "announcements" by the Govt and other bodies have evidently been indications of soon to be executed events, this might be too? Though surely this would have happened as part of the GSA or an amendment to the previous PSA?
Anyway, no point speculating and I know the BD have long been expecting the back-in rights to be executed but, yet again this seems to be another case of the "cart before the horse" or otherwise, appalling communications.
Well one factor to consider for many people is that a non-listed company cannot be held in an ISA and is difficult in a normal, vanilla SIPP wrapper accessed through a retail Investment Platform(though some will accept non-listed companies at a cost). So typically you would have to sell to cash and re-purchase outside of the ISA wrapper or transfer the asset from a simple vanilla SIPP to a more complex one , again, typically at a cost.
Amusing? Well then it evidently doesn't take much to cause you to titter Rojo! ;0)
It is pure drivel.
It s totally contrary to my instincts but I have had enough - I now have one person on my filter list. I just can't suffer this fool any longer - what a load of dross. Why, oh why does this berk bother with this drivel? It can only be in a deliberate attempt to annoy people - well no more!
Okay LOTM - apologies and understood; I conflated two separate issues, as you suggested.
And thanks for the link.
Morning CP, the Gas Service Agreement, was exactly that an agreement - it requires negotiation and, hence, signatures; I am not 100% sure that a 25 year Development License actually needs signing - it is a License and awarded by the Govt to someone that applies for it. ARA will simply be awaiting notification that it has been granted. Though, in any event, I would anticipate there being some razzamatazz around its award but then haven't we already seen that?