Member Info for DeusExMachina

Paul

I seem to remember that back in the 2010-12 era, there were a lot of professional O&G guys - many working on the rigs - who were heavily invested in RKH. They mostly preferred to post on ADVFN, I think, because the Moderation was laxer than on III and LSE. So, if they wanted to tell a few jokes or swear a bit - nobody was bothered. Any supposed drilling leaks could be disguised by burying the info in impenetrable rambling posts - often in dialect. After the drilling finished the Board seemed to get taken over by the Boiler Room fraternity (the 'girls') who have been wreaking havoc ever since.

That particular Troll Swamp really needs draining and the individuals who run the Boiler Rooms need to be held to account in the High Court. It will happen - hopefully soon. A nice project for Sir Keir Starma (ex DPP) perhaps !

DEM

US judge says Argentina owes about $16 billion after YPF payout trial

NEW YORK, Sept 8 (Reuters) - Argentina suffered a big legal defeat on Friday as a U.S. judge ruled that the country must pay about $16 billion to minority shareholders of YPF (YPFD.BA) arising from the government's 2012 seizure of a majority stake in the oil and gas company.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan ruled in favor of Burford Capital (BURF.L), which funded the litigation brought by shareholders Petersen Energia Inversora and Eton Park Capital Management LP, and according to court papers was entitled to a respective 70% and 75% of their damages.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-rules-against-argentina-following-ypf-payout-trial-2023-09-08/

If Argentina are determined to grab Falklands oil they only have two options. Seizure by force is a complete non starter. An unintended consequence of this Judgement is that it should greatly reduce the risk of Argentina attempting any illegal Seizure through Legislation. In any case, lacking a navy or air force to enforce any seizure attempt means that it would be doomed to fail.

Another box ticked.

DEM

Chessmaster1234 on 21 August reminds us all that:

"my posts are not all opinion based, they are based on facts with some educated opinion thrown in to allow the masses a small insight into how the mind of a genuis (sic) works. The difference between me & most other investors is that a (sic) do more detailed research than the average man so I may better anticipate what & when significant events may be expected and thus gear up and profit from them".

Imagine my surprise when I read over the weekend that Chessmaster1234 is asking:

"Will it be Funding or a LOI on an FPSO, it's anyone's guess but we do know both should come before FID based on Shenandoah, where Navitas are also operator".

Navitas are NOT of course the Operator of Shenandoah. As a Chess Master with a brain the size of a planet - very surprised you made this schoolboy error. Take 100 lines.

"Shenandoah is an ultra-high-pressure oil and gas development located in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, US. Beacon Offshore Energy, an upstream production company formed by Blackstone Energy Partners in 2016, is currently the operator and holds 20.05% interest in the deepwater project. BOE II Exploration, another Blackstone Group portfolio company, holds 10.95% stake in the project. Other development partners of the project include ShenHai (49%), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Israel-based Navitas Petroleum, and HEQ Deepwater (20%), a company formed by Quantum Energy Partners and Houston Energy in 2021. HEQ Deepwater acquired 20% working interest in the Shenandoah development from BOE II Shen, an affiliate of Beacon Offshore, in August 2021".

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/shenandoah-field-development/

https://www.offshore-energy.biz/beacon-gives-out-another-contract-for-gulf-of-mexico-project/

DEM

PS

Shenandoah - discovery 2009 - first oil 2024

Sea Lion - discovery 2010 - first oil - 2026

Looks like Rockhopper's time frame is pretty much par for the course and not so shabby for an AIM minnow !

Hoorah for Sam !! He deserves a knighthood (Latics)

If Sea Lion's three Phases are on stream in a few years time producing 300,000 bopd from the three FPSO's + gas coming online in the SFB and the latest exploration campaign in NNFB getting underway - it won't be Sir Samuel - more likely Baron Moody of Stanley !

DEM

Good to see that Sam's decision to extend the Open Offer of Shares & Warrants to retail investors in last years Placing was very much in line with best practice.

I have no doubt that any future Placing - in the unlikely event that one is required - will follow the same approach. I am confident that neither the Board nor the great majority of Private Investors will succumb to the daily hectoring and bullyboy tactics of certain elements on this Board.

A gentle reminder to the clever individual(s) who are CFA Charterholders or who have other finance qualifications - you are in no way exempt from the LSE 'Terms and Conditions of Use' nor of course the Laws of Libel. You might also wish to review the 'Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct' of your own professional bodies, including:

https://www.cfainstitute.org/en/ethics-standards/ethics/code-of-ethics-standards-of-conduct-guidance

Extract from todays interesting & relevant Editorial in the Investors' Chronicle online by Rosie Carr, Editor:

"In the UK, too, attitudes towards private investors are changing. There has been a notable shift in official support for broader retail investor inclusion in UK capital markets, including in last year’s Austin Review, which stated that the default presumption should be for retail inclusion alongside institutional investors in both IPOs and follow-on fundraisings, and Rachel Kent’s Investment Research review, published in July.

Platform PrimaryBid says regulatory tailwinds are set to accelerate inclusion, and that while some retail participation is still limited by legacy EU rules, these caps are expected to be removed. It points out that in 2022 there were 13 FTSE 350 offers, of which 85 per cent were open to retail, while seven of the nine offers so far this year from the 350 have been open to retail.

That’s a sea change from just three years ago, says James Deal, head of UK at PrimaryBid: “Best practice now demands that companies include retail investors when they raise capital.”

There is still a long way to go – retail investors are frozen out of many fundraisings, and even when they are included, the speed of execution (often overnight) can rule them out, but Deal says that PrimaryBid is an advocate for bookbuilds being open for as long as possible, and that better notification channels will be key to improving retail access".

DEM

Hi Zen

Yes - all fair comment. Plenty of options available.

DEM

I think the lack of a formal Announcement stating that the Stay has been lifted were dealt with in the RKH RNS dated 13 July 2023 headed:

'Update on Arbitration - Stay of enforcement to be lifted once Rockhopper put in place relevant escrow arrangements'

After a brief summary of the key events to date the RNS continues:

'On the 11 July 2023, and having received additional comments from the Parties the Committee issued the following orders with regard to the provisional stay of enforcement:

1: That the provisional stay of enforcement shall terminate 5 business days following the provision by Rockhopper to Italy of documentation that escrow arrangements in the form proposed have been established, provided that Italy does not within those 5 business days submit a reasoned written objection in these annulment proceedings that the escrow arrangements established are not in accordance with the proposed arrangements'.

https://rockhopperexploration.co.uk/2023/07/update-on-arbitration-2/

In the current (2006) version of the 'ICSID Convention, Regulations and Rules' - 'Rule 54 Stay of Enforcement of the Award' on pages 126-7 provides a concise set of rules and procedures as to how ICSID will deal with Stays.

Clause 3 in Rule 54 states:

'All stays shall automatically terminate on the date on which a final decision is rendered on the application',

https://icsid.worldbank.org/sites/default/files/ICSID%20Convention%20English.pdf

On July 10, 2023 'The (ICSID) ad hoc Committee issues Procedural Order No. 2 concerning the termination of the stay of enforcement of the award'. ie Final Decision. Click on Procedural Details tab:

https://icsid.worldbank.org/cases/case-database/case-detail?CaseNo=ARB/17/14

I am certain that Rockhopper will have been guided by their retained arbitration lawyers King & Spalding - one of the top global firms in this field. If K&S say the Stay is lifted then I'm sure the Board will be delighted to be able to start considering 'next steps'. These will include choice of jurisdiction(s) to present the Award, composition of in-country legal team, strategy regarding which assets to target, costs and timing. I doubt that there will be an RNS announcing these details in advance - as there is no need to give RoI advance warning.

Lifting of the Stay is yet another box ticked and will, I imagine, increase the value of the Award - should some of it need to be sold to cover Rockhopper's share of Sea Lion costs. In previous posts I have suggested a figure of around $36m as RKH's likely contribution - assuming a total project cost of $1.2bn - but this may be reduced if a third party joins the JV. With Ombrina Mare now worth over $200m net to RKH after paying Harbour Litigation's fees - $36m (£29m) seems very 'doable' - even if any part sale of the Award is heavily discounted.

DEM

CJ1986

The style is rather reminiscent of another banned alias from your murky past.

Reported to LSE for multiple breaches of the LSE T's & C's - good riddance to bad rubbish !

DEM

"I do not want the board dominated by these whingers, who offer nothing constructive but simply constantly whinge & moan about all things Rockhopper, without putting any realistic, relevant, balanced & critical arguments forward". (Glen69)

https://rb.gy/okwdo

DEM

"I do not want the board dominated by these whingers, who offer nothing constructive but simply constantly whinge & moan about all things Rockhopper, without putting any realistic, relevant, balanced & critical arguments forward". (Glen69)

https://rb.gy/80qbb

DEM

Whilst Glenrothes1969 in his recent reincarnation as Chessmaster1234 hones his latest insults against genuine posters - important real news is being released !

According to yesterday's Law Gazette:

'Shockwaves' as Supreme Court rules litigation funding deals unenforceable

"Litigation funders will have to redraft the terms of their agreements following a widely awaited ruling by the Supreme Court this morning. In PACCAR Inc & Ors v Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors, four out of five justices ruled that such agreements fall within the statutory definition of damages-based agreements (DBAs). As they had been entered in to without satisfying conditions for DBAs, they were therefore unenforceable.

The ruling concerned collective proceedings brought against truck manufacturers following a European Commission decision that five companies had operated a cartel. The proceedings were supported by litigation funding agreements under which the funder’s remuneration is calculated by reference to a share of the damages ultimately recovered.

Alice Darling, senior associate at magic circle firm Clifford Chance, said the decision 'has rendered many funding agreements currently in place unenforceable'.

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/shockwaves-as-supreme-court-rules-litigation-funding-deals-unenforceable/5116775.article

Also:

'The Supreme Court finds that litigation funding agreements (“LFAs”) are damages-based agreements (“DBAs”) within the meaning of the legislation regulating DBAs'

https://www.clydeco.com/en/insights/2023/07/the-supreme-court-finds-that-litigation-funding-ag

And:

Uncertainty for funders after UK Supreme Court ruling

The UK Supreme Court has raised doubts about the enforceability of many litigation funding agreements in England and Wales, as funders look set to review the terms of their agreements.

https://rb.gy/80qbb

Early days as Harbour Litigation is a US listed company and if the Award is pursued through the US Courts - none of this may apply. However, as the UK is a global leader in the world of arbitration I doubt that the Supreme Court ruling will have no impact in other jurisdictions.

I can see no downside for RKH and there just might be the opportunity to negotiate a more favourable new contract if this is required. As currently RKH may end up paying Harbour as much as €40m on a €200m payout - there is plenty of scope for Harbour to 'make a gesture'.

Interesting times.

DEM

"but you omitted to say that Rkh can sell the award, in full or part after annulment and that could generate a minimum of $75mln ($50mln net to rkh) after annulment", (Chessmaster)

I don't recall seeing the $75m figure mentioned before - are you able to share your source for this figure ?

Your $50m net figure assumes a 33% payment to Harbour, rather than the 20% figure quoted by SM in the RNS of 24-08-2022 'assuming full recovery of the award'. We know that the Harbour fees are on a sliding scale but its never been published. So, once again, would be interested to know the source.

I seem to recall that we enjoyed a few drinks, probably after an O&G AGM (HUR ?) discussing CCI and related topics.

DEM

Bristow Group responsible for Search and Rescue, SAR, and aircraft support solutions at Mount Pleasant Complex, in the Falkland Islands moved a new helicopter frame by road from Mare Harbour to Heli-Ops on Friday 6 July.

The move started at 1200 from Mare Harbour, at a walking pace, and passed the air terminal in time before the arrival of the airbridge at 1600hrs.

The helicopter frame is of the second much newer and eagerly anticipated Sikorsky S92A which replaces Sikorsky S61N.

The helicopter was delivered on the Falkland Islands Resupply Ship (FIRS) and transported to the Bristow hangar at MPC, HQ of the British Forces South Atlantic Islands.

https://en.mercopress.com/2023/07/08/new-sikorsky-bristow-helicopter-unloaded-at-falklands-mpa

DEM

Why is it called bonefish?

Commonly, bonefish are named for the many fine bones they contain. English common names include banana, bananafish, Indo-Pacific bonefish, ladyfish, round jaw, salmon peel, tarpon, tenny, and tenpounder.

What do bonefish eat?

The bonefish feeds on benthic worms, fry, crustaceans, and mollusks. Ledges, drop-offs, and clean, healthy seagrass beds yield abundant small prey such as crabs and shrimp. It may follow stingrays to catch the small animals they root from the substrate.

Why are bonefish so tough to catch ?

Not only are bonefish naturally good at hiding, but they're also elusive and incredibly stealthy. From making sure that you aren't wearing bright colours or covered in distinctive smells, to timing, measuring, and presenting your casts perfectly, there's a lot that must be done to successfully nab one.

Are bonefish aggressive?

Bonefish are fast, aggressive, and provide that rush of adrenaline every angler seeks. At times they can be difficult to spot and catch but with some pointers, everyone can be well on their way to landing their first bonefish. Bonefish are notoriously wary and great skill must be taken both in approach and presentation when fishing for them. English speaking fishermen often refer to them as “grey ghosts."

Can you eat bonefish?

Additionally, you can only eat the small bonefish of about six inches or under, as the bigger ones may contain a toxin called clupeotoxin, a poison that is common in plankton-eating fish. This poison leads to death in about 50% of the cases, which is extremely high.

How strange that any genuine poster should choose an alias named after such an unpleasant creature.

So, Ladyfish or Banana or whoever you are - be gone and take your poisonous toxins elsewhere. You have no place here.

DEM

Great link yesterday from pauldrayton:

"My client that is a leader within the Oil and Gas Industry has a key requirement for a COMPEX electrician to carry out remedial works on the Falkland Islands. * This is a 6 weeks contract, all expenses paid. * Carrying out remedial works. * Must have COMPEX experience. * Paying £350 per day, starts August".

According to Google: 'CompEx is the leading national training, assessment and certification scheme for electricians and other electro-technical craftspersons working in potentially hazardous or explosive atmospheres'.

Some of you may recall that as part of their exit from the FI, Harbour Energy came to an agreement with Navitas, Rockhopper and FIG that the ownership of the 'Temporary Dock Facility' (TDF), aka the ‘Noble Frontier Barge’, would be transferred to the remaining JV partners. This provided both a 'clean exit for Harbour' and 'scope to upgrade for Sea Lion development'.

I seem to recall that the original plan was for FIG to build a new Port facility at Port Stanley to replace FIPASS. This would have entailed both FIPASS and the TDF being dismantled and removed. Unfortunately, FIG appears to have rejected the detailed proposals by BAM Nutall on grounds of cost and is still some years away from having a brand new Port. At a stroke this has conveniently converted the TDF from being an expensive liability into a rather useful asset. It now seems very likely that the TDF will be used for Sea Lion related berthing freeing up FIPASS for all other non-SL related shipping. In time, FIG itself may also need the TDF, as the old Port structure (FIPASS) will have to be removed before the new Port - which will occupy the same footprint - can be completed. This may result in a 'capability gap' of several months.

The TDF is approx. 250m East of FIPASS and the single barge & causeway is only approx 15% of the total size of FIPASS. If you type ‘FIPASS Port Stanley’ into the search box of Google Earth Pro – you can zoom into both structures. We know that the TDF requires some remedial works including maintenance work to the footbridge. I would not be surprised if the bridge also carries all the electrical cabling to the barge which may also require some renewal and upgrading to cope with the SL production traffic. With Stanley Services Fuel Depot closeby, I assume that there may also be a pipeline running under the footbridge to the TDF. The combination of possible fumes from the fuel pipes + high voltage cabling, may explain why the advert specifies a CompEx qualified electrician.

The advert seeks one electrician for six weeks - so this is not going to be major works to the Power Station or at Mount Pleasant, who doubtless have their own electricians anyway.

Getting the TDF up and running in Q3 2023 seems a very logical and welcome 'next step' .

Another box ticked!

DEM

As regards the sometimes slightly odd behaviour of the three parties in the case:

I think the RoI lawyers pathological aversion to co-operating with even the simplest request/instruction/time frame from the Arbiters is easily explained. Of the four possible grounds for an Annulment - the most promising one from RoI's viewpoint is that 'the Tribunal has manifestly exceeded its powers'. Each time that RoI meekly obeys the instructions from ICSID - their argument that ICSID has no jurisdiction becomes less tenable. In any case the legal team - all employed by the State - will no doubt do whatever their political masters instruct, regardless of commercial logic or reasonable behaviour.

In a similar vein - by bending over backwards at every opportunity, ICSID has clearly demonstrated their determination to avoid any future accusation that they have not allowed RoI every possible opportunity to state their case. ICSID is anxious to both maintain their legal supremacy over European institutions and to create 'bomb proof' case law to be quoted in similar future cases.

Finally, Sam is probably more than content for the OM Award to continue increasing in value at €1.25m per month. The company does not at present need the monies and as I have commented before - once the €200m hits the RKH coffers - the company will be like the unfortunate elk in the Larson cartoon.

https://www.whitebirdrising.com/youre-a-change-agent-bummer-of-a-birthmark/

As regards time scales:

I remain convinced that all time scales quoted in the ICSID Handbook refer to working days, not calendar days. For example in Regulation 29 on page 69 in the 'Administrative and Financial Regulations' - discussing time limits relating to the delivery of 'notifications and instruments' - the clause states that weekends and bank holidays will not apply. It would be illogical to accept that they should apply in other time limits. (However, I accept that this is not clearly stated one way or the other).

The RKH RNS dated 25th April states that: "Rockhopper shall, within 30 days of the date of the decision, apprise the Committee of arrangements agreed with Italy for the mitigation of the risk of non-recoupment or that negotiations have failed and, in the latter event, propose concrete arrangements in accordance with the decision for the mitigation of the risk of non-recoupment. Italy may then briefly comment on Rockhopper's proposal within 10 days, constructively highlighting any areas of disagreement between the Parties".

So the 30 day time limit from the 'decision' date of April 24th will be Fri 9th June allowing for 10 Sat/Sun and 3 Bank Holidays. So, I would not be too surprised if there is an RNS in the next couple of days. The 10 day additional time limit will expire on Mon 26th June, counting working days only. An RNS a day or two later is timely with the AGM on the 29th.

DEM

Harbour Energy planning to merge with Talos - with main listing on NYSE and presumably delisting from LSE ?

https://www.xm.com/research/markets/allNews/reuters/north-sea-oil-producer-harbour-in-merger-talks-with-talos-sources-53559390

Possibly just as well that Harbour did not proceed with Sea Lion !

DEM

These three replies by the Rt Hon Lord (Zac) Goldsmith of Richmond - Government Minister of State for Overseas Territories, Commonwealth, Energy, Climate and Environment - to questions asked by Baroness Bennett (Green Party) are very informative. Essentially, whilst UKEF is off limits - Falklands oil has the green light and with HMG blessing, providing the FI want it. Another box ticked.

3 April 2023

"As a self-governing Overseas Territory, economic development, including the development and exploitation of hydrocarbons, is a matter for the Falkland Islands Government, in accordance with all relevant laws. The UK Government supports the right of the Falkland Islanders to develop their natural resources for their own economic benefit. This is an integral part of their right of self-determination. The UK Government is working closely with the Falkland Islands Government to support their right to develop its hydrocarbons resources and we are ready to offer UK expertise on how to mitigate environmental impacts, including emissions".

5 April 2023

"The UK Government regularly discusses development of a Falkland Islands hydrocarbons industry with the Falkland Islands Government and is working with the Falkland Islanders to ensure they can access UK expertise. Policy on hydrocarbons development in the Falkland Islands is a matter for the Falkland Islands Government. With UK Government support, the Falkland Islands Government is ensuring they are able to identify, assess and manage risks, including environmental risks".

5 April 2023

"As the Falkland Islands Government is a self-governing Overseas Territory, hydrocarbons development in the Falkland Islands is a matter for the Falkland Islands Government, in accordance with all relevant laws. There is no change to His Majesty's Government's policy of not using UK export credits to fund fossil fuel projects and the financing of a future production phase is a commercial decision for the Falkland Islands Government and the companies involved. We continue to engage internationally in pursuit of global environmental targets".

Mogger - thanks again for the diligent research. If you could get in touch via the gmail address I mentioned about six weeks ago to another poster - I would be most grateful.

DEM

Morning All

"Whilst our focus is very much on getting Sea Lion up and running, we continue to work up prospectivity in the SFB where we have what we believe to be a direct analogue feature to the large Darwin discovery held by Borders & Southern Petroleum in adjacent acreage". (Probably increases the chances that BOR will get developed one day)

"Italy has refused to comply with the Panels instructions. Rockhopper intends to continue to work in good faith to resolve the issues raised regarding non-recoupment and has submitted to the Panel its proposal to mitigate this risk. The provisional stay remains in force during this time, pending further orders from the Committee". (As expected, RoI continue to play the Villain in the OM saga and RKH demonstrate yet again to ICSID that they are the Good Guys).

"Now is therefore an appropriate time for change as we move into a new phase for the Company, having passed through important milestones on both those fronts. In light of this we plan to phase in a new board led by a new chair. Their focus will be on recovering our tribunal Award and working with the Falkland Islands and UK governments, as well as Navitas, to move towards approval of the Sea Lion development. Work to identify a new chair is underway and we hope to have made the appointment by Q4 of this year." (Not unexpected, as RKH transitions from being an Explorer to a proper grown up Producer - we need a BOD to match. Almost certainly a new FD as well.)

"Having anticipated Italy might attempt to annul the Award, Rockhopper had a non-binding offer in place to fund both fighting the annulment and enforcing the Award. The Group has instead chosen to use existing resources to fund all legal costs arising from contesting the request by Italy for annulment whilst it explores all acceptable funding possibilities. (Sensible, as once the Annulment request has been refused, no doubt there will be better offers on the table to finance Enforcement - which I am certain will proceed post-haste.

The Tax Settlement Deed also states that the Group is entitled to make adjustments to the outstanding tax liability if and to the extent that the Commissioner is satisfied that any part of the Development Carry becomes irrecoverable. ..... We are currently engaged with FIG formalising the tax implications of the termination of the 2012 Premier Oil farm down which resulted in irrecoverable carry of approximately US$ 670 million. (Seems like most/all of the £59.6m potential tax bill may disappear).

"At 31 December 2022, the Group had cash and cash equivalents and term deposits of US$9.8 million and $7.3 million as at 30 April 2023". PLUS "Assuming the share price is in excess of 9 pence, which it is at time of writing, the Group expects the majority of these (56.5m) warrants to be exercised providing additional funds of up to £5million". Why on Earth would holders of 9p Warrants not exercise them if the SP is 15-20p? Am sure 80% + will convert

Agreed BB - Repsol would make an excellent partner - as would Hess who also have old scores to settle:

Repsol (Spain) – In 2012 President Kirchner proposed the expropriation of 51% of Repsol shares in YPF. Long court case ensued and eventually Argentina were compelled to pay $5bn compensation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/afontevecchia/2012/04/18/us-condemns-ypf-expropriation-as-spain-argentina-trade-war-nears/?sh=316fb9127352

Hess (USA) – US major global independent energy company, still run by the Hess family (one of the leading Jewish companies in NY). Never forgiven Argentina for the Hercules incident in 1982.

https://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/09/world/tanker-attacked-in-south-atlantic.html

There is of course another US Independent who are not unfamiliar with Sea Lion.

Favourite is probably Delek - the Israeli Gas giant for whom most of the Navitas Senior Mngt team used to work.

Interesting times.

DEM