Member Info for dickupham

bogs - nothing's confirmed until the money's in your bank account!!

Sadly, I don't own a crystal ball and don't claim that my views are right - in most cases it's easier to demonstrate that others' views are wrong - or at least based on thin air.

GL - hope you make a stack.

a1m1 - please humour me and read what I have already linked at least twice and explained my thinking on more than that. If I am wrong in my understanding of what is written in the shareholders' document of 11/10/2017 (linked again below: please read resolutions 2 & 3. The section ends: "The authority sought under Resolution 2 and Resolution 3 will expire approximately 15 months from the passing of these resolutions"). Then explain why I am wrong to believe the Company can't issue any more shares for placing until shareholders say otherwise in a general meeting.
https://www.cluffnaturalresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Cluff-Natural-Resources-Circular-FINAL.pdf

I accept this doesn't exclude right issues. But imv it would have to be underwritten not to fail. Maybe Spencer would underwrite one but I disagree strongly with you when you say that now would be a good time to raise money to cover events more than 18 months down the line. With one, maybe two, licences farmed out to Shell and a further 5 (ignoring P2248) still to farm out, with combined prospective resources of 2 TCF+ net to CLNR, do you seriously think about £15m is anywhere near a fair value to apply to CLNR? I don't. And nor will CLNR's directors if they're sane. The share price is where it is because there's been a big seller in evidence. You're looking only at short term price, which is the wrong thing to be looking at.

You know nothing about me, my background and experience, who I talk to, what sums I'm used to investing or anything else. Yet you feel it appropriate to tell me (and everyone else) I lack experience (you have to be joking) and untruthfully say I have stated definitively what will happen in the future. I haven't. Many things might happen - I've simply said what I think is most likely and backed up my views with explanations. You have consistently presented 'facts' I have demonstrated are wrong.

It is quite possible the Company will feel it's wise to raise money for working capital if it can't, for instance, raise money up front on future licence farm-outs - but what's raised is unlikely to be beyond its immediate needs (say next 12 months). So wholesale dilution seems to me to highly unlikely. My personal view is it's more likely CLNR will end up on someone's shopping list. The fact Algy promoted an accountant and not an oil man to CEO when he stepped up to non-exec chairman seems relevant to me in this regard.

Half CLNR's problems stem from the fact the share register contains a lot of day traders who concentrate on price to the exclusion of everything else, which they would be unable to understand even if they were interested. They cause huge SP volatility by jumping in and out on a whim.This causes great difficulty in making future plans that depend on cash.

If I was Algy, I'd look on things now as too difficult and sell. Please form an orderly queue.

all imo - dyor

..........thank you, bogs. Much appreciated.

Does anyone think those who are selling JOG shares mistakenly believe the well due to be drilled at Verbier next month is an exploration well? Wouldn't surprise me.

It's the only reason I can think of. The fact of the matter is that the current share price hardly reflects the worth of JOG's share (4.5MMboe) of the 25MMboe of oil known to exist in Verbier (just in the immediate vicinity of the well-bore) plus JOG's uncommitted cash balances. No account is taken of Cortina or anything else JOG has to look forward to.

Seems daft to me, although I'd be extremely worried if I thought the same way as about a gazillion people who loudly proclaim that the likes of UKOG, FRR and others are going to make them rich. They'll make someone rich - just not them

I have moderated my ambitions here and decided to sell most of my holding when the SP reaches £40 (not quite sure when, or if I'll still be alive).

dyor

Apologies - didn't see yours, noix - I was watching the Racing..........

Verbier Appraisal Programme Q1 2019
•Estimated drill time 30 – 40 days
•Possible side track

https://www.jerseyoilandgas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Corporate-Presentation-January-2019-Rev-21Jan19.pdf

No decision will be made on Cortina until the Verbier data has been fully analysed. JOG is estimating capital spend in 2019 of £7m - £10m, which clearly can't include Cortina. Possibly 2020 if the read-across from Verbier is positive.

Probably best to concentrate on what's happening and not what isn't (yet).

dyor

butcher-boy - please direct your comments at the builder, not me.

..........not sure what you mean when you say shares being forward sold in a new placing, ranike. It's a new one to me.

The last authority given to the directors in regard to non-preemptive share issues as far as I can tell was on 26 Oct 2017 when it was stated:
"The authority sought under Resolution 2 and Resolution 3 will expire approximately 15 months from the
passing of these resolutions". I provided a link to the document earlier

At least 140m new shares have been issued in 'private placings' since then so, on my reading of the relevant documents, no further shares can now be offered under the authorities given to the directors in the GM of 26 Oct 2017, when it was stated.
" The authority sought under Resolution 2 and Resolution 3 will expire approximately 15 months from the
passing of these resolutions"

It's all a bit complicated but the idea is to prevent a limited number of shareholders gaining control, without all shareholders having had the chance to increase their holdings proportionally to stop it happening.

The directors' main priority at present will be to get the Shell agreement nailed down and get on with farming out the other licences. The Company probably has enough cash to see it through the next 6 months or so (the £141k Algy paid for his options will have helped in this regard). They will probably also be considering other options that might be available. CLNR must now be on other companies' radar - particularly given the pitifully low value ascribed to it by the market.

dyor

..............it's from CLNR's website ('investors'; 'SHAREHOLDERS documents')

apologies - forgot the link - it's from CLNR's website ('investors'; 'company documents'):

https://www.cluffnaturalresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Cluff-Natural-Resources-Circular-FINAL.pdf

ranike - Algy exercised c.10.65m options @ an exercise price of 1.325p per share. 10.65m new shares were issued to him by the Company, for which he paid the Company £141k. He then sold the shares to MS for £373k, realising a (taxable) gain of £232k. Maybe Algy had offered this 'deal' in advance, when Algy encouraged MS to support last year's placings to provide the funds CLNR needed to bid for new licences and work on farming out P2248 & P2252? Who knows?

The only thing I can think of that might have caused (and still be causing) the significant fall in CLNR's SP since the shares opened last Friday at something like 5.2p on news of the farm-out to Shell, is that a big holder immediately put in a 'sell at best' order for countless millions of shares acquired in one or other of the most recent placings (the last two being at 1.6p and 2.1p).

Looks as if MS is (or perhaps 'was') happy to increase his holding, but he very probably won't have known (if) there was a big sell order pending when he shook hands with Algy on their 3.5p a share deal. Something (other than short term traders selling on the news) caused the share price to tank - it would ordinarily have kept on climbing, but (if I'm right) all the new buyers arriving on the scene would simply have been filling the big sell order.

In other circumstances, MS trying to buy 10.65m shares in the market immediately after the news he and everyone else had been waiting for for so long would have sent the price through the roof. Buying the shares would probably have been impossible - if it wasn't, they would have cost him a fortune.

Everyone (inc MS) is now going to have to be patient - evidence suggests there's still an overhang. When it clears - and assuming enough people still want to buy into the concept that CLNR is fundamentally undervalued on all longer term measurements - the price should start to climb.

Having so many short term traders interested in or holding CLNR makes it difficult for the SP to achieve any form of stability - short term supply and demand sets the price. You could have 95% of the shares held by people who are in for the long ride, but the actions of the 5% ('day traders') set the price. Value always comes to the surface in the end. The ones who are there when it happens reap the big rewards.

All the above has nothing to do with share placings. If I understand what is linked below properly, no further share issues that disapply statutory pre-emption rights are permitted after mid Jan 2019. I might be wrong but I doubt CLNR would want to try to raise money 'across the board' (ie from all shareholders - such a placing would probably fail) so a GM would have to be called giving the Board the right to issue shares as it sees fit.

CLNR will either be sold, or it will raise enough for its share of drilling costs, plus about 3 years working capital. The latter is most likely to come some way down the line, when the SP is higher.

All jmo.

dyor

.....please stop telling lies. You say I asked for a post I'd made to be taken down. I didn't - why would I as I haven't changed my position one iota at any point since. What I wrote is correct.

You claim I stated:
" Quote” nobody gives a loan to an exploration company

That isn't what I said. I said that no bank or individual would lend money to a company to fund the drilling of exploration wells. It was and is implicit that were adequate security to be offered to a bank (or individual) the situation might be different. But as CLNR has no such security to offer, it would not be offered loans to enable it to meet its share of drilling exploration wells.

Anyone who writes (as you do): "I should of known after his first reply that he was never going to admit he was wrong!
Cluff bring this baby home to Papa!" is highly unlikely to be able to offer much of an insight into anything, such is the lack of education manifest in such drivel. The last time I checked "of" was not a verb and as for: "Cluff bring this baby home to Papa!"................pitiful doesn't even begin to describe it.

What you are trying to force me to accept (as a qualified professional) is akin to me telling you (as a builder) that in order to build a house you first need to lay foundations that are made of a mixture of flour and water .

Despite the longer term uncertainties about cash, reaching a farm out agreement with Shell was a pivotal moment in CLNR's history to date. A platform was built from which the only direction the Company should now travel is forwards. I have every confidence in CLNR's Board to make whatever decisions are best for shareholders and for themselves.

That one big holder of shares (possibly bought in a placing within the last 12 months at either 1.6p or 2.1p) has chosen to exit as soon as a worthwhile profit was available - and that a lot of short term traders have similarly jumped ship either in fear of losing a profit or because they think something is amiss, is of no real consequence. I am only interested in long term value, not short term price. Value and price are presently at odds - so what? Fundamentals always win in the end.

CLNR is under no immediate pressure to raise funds. A lot could happen before it even gets close to being.

Please don't come back with yet more insults, scooby. That you don't understand isn't down to me.

dyor

Thank you, pastorius - indeed I do. Possibly more than most.

It is not the case that loans would be available to CLNR if it came to funding its share of the development wells Shell might drill in 2021, or whenever. In small cap explorers with no security to offer, exploration costs are met out of equity.

Maybe Algy will lob in £15m (:-) on the proviso that if the wells are dusters (or even if they're not, because they won't be generating any revenue for a few years yet) the company will issue to him however many new shares his £15m would have bought at the time he made the loan. Not sure his wife and kids would be that happy though...............

That said, I defer to scooby's greater knowledge - he owns his own company :-)

None of the above is intended to be negative. It's just important to understand what the options are for the company you've invested in. With Algy in his very late 70s, two others on the board who might struggle without his guidance if he decided to direct his remaining energy elsewhere and CLNR a long way from generating cash, if I were Algy I would be asking myself: "what would be the best route to take to get shareholders and CLNR's people the best outcome".

"A friendly take-over by a mid-cap with funds available to pay a fair price" would probably be the answer.

Whose radar might CLNR be on? makes for interesting thought.....................

I'm just speculating, but of the options available and given current circumstances (not forgetting Shell are on board!) it seems like a runner to me. Everything else looks too dilutive.

jmofwiw
dyor

You're making an idiot of yourself, scooby. I haven't asked for anything I've written to be removed, although I did note that one or more of my posts were removed earlier in the week too. Looks like the BB gestapo are onto me. Oh no! In one of them I stated what I did for a living but was told by some I shouldn't have. It wasn't building. I have a very fulfilling life as it happens - I have no idea why you would assume otherwise.

Banks don't lend to fund exploration costs. Nor do individuals. Maybe there are one or two insane individuals who do - it takes all sorts. I'm only talking: 'normal'. Most people I know seem to think I'm pretty normal - how about you?

You say Cross does (or did) lend unsecured money to PMG but I'll say it again: the 2011 article you linked clearly states his £8m loan was to fund acquisitions - not exploration wells. The relevance is that someone on here earlier (was it you?) stated that CLNR would be able to borrow to fund its share of the exploration wells on P2252 and P2437 if/when they're drilled. CLNR doesn't have anything to offer as security, so equity funds would have to be raised were CLNR to 'take it all the way'. My hunch is that the Company will be acquired before it has to. Raising themoney via

If the company had 'certified' reserves it might be able to borrow under RBL arrangements, but CLNR doesn't have any, nor will it have for some years to come - if it decides to carry on on its own. I believe it is relevant that Algy is now in his late 70s and no-one carries on forever. Succession is a relevant issue.

You're free to have any views you like, scooby, but please don't try to influence others with your flawed understanding of situations that are beyond you, because this could cause them financial harm if they take any notice. Most people on here will recognise that banks (and individuals) don't lend millions to fund high-risk ventures. Banks make their returns on interest - they don't benefit from discoveries (in the context of oil and gas cos). If they fail to recover one loan, they have to make about 30 more loans just to make good the shortfall.

The kind of banks (and individuals) who lend money to oilcos to fund exploration wells are the same ones that lend money to finance casino visits and build catholic churches in Iran.

What's AUPEC by the way? You've lost me.

"Dickupham who chose your name for you?"

My parents. I was lucky to be named 'dick' - I have two older brothers called "Stickit" and "Shovit"

Pity the poor head groundsman at Lords - Michael Hunt. No-one calls him 'Mike' for some reason.

Interesting you should choose "scoobydoo" as your moniker. You must be an admirer but do you not find some of the plots a bit complex?

I'd stick to building if I were you, scooby. I repeat: banks and others don't lend unsecured money to fund exploration drills - if they did they would quickly go bust given that only a modest number result in a commercial discovery.

The article you linked refers to Cross making a loan to PMG of £8m "to fund further acquisitions" - not to drill exploration wells. He probably held security (why wouldn't he?) perhaps in the form of equity conversion in the event of non-repayment - who knows? No details were given.

You appear to be very confused, scooby - hardly surprising as you are a builder. If I were you I'd stick to educating me and others on things you understand, like bricks, cement, roof slates and things. I think you're using the wrong mix on your cement btw - should be 4:1 not 3:1. I read it in an article somewhere.

I won't engage with you further on this or anything else - there's no point as you don't understand even the basics. You can have the last word and people can believe who they like. I'm just trying to stem the tide of cr*p that's spouted on here by people like you.

Believe what you want. I'll continue to post my views on what happens in the real world.

"There was no security......."

.........your evidence please???

The article you linked is from 2011, scooby. It is not clear what security (if any) Cross (who I believe at the time owned an even bigger share of PMG than he does now) took for the loan. You seem to assume it was unsecured - why??

As for the availability of conventional bank funding to support future acquisitions, which Cross referred to in the article, those loans would have been RBL funds - RBL standing for "Reserves based lending" - is secured on proven reserves (which one assumes would have been owned by the targeted acquisitions, or maybe PMG itself; I haven't followed it).

I would not presume to offer people advice on a public forum about house construction, or to refer to someone who had done it successfully all his adult life as: "an armchair expert", knowing as little as I do about building. The same should apply to you about corporate business dealings, The blinkered arrogance in your throwaway comment is mind-boggling.

Banks and others don't lend unsecured money to fund wildcat drilling. Period. If they did, they would quickly go bust.

Armchair expert?? I suggest you try on the cap....

There are some very strange theories abounding today about how business is done in the real world. No-one lends to fund exploration spend (inc drilling wells). It's done using equity.

By my calculations, CLNR would need to raise something like £15m to fund its share of the two wells Shell would drill in the event of it remaining involved in the licences. This assumes the "pre-investment decision" exploration work (paid for by Shell) supported a case for drilling the wells. CLNR would also need to raise money to cover its running costs (included in the £15m) until such time as it starts generating revenue.

A deal hasn't even been legally completed yet and "pre-investment decision" work won't start for quite a few months, so how likely is it that CLNR would be considering a placing now? 0%. When and if Shell takes up the option on Licence P2437, legal work would take time to complete so this further extends the period before a placing might be considered because CLNR wouldn't try to raise the funds it might need piecemeal.

CLNR MIGHT need to raise some short term cash (not sure how much it has left - £750k?) but the signs to me are that a takeover or merger might now be on the cards. The two senior people apart from Algy are an accountant and a technical man. Neither has any experience of running a company. There are a few gascos around that would find CLNR of interest, with a few good licences and Shell on board. A good result for (most) shareholders and for himself in all the circumstances would be a good way for Algy to sign off.

I am sure he could find better ways to spend his time than getting stressed - which he must have been, trying to keep all the balls in the air this past year.

dyor

The catapult seems to be pointing downwards, MC!! Maybe it's someone (or even a few) selling because they think the Verbier drill is a wildcat. Nothing would surprise me.

The real reason for the price fall today is probably the fact I added a few more in 3 or 4 buys yesterday and this morning. Always happens. "Let's see what he's does, then we'll do the opposite - should give us a fighting chance" kindathing............

Chill.........
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBq87dbKyHQ

:-)