Member Info for dickupham

Camkite - yes, legal completion by end of Feb, but what would be expected is that detailed terms would be agreed by the end of today SUBJECT ONLY to the usual regulatory clearances ie approval by the OGA and any other regulatory body that needs to approve it. I don't know who, other than the OGA, the agreement would need to be approved by, but there's probably some jobsworth government agency or other employing about a million people at taxpayers' expense that exists for the purpose.

If agreement is reached by the end of today it will to all intents and purposes be a 'done deal'.

More misleading stuff earlier to correct: "if (it) had gone pear shaped there's have been a 7am rns to say so I reckon".
..................not necessarily so - the parties have until close of play today to resolve outstanding issues and sign a binding "subject only to" agreement, so it's possible there might be a 7am RNS tomorrow.

The parties have had more than 2 months to fall out, but they haven't done so - so far at least - otherwise we'd have been told they had. The negative approach to take is that sometime between now and midnight the negotiations will break down. The more positive one is that to sign a binding "subject only to" agreement is taking the full time available.

Why?

Because that's what happens.

There are no certainties in life - just possibilities and probabilities. I know what my money's on but that doesn't 100% guarantee a win. I remain hopeful.

dyor

My (long-shot hope - we would probably already have heard if they had - is that JOG submitted bids for new licences in the 31st Licensing Round (bids opened July 2018 - closed 7 Nov 2018; results due H1 2019) or that it will be bidding in the 32nd Round:

https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/news-publications/news/2018/oga-launches-31st-offshore-licensing-round-opening-up-high-impact-frontier-regions/

"The next round, the 32nd Offshore Licensing Round is planned to open next summer 2019, and will focus on mature areas of the UKCS".

dyor

That will certainly scupper any plans JOG might have had to acquire them, FD............... :-)

...........my agenda is to stimulate intelligent discussion by promoting understanding, draft. I have a wealth of relevant experience and plenty of time available to me to engage with all sensible others, having decided to hang up my accounting boots nearly 20 years ago. You'd do well to heed some of what I say instead of leading with your chin with your child-like interpretation of circumstances that don't exist.

That short enough for you, draft?

Thanks, GB. If I'm in Hungary on Tuesday I'll pop down to the lake and join you. I assume the boat's got plenty of ballast.

Should I wear thermal underpants?

:-)

Whatever the eventual outcome, it is no surprise the parties are taking all the time available to complete the agreement (or walk away).

It's what happens. Unless there's an earlier time stipulated, they have until a minute to midnight tonight to conclude a deal and it looks as if they're using it. It now seems likely we'll find out tomorrow one of the following:
1 That an agreement (subject to contract) has been signed (and the terms of the agreement)
2 That the exclusive negotiation period has been extended
3 That the parties have agreed to terminate discussions

The standard of commentary on here of late has been disappointing. If people don't understand how corporate matters usually progress, surely it's better to remain silent than to post all over the place (for instance) that for no valid reason they expect the price to drop. Maybe it will, but this will only be because other people similarly don't understand the norm and decide to make irrational decisions.

Daft, if you ask me...........

dyor

Re Bowleven/COC - the "can't be bothered or don't know how to" votes (or lack thereof) determined the outcome.

Daft, but a reflection of the general style of trading/lack of knowledge of many 'investors' today. The advent of internet brokers and instant low-cost trading fundamentally changed the dynamics of the markets. I'm not saying I'd have the old ways back!!

For those who are interested, the link below is to a helpful explanation of company law as it applies to mergers and acquisitions in the UK. In practice it seems to me a bid (to get to 50%+ of the shares in issue, which would give the bidder practical control) would only be likely to be made by a party that already had a significant holding in the company. Bowleven was subject to a hostile bid a while back, with Crown Ocean Capital, a Swiss hedge fund, already holding something like 28% when launching its bid. COC only just managing to get across the (50%) line because feelings across the board were strong, some in favour of the bid but most opposed to it.

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/8-502-2187?originationContext=knowHow&transitionType=KnowHowItem&contextData=%28sc.Default%29&comp=pluk

A scheme of arrangement, enabling a bidder to secure the transfer of all the shares in the target to the bidder in return for the consideration paid, requires the approval of 75%+ of existing shareholders.

A significant disadvantage to a bidder of gaining only 50% control would be the uncertainty of being able to force through special resolutions, which require 75%+ support to become effective. Events requiring a special resolution include:
1. Changing a company's name
2. Removing a director
3. Changing a company’s constitution and articles of association - how a company is run
4. Changing a company’s share structure
5. Disposing of a material part of a company's business
There are others.

Given SQZ's present share ownership structure, it seems highly unlikely to me a hostile bidder will emerge any time soon. Were a 'friendly' approach to be made, the directors would be duty bound to report it to shareholders (assuming it was serious) but it seems to me would only be likely to consider recommending it if it fully took into account SQZ's present strong position and its unusually promising future.

OK, I'll take £9.50 a share. Always leave something for the next fella.........

Hope the above helps. I believe the info is up to date but can't be certain. I've been out of the game coming up 20 years (I'm not THAT old - just hung up my accounting boots earlier than most; one spends a long time dead)..........

GL

dyor

I don't trust market makers, who are part of a "City" that's rife with dishonesty. "My word is my bond, my arse" is the modern truism.

Virtually all the MMs (as I understand the situation) are owned by investment banks (which have all those Chinese walls in place - also my arse).

Generally, MMs like to be holding shares if the anticipated news is positive and short in the reverse case. Trouble is, one can't always tell what's a buy and what's a sell and MMs hold back on reporting trades that don't suit their dishonest purposes. MMs are supposed to get as close as possible to balancing their books at each day's close of play but are permitted (by the enormously dedicated and talented cretins in the FCA) to be long or short "if it's a normal part of their market making activity".

Making money dishonestly would appear to be 'normal' in this regard.

"I have absolutely no idea" is the answer you're after.

Both sides (CLNR and the unidentified major) have been talking since before 28 November and have now been in exclusive discussions for more than 2 months. I would find it surprising if the deal fell down at the last minute but I've been wrong many times in the past about a whole host of things that didn't turn out as planned. The only certainties in life are death and taxes. wdik? My money's on the table and I have no intention of taking any of it off.

GL

dyor

........depends on how much (if any) gas is discovered, mike.

The SP will follow supply and demand in the short term, but will eventually be determined by the fundamentals. If these are sound, investors looking for longer term value will buy in (thus creating demand and driving the price higher). And these LTHs will be less inclined to sell for a small profit every time the Company takes a forward step so the SP will be less subject to people selling because they're only interested in short term gains and not what the future might hold.

That's the theory anyway and the fundamentals have to be there. In CLNR's case, this will be gas in commercial quantities that results in cash generation. How much the Company's value will increase as it progresses is all in the future and dependent on events that result in the creation of reserves that can be turned into cash. SQZ's market value stood at about £7m-8m less than 3 years and it's about £370m now, whilst the number of shares has stayed the same and the company hasn't incurred any debt.

CLNR imv has the potential to become a significant small to mid cap NS player. Whether it goes on to achieve that potential is all in the future. It certainly holds the licences it needs to get there but there's still a long way to go and an average amount of luck will be required with the drill.

Achieving a farm-out of P2248 and P2252 would be a pivotal first step and a positive portent of similar deals in the future.

It's 'upham' btw (not 'upem' - which sounds a bit rude).

I'm expecting news on Friday - might be tomorrow but often these things go to the wire.

GL

dyor

I'll retract the 75% approval part of my previous post as I may be getting confused (it happens). I will look it up and revert idc.

In practice, GRG, the directors and the Hardys probably hold enough between them to block a simple majority. A number of LTHs (myself included) would also be likely to vote with the directors.

Whatever the % an interested party would think long and hard before launching a hostile bid. At the right price an agreed offer becomes a possibility but I doubt we'll see one in the near future.

dyor

D220 - you talk of a predator, which I take to mean a party launching a hostile bid.

Jeffrey Harris, a US based former NED who stood down only because of Trump's nonsense, has for a long time controlled more than 17% of the shares via GRG Oil UK LLC and the current directors and their families hold more than 3%. In practice (ignoring the Hardys' holding of more than 11%) 20% would be enough to block a hostile bid because the approval of at least 75% of holders voting either in person or by proxy at a meeting convened for the purpose is needed for a bid to succeed. Most PIs, whose shares are held by nominees, don't bother to ask their internet brokers to lodge proxies expressing their wishes, so a bid the directors and Harris J didn't approve of would be all but certain to fail.

I doubt the Hardys would want to see their shares sold for less than fair value either and their failure to support an opportunist bid, when aggregated with Harris's and the directors as above would immediately rule it out. I gain the impression the present team wants to take SQZ a long way and they appear to have the ability and commitment to achieve their ambitious plans.

Good on 'em. They've certainly made spectacular progress this past year and have done shareholders proud

dyor

My comments about share price are made entirely tongue in cheek. I am not trying ramp as it doesn't enter my thinking - the price will find the right level in the timescale I'm interested in. I make a point of never predicting share prices because they are determined in the short term by the actions of the "don't knows" - short term traders who are driven by sentiment and "herd instinct".

There's an underlying logic in the number chosen, however. Trap Oil's listing price in 2011 was 43p, so a subscriber who had done nothing except sit on his/her shares since the IPO would today be holding shares that had cost £43 (after taking into account of the 1:100 consolidation in 2015). Trap Oil raised about £80m in the IPO, which it then set about pi55ing down the drain. I got in much later, when the Company supposedly had unrestricted cash left of £18m and liabilities of about £1m, with one or two promising licences in drawers around the office. The "unrestricted cash" turned out to be nonsense. There's a long story thereafter which I'll spare you the detail of. Suffice to say I was relieved when JOG stepped in and in 2015 and early 2016 increased by holding very significantly, based on my high regard for the new directors and JOG's declared strategy of acquiring income-producing non-operated NS interests whilst keeping a low overheads base to maximise profits. Never again for me those high risk explorers that let you down so often with dusters. Some hope.

Funny how things don't always go according to plan. I'm now also piled high with CLNR, which is in the middle of a "sh*t or bust" moment so I evidently haven't learned. Who cares? Risk is sometimes rewarded and what doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Luckily I've also got a decent holding in SQZ acquired at much lower prices than today's

Ref a share placing, sotb, whilst I don't disagree with your take of the situation in the event of JOG taking its interest in P2170 to first oil, a big placing isn't a foregone conclusion if JOG sells its 18% (perhaps to Equinor or CIECO?) at some point before it's called upon to stump up its share of the infrastructure cost. Serica Energy has increased its market cap from about £8m to £366m in less than 3 years without issuing new equity - and it hasn't taken on any debt. The added value has come from a series of inspired deals by the Board, led by Tony Craven Walker, a much respected industry veteran.

Back to the cricket now...........

dyor

GB - I have my own views about what might happen in the future and have set a broad longer term strategy relating to my holding in the Company that fits my personal circumstances and likely ongoing attitude to risk/reward. There are many things that might happen, but I don't think it would be right to "speculate out loud" (so to speak) about these as it would be conjecture. Suffice to say I see considerable upside based on a present Company value of about £45m. It is a fact, however, that any company needs events outside its control to go its way if maximum rewards are to be gained by shareholders.

On a more general level, there's a lot to learn about oil & gas. Although I have learned a lot these past few years I'm still at "primary school" stage compared to industry professionals - most notably where industry 'technicals' are concerned. I'm ok on the financials and investment theory and it helps in assessing fair value that I have a lot of relevant experience to call upon.

I'm not the right person to ask about how best to run an oil company's affairs when so many variables are involved. You need an industry pro's views, not mine. As far as I'm concerned, ultimately it all comes down to whether or not you trust the directors to 'perform' and to treat shareholders fairly. My strong belief is that in this latter regard we are fortunate to have AB, RL at JOG's helm, with a committed and capable team as their crew.

I'm targeting £43 but might sell a few at £42.50.

dyor

GB - JOG won't be making the decisions because Equinor is the operator

....."I want to see him smoking a bit Cuban cigar"..........

......"BIG Cuban cigar" (I'll send him a Cohiba Esplendido - might have one myself come to think of it)

......might not be announced until Fri. The exclusivity agreement with the major runs until 31 January, so discussions could continue until just before midnight tomorrow. It's a fact that if a deadline is there, people tend to work to it. And lawyers do little to speed things along because they charge by the hour.

It will be a surprise if, the discussions having come this far, no agreement is reached with the major. I'm guessing, but it seems likely to me the principal terms were agreed some time ago and that what's taking the time is the "what-ifs" and legal niceties. As I say, this is only my guess and there's no saying I'm right.

Interesting to see today (and possibly tomorrow) if anything starts to leak. So far CLNR seems to have been a tight ship.

CLNR has disappointed people before but it's fair to say it has had a disproportionately high number of short-term followers out to make a quick killing. Committed LTHs were in short supply but they aren't anymore. The share price for the past 3 years has had the profile of a yo-yo, which is a feature of many 'penny shares'. Whilst the SP may be low I regard CLNR as a lot better than a penny stock.

There have been particular difficulties along the way. Fundraising has been needed and has been piecemeal since the fish woman in Scotland double-crossed Algy (his words) by scuppering his coal gas plans, following which he had to move quickly to realign the company's strategy with natural gas. Whilst progress has been slow, to have ended up holding 8 valuable licences is mighty impressive and one has to ask why the OGA would have awarded the last 6 licences had it not been confident CLNR was a sound custodian.

The news has been largely positive for some time now. It isn't Cluff's fault there have been very few farm-outs done in recent times - conditions for doing them have been far from easy. JOG's farm-out to Statoil, now called Equinor, in 2016 was the first for ages and I'm not sure there have been any done since. I might be wrong.

My glass is half-full, mainly on the basis it would not make sense either for CLNR or the major to have gone exclusive on what is clearly a valuable licence and then failed to reach agreement on terms. The principle must have been established before other interested parties were excluded, so most of what should have remained were the 'finer points'.

I've yet to be convinced by Mr Swindells - let's hope he plays a blinder. Being confident in advance doesn't win prizes I'm afraid, draft. I want to see him smoking a bit Cuban cigar - preferably this week.

GL
dyor

.........ah.........I see. Twitter link didn't work............

Not sure why JOG would be interested. Maybe it will provide Total with the money it needs to pay JOG the £1m it owes it from the TrapOil days?

I wish.

How does Total's gas discovery in the central NS affect JOG, parislse?

There is no reason I can see for anyone to suggest JOG is either short of cash now, or that it will be in the foreseeable future.

In the interim results RNS (20 Sept 2018) it was stated that cash balances at 30 June 2018 stood at £22.1m, JOG has no debt. It was also stated that capex guidance (relating to the continuing Verbier appraisal, as extended to include the wider 3D seismic work) would be towards the upper end of the £9m-11m previously guided. More recently (on 16 January 2019) it was stated: "total Capex for 2019 expected to be in the range of £7 million to £10 million. This includes the Verbier appraisal programme, expenditure (on) which has moved from 2018 into 2019 and remains in line with previous guidance".

The only uncertainty in my mind is whether any of the costs relating to the seismic study were met before 31 Dec 2018. I can't see that cash balances at 31 December 2018 have yet been disclosed.

Salaries and overheads appear to be running at about £2m - £2.5m pa (perhaps a shade more if one includes lunches and company trainers) so I would expect 31 December cash balances to be somewhere around £20m-£21m.

Taking £10m as the upper limit for 2019 capex and allowing £6m for JOG's share of a Cortina drill - possibly late 2019 or 2020 - JOG seems to me to be adequately funded for the next 18 months to 2 years, which is a long time in the context of what might - and probably will - happen. AB has said in i/v (with Proactive Investor I think) that he does not rule out bank funding (RBL) to support JOG buying positive cash flow generating production, although if something worthwhile were to be contemplated, it seems likely to me this would be achieved by a combination of equity and debt, necessitating a further round of equity issue. That's in the future and is pure speculation on my part.

Just to introduce a new discussion topic, did people see this when it was released?
https://www.ogauthority.co.uk/news-publications/news/2018/oga-releases-new-data-packages-to-revitalise-greater-buchan-area/

JOG has an impressive record when it comes to farming out licences awarded to it in the past (and going on to make discoveries). The OGA is seeking maximum economic recovery (MER). The area covered by Licence P2170 is next door to Buchan and Cortina a mere 2km from the nearest boundary. It cannot be said JOG doesn't know and understand the area - Equinor too.

Why not?

dyor

PS just for you, GB: this is how many people JOG presently has on the payroll (at least 3 or 4 are part-time). You can work out how much they're all paid but I wouldn't describe it as a fortune:
https://www.jerseyoilandgas.com/about-us/board-of-directors/
https://www.jerseyoilandgas.com/about-us/senior-management/

AB & RL share the cleaning