Member Info for extrader

Hi DiveCentre et al, You wrote re Ineos a few days ago..."His (Jim Ratcliffe's) move into oil and gas is primarily a means of securing a reliable and cost efficient supply of feedstock for his chemical plants." HUR's FFD, it seems , will need a gas pipeline to handle our gas issues. Mr Ratcliffe has just been declared, per the Sunday Times, Britain's wealthiest person, with a reported worth of GBP 21 billion and change. JR appears to be a bit of a 'rulebreaker' who's made his money by being unconventional and thinking outside the box. Sound familiar ? Maybe there's a deal ('chump change ' for him) to be done somewhere . ATB

Hi MM et al, ZIOC's broker is given as Investec Securities, who last wrote about the company in 2013. Rather than ask outsiders to search the investment universe, why doesn't somebody just ask the Company / Andrew Trahar (a) what is available and (b) if not, why not ? After all, ZIOC itself should be in a position to know what's out there.....and be the most motivated to rectify/ chivvy along , if there's something missing that they could make better ? ATB

......cont....dividend payments over 30 years has its attractions ! ATB

Hi all, I'm interested in looking at ways that holders (esp. PI's and maybe CA) could monetise some of HUR's potential whilst retaining an interest in the upside. The instrument I was thinking about was an Oil Production Stock Unit, issued by LASMO back in the '70's (not by Enterprise, as I'd misremembered...and thanks to tournesol for clarifying). There too, there was a wide disparity between what the owners thought the asset upside was and what the market was willing to recognize. The LASMO OPS units helped bridge the gap. The relevant details are in this RNS, https://www.investegate.co.uk/Article.aspx?id=201103240700145201D which reads in part "ENI LASMO PLC - OIL PRODUCTION STOCK ("OPS") REDEMPTION AND FINAL HALF-YEARLY PAYMENT The OPS will be redeemed at par value of 10 pence per unit on 28 April 2011, being the next payment date following 31 December 2010 (the final chargeable period), in accordance with the terms of the Trust Deed dated 17 August 1976. The final half-yearly payment of the OPS for the six months ended 31 December 2010 will be made on 28 April 2011 at the rate of 6.3874 pence per unit to holders on the register on 1 April 2011. Payment for the six months ended 30 June 2010 was made at the rate of 9.8783 pence per unit. Notes to editors OPS units were issued in 1976 to help fund the LASMO share of the Ninian field development costs. The Ninian field commenced production on 23 December 1978 and the OPS holders have been receiving half-yearly payments FOR OVER 30 YEARS. In accordance with the terms of the Trust Deed, the OPS are repayable at par value of 10 pence per unit at the earliest of: � the termination of production from the field � the date when the quantity of petroleum own and saved for the field attributable to the OPS interest reaches 120 million barrels, or � chargeable period to 31 December 2010. The OPS final half-yearly payment is calculated on 8.75 percent of the sales value of production from 8.62608 percent of the Ninian field after deducting Government royalties, field operating costs (as adjusted for incremental costs associated with tariffing assets) and insurance costs, incurred in connection with the production, conveying and treatment of petroleum won from the field. The net value is adjusted for OPS units repurchased and cancelled by LASMO and the payment per share is calculated on the number of units currently outstanding, being 5,562,990 (the original number of units issued being 7,500,000). At 31 December 2010 cumulative production from the Ninian field attributable to the OPS interest amounted to 104.9 million barrels (30 June 2010: 104.7 million barrels). Production attributable to the OPS interest for the six months ended 31 December 2010 was 198,081 barrels (six months ended 30 June 2010: 258,586 barrels)...." Maybe IJWT (and others ) would care to comment ? Monetisation - part cash / part

Hi shaun86, ..."extrader turned up ..... asking questions that are unanswerable ..." I'm surprised that you think that basic questions about license terms should be 'unanswerable', all the while expecting AT to answer your enquiry about port status, which as a 'live ' topic is clearly (?) in the unanswerable - because 'price sensitive' - category. IF info re license terms is for some reason 'price sensitive', that might, of course, be a cause for concern, depending on the reason. ATB

Hi gta5, Shouldn't expect imminent news re expropriations etc : per the Brazzaville Depeche article, they've given themselves until August (2018) to sort that issue out. ATB

Hi Apache Straits of Hormuz are the bottleneck at the mouth of the Arabian / Persian Gulf that AM has perforce to transit. Most Gulf oil does too , though , so if it's impassable for any reason we'll have other things to worry about...... Whether Suez or Good Hope is secondary. ATB

Hi adoubleuk,, For the avoidance of doubt, I've not 'taken wellwell's side', as you put it ! My views are my own...and aren't congruent with his (as I understand them to be). Some mild paranoia there, methinks ;-> Slightly off-topic, but I like the quote (said of Charles 2, accused of being ineffectual /duplicitous) : "Here. lies our sovereign lord, the King; Whose word no man relies on; Who never said a foolish thing; Nor ever did a wise one." To which Charles' reply was : �This is very true: for my words are my own, and my actions are my ministers'.� ATB

Hi shaun 86, I can see why AT may not wish to engage on a 'live' topic like the new port but don't see why this should affect ability to reply to a 'nuts and bolts' factual matter that they'll need to show any potential customer. The licenses and approvals were mostly granted at least 8 years ago and - apart from having a finite life, eg 20 or 30 years - often include a sunset or 'use it or lose it ' provision. I wanted to be sure that there was no potential 'nasty' as eg recently occurred with Sunrise Resources, an example I mentioned to AT when framing my request. ATB

Hi all, Grateful if someone well connected with Andrew Trahar woul ask him for the current expiry dates of ZIOP's various licenses, consents and approvals. I've emailed requesting this ( fairly basic) info 3 x over the last 6 weeks and phoned once, to no avail. TIA

Hi all, When adoubleuk writes , re dspp' case for IFD " don't know where this information comes from, but I sure haven't read anything about it in any of the literature available on the Hurricane website ", I think that ' s rather missing the point ! Why ' scare the horses' unnecessarily, by positing a scenario that may never come to fruition ? You can bet that the serious players will be aware of IFD as a possibility, the less info you give about how you might work it , the harder it is for BP et al to work out the economics and hence your likely price . There's lways a trade-off between price , timeframe, execution risk, etc. 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.' ATB

Hi Longwait et al, The reuters take on POO outlook was from 2015. For a more recent view, have a look at https://www.dropbox.com/s/uhk2xxq9vfzdknt/Burggraben%20Crude%20Oil%20Presentation%20041818.pdf?dl=0# which is much more bullish, citing natural depletion rate; rising demand; under-investment in supply ; political risks in Venezuela, Iran etc ; Saudi politics incl Aramco IPO; and demand in China and India; to underpin a forecast of 'near 3 figures' for 2019 and beyond. Some people might accuse me of 'confirmation bias', I , of course, couldn't possibly comment.......;-> ATB

Hi sniffer 78 Thanks for posting this. The untranslated bit of your post speaks of the. Administrative details of getting hold of the land for the SEZ. They're allowing until August 2018 to process claims - so apparently nothing done since 2016 - and reference to title, catastral references and desirability of avoiding court cases suggests there's no 'eminent domain' in place and some concern re 'ransom strips' and similar opportunities for the well-connected to make a few bob. I'm with god's target prices but think most people's timeframes are ambitious , to say the least. ATB

Hi adoubleuk/IJWT, Surely these aren't mutually exclusive propositions ? The presentation may be a conservative 'min. goal' and the comment by Dr T a 'max goal'. Depends on how long ago / how 'hard' Dr T's comments were made... ATB

Hi tomshare, i'm relying on google translate, your link includes ...It is also difficult to start project construction within 2-3 years. There is also a risk that the new project owner will perform the original general contract. Therefore, based on the principle of prudence, the company conducted an impairment test and made provision for asset impairment.... this doesn't suggest anything is imminent. maybe i've misunderstood something . ATB

Hi adoubleuk Horses for courses and all that. ATB

Hi Afric That's because it's recycled news from Feb 2016 . Rather I suspect like tomshare's recent phosphate contract. ATB

Hi Joe Soap, Thanks for the feedback ! David Craik's background (I may be doing him a disservice) seems at first pass to be highly technically qualified on geological matters, dspp seems to have (from his writings only, I've not seen or heard him speak) a broader strategic mindset, see his game theory approach. Your comment re Leaf Clean Energy , allied to Ricfle's subsequent post, does rather make CA seem a bit of a one trick pony. All the more reason, you might think, to be particularly nurturing.... ATB

Hi IJWT, Re RB/CA, here's a further thought : rather than just a presentation to CA investors by RT, who will be constrained by what he can and cannot say, why not get dspp involved as a professional consultant, who - apart from his existing investment exposure - would be a more disinterested commentator on what prospects HUR might have and the various scenarios that might unfold ? Am I right in thinking you have a nodding acquaintance with RB ? Maybe this is something he'd be interested in picking up and running with ! ATB Discl. I have no knowledge of dspp personally and no financial interest to declare, he seems to write from a position of considerable (and wide) experience at a senior level, in any event more of a generalist than the good Dr T.

Hi IJWT, Thanks for that. I like the idea of RB getting involved and 'taking ownership' : it suggests that he may be able to do something that would (we hope) benefit us all. What was it LBJ said about it being better to have someone inside the tent p###ing out than outside the tent p###ing in ;-> ? ATB