Member Info for G_G_G

God jolly, yes debt. Debt that would be less than 1 year NOI, easily paid back and hardly distressed. And why would they go down clns - or have you just read about clns somewhere and decided to throw it in for good measure. You do know we carry debt now right? Accessed when we were on a far riskier footing. You do know how debt can be very good and very bad right? Well this is very good debt. And yes debt could have been arranged against existing reserves. This isn't something new, many companies have revolving debt facilities. Guess what, a lot of them are oil and gas companies with balance sheets that are highly leveraged compared to ours. We're talking £20-40m. Cuckoo land...? Go to grade 1 and let's have a conversation again when you've graduated from primary school.

Dunno on f/o passer. Given my lack of trust in the bod's integrity I'm starting to think they're going to announce shortly after the new shares are listed. Doesn't matter either way. The deal is done. And good news is good news. It will also help to clear the over-hang quicker. As I've been saying it's a shame though because the debt funded route would mean we have a higher sp now. And it would mean the f/o would have created a far bigger uplift (without a retrace) because it's not trying to lift an extra +360m shares that have been priced at 11p. Again something that most just aren't understanding. Tony please tell me you can see this?

Jolly, on debt being hard to access, what a load of b@llocks again. The market is awash with debt. Oilies in Nth Amercia have been accessing and renegotiating debt very easily lately, which is why they're still alive. And our company has a history of accessing debt (remember you know f'all about this company) from the very same IIs that have given it to them in the past when we've been on a far riskier footing. And you still haven't answered why they didn't have debt lined up when they've been talking about more acquisitions for a year. Care to make up something for that? The difference to the sp with £20m funding would have been huge. I believe we would have stayed near 15p as the dilution would have been far lower. With total debt funded we would have hit 20p, which funnily enough is near the underlying value that Graham has talked about recently. Let's finish our little sparing session as you clearly have no idea of how these things work, or could have worked. Go back to saying 'it's a great deal' and in a month or two when we're still bouncing back to 12-13p (when our underlying value is 21p) you may start to understand what I've been saying. Those with a brain and who have been here before know this is the case. And guess what, look at the sp in case you need to see how the structure of this great deal works. They gave it to their mates. That's why we're down here.

Jolly, jesus you are a m@ppet. Again, I had 3.75m shares. I sold 250k to see if I could buy back cheaper as I thought we'd lost steam in our run and would have a pull-back. I bought back the 250k (so back to 3.75m) and banked £2.2k. I was completely open about this and the fact I was having a bit of fun with my long term investment. Can you get your head around this basic little bit of maths? Go back and re-read again if required.

Yes of course Tony. Another way of looking at it (the way I looked at it) is the company was worth 15-16p based on a variety of metrics compared against peers, so adding 50% more shares should still in theory values the company at 10-11p without taking into account the value of the recent acquisition. But as you know this isn't the way it works when 50% more shares have been printed. What happens is the share price will normally drop to the value (or near value) of the capital raise. You also know this because we've been through it. The new underlying value doesn't matter until the over-hang is cleared. Good thing is because of the production and revenue being added I expect us to stay above 11p (like you), as opposed to when a raise is done for say drilling that doesn't generate any income.

But here's another way of looking at it, which I've saying most people just aren't getting. The underlying value of the company is 15p but we take out £40m debt. The company sp stays at 15p because there isn't 360m extra shares printed at 11p, and we still get the value of the acquisition. Given the acquisition brings immediate revenue and income the market will usually provide a premium to the sp, so higher than 15p, rather than provide a modest discount (for the modest amount of debt v new NOI). Given Graham is talking of 21p underlying value, you can see what it could have been.

But they didn't go down this route. They could have had debt lined up already (given they'd been talking about further acquisitions for a year). Or they could have arranged debt on the back of this opportunity, had they not thought about it previously, which is unlikely as they're not stupid. But they didn't. Tells you something doesn't it. Now do you see what has happened? Their clear way of doing business is sending maximum wealth to the IIs. And of course they get free options on the back of it.

Look at the sp. Feel familiar? We'll be down around the 11.5-13p level until the over-hang has cleared and trust restored. It will be quicker than last time at least, and could be quite quick with a lot of good news. There will be spikes and retraces until blue-sky is achieved. But our share price will never reach the same highs on the back of great news that would have been provided by debt funding. All due to +360m shares being printed. But if you can load up now it should provide the same base growth over time for your total investment. But not all PIs have spare cash. And they probably won't get in at 11p. But the IIs have been guaranteed that growth, rather than all of us getting it. Does everyone else now get it...?

Jolly, greed got the better of them (not me), you're just not seeing it because you've popped up lately. You also have no idea of what has happened in the past so try not to comment on it until you do. And I'd say it's you that has no idea on what's happened on the inside with made up explanations of them having 'no time'. They've been talking about further acquisitions for the best part of a year. What has stopped them from securing debt in readiness of a deal against our reserves, which were significant before this deal? If they were always in the market, why not have the debt lined up? And please also keep in mind jonnycomelately they've secured significant debt in the past from the very same IIs with no reserves, no production, no income, and without the poo and gas being so high. And they've done it quickly. Debt was always an option, they chose not to go down that route. As for me being 'tricked'. How is it my fault that I believed they would act in the interests of all shareholders this time? This shame on them / shame on me saying is a way of shifting blame from those that should always carry ALL the shame.

Tony, I've already written a note to i3e mgt. It's a pointless exercise but let's see if they come back, and what excuses they can provide for not negotiating debt, or having it lined up already, for this last minute 'take it or leave it' £40m deal that had caused their recent (and greatest) PR drive to begin weeks ago. As for freedom of speech and moaning, I could say the same thing about the recent newbies talking utter rubbish about how this is such a good deal for us. If it was, then why has the sp dropped to the mid 11's? Why are PIs who have been caught up in the bod's recent PR drive down by as much as 40% on their initial investment? Yes I'm comfortably in the money, but that's not a counter argument to their lack of integrity in doing the deal in this way, or their continued lack of regard for PIs and their wealth, rather than working in tandem with IIs to generate wealth largely for themselves. As I've said it makes no difference, the deal has been done. And the sp will act in accordance with such a deal. Trading will be the order of the day until the overhang is cleared and trust restored. Let's see how long it takes this time.

Well done nomadic. It's a very good price imo, and almost as though you've participated in the raise :)

Tomhuk, no we don't know their preferred II mates who received 360m shares. At a guess I'd say the same IIs as previous, and no-one new in any volume, but let's see. It will at least answer the rose tinted assertions that 'new IIs' have come aboard. We also don't know if Majid has purchased a single share of the company he is running out of his own pocket i.e. from his £600k salary. Remember he never has. Same goes for Graham. Have to keep in mind they received a ton of FREE options for closing this deal. Same for the last deal. So yeah 'skin in the game', but not quite the same when you've awarded yourself all the shares for free now is it. Anyone seeing a pattern here...? Maybe we should move onto recurring trust and integrity issues...

Guys the deal did us no favors. That's a fact. If you need a reminder then look at the share price. Jolly, to answer your list.

1. You've just made it up 'they needed to close fast'. Complete and utter rose tinted rubbish. You think a deal like this happens in minutes, hours, days...? They've been working on this for weeks, if not months. There is no way they couldn't have gone down at least partial debt funded route with the same IIs that have given them debt before, and who have laughed their @sses off at the umber of shares they've just been given at 11p.
2. Yes. It was a good deal.
3. Distressed? You're joking. If they fully debt funded the ENTIRE deal it would leave us with total debt being the same as our new YEARLY NOI. We'd be paying a low rate. And we'd be able to pay it off in less than 5 years without breaking a sweat. If they said divi would be 20% fcf until the debt is paid everyone would cheer and the sp would already be at 21p because we'd have printed ZERO shares for all the benefits of this great deal. We'd be above 16p if they printed half the amount for £20m debt.
4. So what? We'd still have it if we took on debt. Just a much higher share price.
5. Same as above if they went down the debt route.
6. Same as above if they went down the debt route.

Hopefully by spelling this out people can see the differences in debt funded (partial or full) versus printing 50% more shares and giving them to IIs. Remember they gave themselves and IIs a **** ton of FREE shares in the last raise. The only good thing they did this tie round is not give them any more, although they've taken their free options on the back of this.

The deal was very good. But it was very far from very good for PIs. And the fact Graham is out there talking of 21p (again) is a bad joke given him saying the same thing over the past year then doing this. He obviously hasn't learnt a thing about who drives the share price and who provides the floor. He just f@cked over those who drive the share price. Remember trust was the major issue here to get into double digits. Anyone care to argue with that point? It will be a while before PIs pile back in ad drive us above recent 16p highs (meaning PIs caught up in the recent PR drive getting their money back). And what happens when we get to 21p? Will Majid and Graham add double the amount of shares for 14p and hand them to their II mates whilst taking 100m free options next time? Good deal executed without integrity and regard for PIs.

Either way its done now. But don't bull**** yourselves on the way it was done. Tony, that's my answer to my posting about the deal, and I thought you're normally in the same place wrt rose tinted glasses posters. I've been balanced on this deal, which unfortunately means calling out the bod on structuring this great deal in a way that f@cks over their PI base. Share price says it's true.

Justfencing, why would I sell at maximum damage (or near maximum) to the share price. Doesn't make sense does it? There will be jumps to the 13's, maybe even back to 16 with f/o news. I'll take my divis and do my best to trade a large chunk of my shares on the spikes. There's ways to get back the value our bod has freely given to the IIs. At least I know the company and its prospects pretty well.

As I've said many times, this is a great deal, and the company has very good long term prospects. But the bod has ultimately blunted our sp appreciation and the speed of it, by printing hundreds of millions of shares and giving them to IIs and themselves. At least this time the shares weren't free for the IIs, like last time. It's worth keeping in mind some of the IIs are very healthily in profit now. If just one major II decides to cash in or deleverage on the back of gains here, then don't expect to get above recent 16p highs for some time, regardless of news. Anyone who has been in a stock whilst a major II is deleveraging will be acutely familiar with how this goes. Even with all the extra shares we're worth more than 15p right now. So long as you're not buying above this level anytime soon you can't get too caught out on retraces. Entry level here is very good for newbies. But remember you need a lot of newbies to get through the volume that needs to be traded to see blue-sky and above 15p.

Anyway I've had enough of talking about how the structure of this deal has f@cked our sp potential, alongside the bod's complete lack of integrity and regard for PIs. Let's just see how this pans out. GLA

Fair enough hasiba, a slightly less powerful kick in the g@nads :)

Nope you're correct first time hasiba, my i3e portfolio dropped roughly £175k from the this week's highs to now. And it would have gone the other way had they debt funded this great deal.

justfencing, how long have you been around i3e? I'm guessing not very long as you didn't get a single thing correct in that last post.

Firstly, I have 3.75m shares. My average is about 5.5p. So hardly a reckless trader. I traded 250k two days ago (freely disclosed) and bought them back (with £2k profit). As mentioned at the time it was a 'bit of fun' to test my belief we'd run out of steam and would pull-back. So I didn't get stuck with anything. I also lost around £75-80k on the fiascos related to the Nth Sea dusters first time round here. I'll spare you the details of the insider trading and IIs dumping their stock - we're talking about 70% drop and 1/3rd of the stock changing hands in a day and the bod saying they knew of no reason for the share price action until dropping an rns 2 minutes before close. Perhaps best to do some research before making some statements related to my anger with what has happened here (and before).

As for talking down my investment, I think I've been very clear on the deal being very good, with the structure being **** for PIs. Anyone with half a brain can see this for themselves. Or do you think my ****bagging the bod for them f@cking us over is the reason why the sp is 11.5p...? If they debt funded the lot the share price would be 20p. And we'd still be a company carrying less debt than our yearly NOI (so hardly leveraged - take note Barnyards). Best to sit down and have a think about that. Then think about how the bod gave up 1/3rd of the company to a bunch of spiv bankers for 11p. I'm p!ssed off because they did a great deal for everyone but us. And I feel sorry for the PIs who got sucked in by the recent bod PR blitz so they could get away a discounted placing to their banker mates plus cash in all their free options.

Seriously wtf is it with posters not understanding what I'm saying. Cletus (Cliveas) have you worked it out yet? Tony, please tell me you understand what I'm saying and why I'm ****ed off...?

CF, I think the tweet was a signal to say they're still alive. It also helped to remind me (and probably many others) that we're waiting on the coal project.

Similarities in timelines I suppose, it's only taken half a century to be in a position for 'it' to 'come home'. Imagine relying on Hanno for that timeline :)

MissAnna, nice to hear from you again. Agree with your points, but as I'm sure you know it all depends on the type of news we receive. If relatively small but positive bits of news then we're likely yo get a slow climb but will always be pulled back a little. The f/o however will be the interesting one, and where the brave traders can bank a lot of profit (or accumulate more shares). The timing of this news will also be a key factor in the size of the bump. I'll be trading up to half my holding when I think it's a good opportunity. As I said, no lose situation if you can time the spikes. I note we're now mid 11's.

Tony, agree we're almost always aligned in our thinking, and genuinely surprised it's not the same on this occasion. Just to be clear, I'm not saying in any way we should have relied on PI money to close this deal. I know PIs are notoriously unreliable when needing to raise significant sums of cash. Having said the prospects offered by i3e now are far different to those last time round. As are macro factors. As a reminder, I mentioned as an example 50% debt, 50% raise (of which 5-10% of 50% raise offered to PIs). So hardly relying on PIs for cash.

Reality is the deal could have been structured with debt. That's a fact. And it would have been better for the share price, and therefore PIs if they did this. That's also a fact. We've quickly secured debt when the company was in far worse shape with far riskier prospects. And we could have secured a paltry £20m with the greatest of ease in today's markets awash with confetti money given where we stand now, alongside positive macro indicators. All facts. The only counter argument is 'they didn't have time'. This is the only speculation when it comes to whether the deal could have been structured better. I gave you reasons as to why I think they had time, and this has most probably been in the works for months. But obviously I cannot prove this, in the same way as you can't prove otherwise.

Either way you know what this means for share price appreciation in the coming months. You know because you've been through it already. And you know with debt we would be higher now. And we'd reach higher highs, and quicker, in future. Simply because there'd be over 50% less shares printed. This last point is what many are missing when they're saying 'it's a great deal'.

Yep that's about as good as I expected from you Cliveas.

Levs, your questions are one and the same. I'm fuming with how the bod have acted, and it's because of these actions that I don't see the share price breaking our recent 16p highs for the near future. What many on here are completely missing is the massive raise they have done (for a great deal) means they've printed at least double the amount of shares required to make the acquisition. If they did the deal in the right way i.e. with a degree of debt and greater PI participation, we would reach significantly higher highs in future, and quicker. So when we're 20p in 6 months, we could have been 30p and so on. The structure means the share price will be lower for a lot longer, and then won't reach the same highs or as quickly, as consequence of the amount of shares printed. There's also the big difference in trust, which many lths know can hold this company back from being valued correctly i.e. based on fundamentals. A simple way they could change this is to take out a loan and then do some share buy-backs. That would also address the rose tinted hypothetical that 'they didn't have time'. Can't see that happening though. It's fine, as many have said this happens a lot on aim. And it's good to know they're 'that kind' of bod, as one can take advantage of their actions. I accumulated the majority of my shares the last time they did this. On that occasion it was also a great deal, but it also meant their survival and only route, so understandable. It's not the case this time round, but they chose to do it anyway, which is incredibly disappointing as well as costly to PIs with large holdings.

Anyway it's a traders paradise for the next few months. What I mean by this is there's going to be lots of good news in the near future, along with a great big anchor. But one can't really lose. You time it wrong you just don't make as much. And if you over-commit you have the luxury of knowing it's a very good long term hold.

nomadic, because some other bods can be pr!cks who don't do the right thing by their PIs isn't a good reason for this deal. As for IIs, they'd still get the loan plus the ability to buy a greater share of the remaining raise. Whoever is providing the loan gets the most shares. Usually it's the biggest II that stumps up the loan. So they don't get diluted and still win, they just don't win everything. Btw, this isn't unusual either. It's just the right way of going about it.

It's done anyway. Full disclosure, I'll be trading the spikes from here. Good deal but we're now anchored and it's the best way to make money for the next few months. Figure I may as well take advantage of what the bod has done. Once the overhang is cleared I may park myself again but with a far clearer appreciation of how our bod like to operate. GLA

Cliveas, is this is the best you can do? Care to give a sensible counter argument? You up to that? As for me trading 250k of 3.75m shares and disclosing it to the board saying 'Have to be honest', and 'Having a bit of fun I hope I don't get caught out', what exactly is your argument against this? Do you think that's me lacking honesty or integrity? Even if I was secretly trading, how does it make this the 'right' deal by PIs? I'd really like to hear what you think of this deal, and whether it was done as well as it could have been. And please don't spare the details or your thinking (funny even typing this last word when addressing you).

Tony, one may as well go back to when the price was 5p and say 'well look it's now 12p'.

As for time sensitive, that's what you want to believe. These deals don't come along with a 'you have 24 hours to say yes' clause. We'd even been talking about there being a potential offer for i3e due to the bod finally doing some PR over the past few weeks. The ability to print 500m shares wasn't just something thrown into the resolutions at the last minute for good measure. As for debt being hard to come by, absolutely not. Nth American oilies with decent balance sheets (some horrendous) have been re-negotiating debt at an astonishing rate. We were a producer of near 10kboepd. Significant NOI and fcf. A dividend payer. Next to zero debt. And we were adding another 8kboepd for £40m. You trying to tell me getting £20m would have been difficult? Existing IIs that were supposedly biting their hand off for the raise would have jumped at a loan for a bigger part of the remaining 50% placing. And if they didn't, their holdings would be diluted by another II that would provide the loan. They just weren't pushed on it. Or more likely the bod just gave it up to their mates with little regard for PIs. The recent history and actions of the bod gives a sense of when this deal started in earnest, which was probably first discussed weeks (even months) before the recent PR drive sucking in PIs. The assumptions are what you're making in trying to avoid the sad fact the bod looked after the IIs and themselves, but not us (again).

If they did the deal the right way I'd be singing their praises, because the raise would be higher, and the share price higher still. We would reach higher highs in future, and quicker. So when we're 20p in 6 months, PIs need to keep in mind we'd be 30p if they did the deal the right way i.e. with a degree of debt. Very simple really, but h@lfwits on here want to keep talking about it being a great deal and the share price is going to go up. No **** it's a great deal. No **** the sp will go up. But the structure means the share price is lower for a lot longer, and then won't reach the same highs or as quickly. It's not rocket science but even when spelled out most on here still can't see (or refuse to see) the end result. Now I'm waiting for the f/o to drop just after the +350m shares are printed and options granted. This is the level of confidence I have in the bod's integrity.