Member Info for getafgrip

Surely BP HR must have been tracking what looks to be an extensive list of over-promotions! My concern is that BP limited the self-confession to the last 3-years, deliberately putting a cap on resulting numbers!

Perhaps BP should have approached this issue from another angle & tried to establish whether there were any women employed by BP, who did not have any suddenly unauthorised liaisons to confess, and promoted them instead.

At least Storm Beryl looks like keeping Brent at a reasonable level. The Texas ports of Corpus Christi, Houston, Galveston, Freeport and Texas City said they closed after condition "Zulu" was set by Coast Guard captains on Sunday.

Shell has stated that it expects the decision to stop building work on the biofuels plant in the Netherlands, which it announced early last week, to cost up to USD1 billion. Also Shell has stated the move to sell its Bukom refinery in Singapore will cost between USD600 million and USD800 million. Wael Sawan clearly does not shy away from making massive decisions.

Stopping the Rotterdam plant also sends out strong messages to world governments regarding the development of sustainable aviation fuel, which is seen by some as crucial if airlines are to cut their carbon emissions in line with global climate targets, which will have to be re-calibrated.

It also sends a strong message to the new UK Government regarding the speed of development of SAF infrastructure. And also the measures that companies like Shell will take in the best interests of their current and future profitability. It also flags up the fact that companies like Shell will not be pressurised into being treated as political pawns as governments strive to achieve unrealistic climate goals, at an unrealistic speed.

It is a complex scenario when Rachel Reeves has stated that the Treasury is not exactly overflowing with unallocated funds, and she will have to "lean" on the private sector to come up with the difference, whilst Shell has already made it clear that leading up to the Election the gravitational pull for Shell was towards a US domicile & listing. A situation for the tight-rope specialists!

OL - In my view it seems highly unlikely that Pensacola and Selene were discussed separately by essentially the same partners. What appears to have come about is a trade off and agreed negotiation of the two assets. Deltic has remained totally silent on the Pensacola situation, when shareholders deserve an explanation, otherwise chicanery rears its ugly head. It retains anonymity for the companies concerned if Deltic states how many companies they were negotiating with and the broad reasons for the failure of the negotiations to reach any meaningful conclusions.

Swindells stated that they were negotiating with several potential partners up to the end of the additional week. At what point did failure become obvious and why? Were potential partners available? You can list a thousand questions.

It is not unusual to have a clause in a contract that reverts the project to ownership of the main partner, in the event of the smaller partner not meeting its financial or general obligations under the terms of the contract. The contract needs to ensure continuity of the project even if one of the partners is completely inadequate, fails, is taken over, cannot meet its obligations etc. But, if Deltic was such a "straw" company, that was even remotely likely to renege on its contracted financial commitments, why did Shell contract with them in the first place? The Selene negotiation looks very much like a sweetener, relieving Deltic of any responsibility to fund costs until revenues are likely to flow.

Shell Perdido Evacuation begins in the Gulf of Mexico as Hurricane Beryl threatens:

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Shell-Begins-Perdido-Evacuation-As-Hurricane-Beryl-Threatens-Operations.html

FD - funding was available in the markets for a project like Pensacola, the only question was at what interest rate price! It was certainly not a question of is funding available for Pensacola, and there is only a binary yes or no answer, with nothing bridging the gap!

Why has Deltic not complained about Shell's position on Pensacola! Why has Deltic carried on partnered with Shell as the lead partner in Selene, without apparently even a ripple of displeasure in the business relationship! Why has Swindells apparently taken it on the chin, without comment! The outcome was pre-agreed, as you say settled behind closed doors, and the SP (even with the RNS warning from Swindells) was simply collateral damage! Ordinary share holders acting in support of Deltic have simply been treated as cannon-fodder!

The issue for Deltic was that although they had incredible prospects from Pensacola and Selene alone, they had no control of the situation with Pensacola once Selene was agreed & ratified, with Dana coming in!

With news yesterday such as: Shell has paused construction at one of its biggest energy transition projects, a huge plant in Rotterdam that was intended to convert waste into jet fuel and biodiesel, Sawan is showing repeatedly how ruthless his approach to addressing market conditions & cost cutting can be particularly in relation to projects that will not meet stringent profitability criteria.

Wael Sawan runs the rule over every Shell project with his CFO. And Pensacola is going ahead!!! Without doubt Pensacola has the potential to be very profitable & meet Shell's criteria. In my view Pensacola was relinquished either due to financial or political publicity pressure instigated by Shell. Otherwise why would Deltic just remain silent on this. There is more to the pressurised, aggressively timebound, Pensacola decision than shareholders have been informed of!

Shell look to be approaching a number of SP targets in the lead up to the 2nd Quarter results announcement on the 1st August 2024. Shell is very close to the previously broached £29, nearing the top of its 52-week trading range 2,251.00 / 2,961.00 (Source: London Stock Exchange), and the elusive £30 barrier.

With news such as: Shell has paused construction at one of its biggest energy transition projects, a huge plant in Rotterdam that was intended to convert waste into jet fuel and biodiesel, Sawan is showing repeatedly how ruthless his approach to addressing market conditions & cost cutting can be. For now the best that competitors such as BP can hope to do is at some point copy and imitate Shell.

End of the 2nd Quarter, with Brent at a reasonable level throughout, streamlining & focus on oil & gas, divestment of what are strategically viewed as superfluous low earning renewables, significant cost cutting taking place, together with indications that domicile in the US is being actively considered. Driving season in the US, a possible escalation of the Israeli confrontation with Hezbollah & other geopolitical tensions. The SP appears to have quite significant momentum at the moment, so hopefully this will continue through the 2nd Quarter results announcement on Thursday the 1st August 2024.

If the Regulator waves the Thoma Bravo takeover through with a green light, it is going to state definitively how important cyber-security is in terms of our national defence. It is not a great message to publicise, if the regulator is stating clearly that as a nation we do not have any care whatsoever in relation to the ownership of a cutting edge cyber-security company that utilises AI!

Also that as a nation we are content to let the US dominate provision of OUR cyber-security defences! Also that we are content for a US court to dictate to us who can be a Director of our most important cyber-security company! Also we will have to meekly accept the US extraditing whoever they choose, for say dropping litter on Wall Street - with no reciprocity!

From the number of Off-book trades & UT trades the market-makers look to be having difficulty even managing an orderly market in Deltic shares! Now with a Market Capitalisation of £7.5 m and declining & nobody wants it! As you say Purdey with not a word from the directors on this "transformational" situation!

Mooching,

Tombstoning! I've decided to buy the company when its Market Capitalisation is down to £10!

Notices of the Court Meeting and General Meeting

As described in the Scheme Document, to become effective the Scheme will require, amongst other things: (i) the approval of a majority in number of Scheme Shareholders present and voting either in person or by proxy at the Court Meeting (or any adjournment thereof), representing not less than 75 per cent. in value of the Scheme Shares voted by such Scheme Shareholders; (ii) the passing of the Special Resolution by the requisite majority of Darktrace Shareholders at the General Meeting (or any adjournment thereof); and (iii) the subsequent sanction of the Scheme by the Court. The Scheme is also subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the other Conditions and further terms that are set out in the Scheme Document.

Notices of the Court Meeting and the General Meeting, both of which will be held at the offices of Latham & Watkins (London) LLP at 99 Bishopsgate, London EC2M 3XF, United Kingdom, on 18 June 2024, are set out in the Scheme Document. The Court Meeting will commence at 2.30 p.m. and the General Meeting at 2.45 p.m. (or, if later, as soon as the Court Meeting has concluded or been adjourned).

It is important that, for the Court Meeting in particular, as many votes as possible are cast, so that the Court may be satisfied that there is a fair and reasonable representation of the opinion of Scheme Shareholders. Scheme Shareholders and Darktrace Shareholders are therefore strongly encouraged to submit proxy appointments and instructions for the Court Meeting and the General Meeting using any of the methods set out in the Scheme Document as soon as possible and, in any event, by no later than 2.30 p.m. on 14 June 2024 in the case of the Court Meeting and by no later than 2.45 p.m. on 14 June 2024 in the case of the General Meeting (or, in the case of any adjournment, not later than 48 hours (excluding non-working days) before the fixed time for the holding of the adjourned meeting).

Maybe HR will end up with an overflowing mail-box! At least any employees who feel that they have been shafted by the management or directors, will have confirmation of whether this assumption is correct!

FD - Deltic no longer holds a 50% share in Selene. From the Deltic website:

In February 2024, Deltic farmed down a further 25% of its interest in P2437 to Dana Petroleum (E&P) Limited. This transaction, in combination with the existing Shell carry, results in Deltic retaining a 25% non-operated interest in Licence P2437 and having no exposure to 2024 drilling and testing costs up to a cap in excess of current success case well cost estimates ($47M), provided by the Operator.

The deal also includes $500k in cash on completion in relation to back costs incurred by Deltic. Dana will carry Deltic for its residual cost exposure to the Selene well (after utilisation of the existing carry from the Shell farm-out) to a value of $5M, and $6M in a success case.

Dana will pay its 25% share of costs from 1 January 2024 and completion of the deal was on 2 April 2024.

DP & ROT,

I still think there is an agenda behind the scenes that has governed what has happened with Pensacola.

Deltic were actively negotiating with several parties until the 12th June. Even if they accepted a deal to take on the costs + give Deltic £1 it is better than what has happened! Unless Deltic was negotiating to actually pay another company to take Pensacola off their hands which seems incomprehensible!

So we are where we are. To all intents and purposes the 30% ownership of Pensacola has completely gone! Big political points have been made regarding the future of NS Oil & Gas recovery. Shell is now covering 95% of costs, presumably with One-Dyas covering 5%. Shell appears to have obtained defaulted ownership of 30% of Pensacola for nothing.

Ownership of Pensacola still rests with the original partners, albeit excluding Deltic. No new part-owner of Pensacola has been introduced in spite of an extremely short, well-publicised "suddenly introduced" sales process. Shell now has complete freedom to compensate, or not compensate, Deltic at some point if Pensacola proves commercially viable, and they wish to act honourably! Or Shell may adhere to a "grey" agreement in the background, decided on by the three original partners.

We all seem to agree that this is a complete "transformational disaster." With contracted cost implications projected into the future that could bankrupt Deltic. The company was completely inadequate in every respect in coping with the success of the Pensacola discovery.

Deltic were talking to interested parties right up to the deadline. There was interest, but it foundered on price, prospects and the changed political environment. The political scenario changed in an instant. The right to a fair share of luck completely evaporated.

I don't think Shell was at any point going to step in and directly intervene to save the situation. But Shell has enormous financial & industry muscle, and could easily have leaned on appropriate lenders and potential partners, to resolve the financial situation for Deltic. They chose not to!

Deltic may have simply become a political football. The impossible commercial & economic hurdles created politically with Manifesto pledges etc, could be highlighted by say Shell & other oil-majors withdrawing from a few NS projects, but the Deltic debacle makes much more profound statements on the viability of the NS.

Exploration & discovery of potential NS commercial assets is non-economic, funding is not available, the business model/case of small exploration companies like Deltic is completely flawed, the political situation is crippling, the tax situation is impossible etc.

With a trivial capitalisation and loss of involvement in one major project, Deltic may just be a sacrificial lamb in terms of Shell making a big, but cheaply funded, political point on the non-viability of the NS, the political minefield, and the attractions of heading for domicile in the US. Shell has as a minimum made the politicians focus on the reality of their policies impacting on jobs, investment, energy security & the NS.

The UK, US Government, fat lady, & Mike Lynch, want him fighting cyber-crime, so fingers crossed. I've just voted against the takeover.

Darktrace is now a FTSE 100 company & therefore this further indicates that mant consider the opportunist bid from Thoma Bravo should be improved.

Mike Lynch has been cleared of all charges in the US. Presumably this would also free him up to be a director of Darktrace again if the opportunity arose, and it was his inclination. For me one of the last outcomes that the US Government would accept was jailing one of the World's leading cyber security experts for decades, it would have been too much of an own-goal!

He states that he wanted to come back to the UK, his family & making innovations in his chosen field - so that it is now very relevant what he decides to do. He only resigned from the Advisory Board of Darktrace in February 2022.

Will he just return to Silicon Fen, or will he be open to recruitment into the Thoma Bravo camp to head up innovation based in Cambridge, with Darktrace based in the US. This might be acceptable from the US and UK perspectives i.e. the UK not losing Darktrace altogether.

If only 25.1% is needed to secure a "NO" Vote, what is going to happen with Mike Lynch and Angela Bacares remaining shares, the employee benefit plan, or any other so far non-declared votes. If another potential predator is waiting in the wings, might they not persuade Mike Lynch to head a rival bid at short notice, or one that is largely already prepared.

This is tight, but I doubt whether it is all over yet. I certainly hope not.

Pot and kettle or just dyslexia:

MG -"This is S&P short term outlook due to BP’s net debt position creeping up a LITTLE from £21.7 to £24B." Surely a £2.3 billion increase in net debt is significant + 10.6%.

You also quote" BP's net debt rose to $24 billion in the first quarter of the year, compared with $21.2 billion a year." Depending which figure you consider correct, this is an increase in net debt of £2.8 billion or 13.21% in only 3-months!

You have failed to explain this other than by stating that net debt has come down from COVID levels, and the management know what they are doing.