REMINDER: Our user survey closes on Friday, please submit your responses here.
Jam on what Ovets? Genuinely, what is it about today's release that makes you more optimistic than you were yesterday?
If I recall correctly you were for a long while saying give PMO/RKH more time to meet the approx Feb-end deadline for FID, then went off on one (fair enough) when a PMO director appeared to change the timetable to "by end-2019" at a conference.
Today we hear they intend to make an application in Q2 (not sure when in Q2 or how long this will take) for funding (presumably export). The alternative would have been to say we've given up on finding a funding solution.
The wheels are undoubtedly turning, but contrary to what I said previously about Q2, many believed they were turning much faster.
I'm not sure what it is that signals the sudden increased level of optimism.
Until now, it has been assumed by most that it was simply a matter of FID being announced, probably sooner rather than later; that we were just waiting on a decision on export credit.
This morning, it's been confirmed that that isn't the case; that a formal application for funding will be submitted in Q2. This matches what I said would happen a couple weeks back about the parties having to move on from more informal discussions which ordinarily might give rise to a very quick decision to forcing a decision through a formal application in Q2. This step has happened because of political stalling, so I wouldn't say a positive decision at the end of process is automatically a given.
"Q2" is pretty wide and there is no mention of how long this application process will take. No "application in Q2 with a view to taking FID in ....".
Perhaps some of these issues will receive some more clarity on the call later this morning. 9am for those interested.
"We are no longer a footnote and they have don’t want to farm down as they see it as being a company maker. Instead they’re looking to bring in an equity partner so they can enjoy every barrel themselves."
Umm...what exactly do you think an equity partner is?
Funny how when I said a couple of weeks ago that the companies were looking to force a decision in Q2 (mostly due to political stalling) that I was derided. Perhaps I just got lucky...
"FID and Project Sanction of Sealion 2019"
Careful Nigoil. That sounds like a statement, dare I say theory, without any reasoned evidence or facts...
I can name many dates where selling RKH would have been a good idea ralph. Doesn't mean it was obvious or the wrong decision taken at the time not to.
Fionna swapped a COO role for a CEO role and transferred all her options into those at Echo. She didn't walk away from anything.
Brexit and politics are the issue now.
Re options, as Chairman, David didn't get options; just a six-figure fee, so he's not specifically walking away from any leveraged pay-off. He did, however own c500,000 shares so much more interesting (though unlikely to ever be revealed) would be what he has or plans to do with them. Fionna probably saw the writing of the wall in terms of timing and got a better offer for which I'm sure she has been adequately compensated.
I wouldn't read much into it.
Ovets, I think you're being a bit one-sided here. You used to post some pretty well-reasoned stuff, but increasingly you're just the antithesis of those who constantly post negative remarks and have been dragged down to much the same level.
In this instance, Nigoli (and others) constantly post that FID and Sanction will happen in 2019. Maybe, hopefully, they will be right.
Godders as far as I can see suggested he didn't think it would happen in 2019, because it's been delayed many times before and why should this year be any different. Maybe, hopefully, he will be wrong, but I see historical precedence as at least a valid basis for making the statement.
If people bug you, just ignore them. You're not going to change them, that's for sure.
As for the director's purchases they are what they are. Put yourself on one of their shoes however. Each year they are awarded 2x their salary in potential shares. These will easily vest if Sea Lion is sanctioned and make them a lot of money. The sanctioning of Sea Lion is somewhat binary and there are factors outside of their control influencing this. I'm not sure I would be putting my eggs all in one basket if I was already in line for massive pay-off if everything lines-up.
It really depends on your starting point.
Any conceivable deal that sees Sea Lion sanctioned in the next 12 months or so, prior to any call on shareholders from RKH (and even post a minor one, if Sea Lion was still seen as foreseeable) would put a rocket under the current share price from today's levels.
Now, some conceivable deals might not see you whole if your purchase price is £1+, but while that might give reason to moan it shouldn't effect whether the shares are attractive at today's price, which is really only what one can look at when making a decision whether to sell, hold, or buy more.
Am I Imagining it, or hadn't it already been announced that Bushell was stepping down some time ago?
Has anyone reached out to PMO to see if Mr Hartell was confusing his FID's with his Sanctions, or if FID by year-end (with sanction presumably into 2020) is the latest official PMO line?
I suspect there has been no RNS because there's very little of value that can be said. The timing was as previously indicated, and they're unlikely to say much else for risk of prejudicing the deliberations or any subsequent actions. If there are any post-hearing submissions, it may also be that they're waiting to these are finalised, or simply that any broad comment will be in the next scheduled release.
Much, you may be proved correct in the end, but I'd hesitate about professing those views with such apparent certainty. When it comes to legal proceedings, it's small details (and a bit of luck) that often decides it, and those details are often things that private or institutional shareholders are often not aware of or not privy to.
The hearing has taken place. The wording used in the case detail is inconsistent, so I wouldn't be concerned with the specific prose.
A decision should be expected within 4 months, subject to an extension requested by the arbitration panel, or any other post hearing action which might delay the firing of the starting gun.
"The influence of Brexit is probably more to do with consuming Government resource than HMG getting cold feet."
This is the misconception. Although I wouldn't say HMG are getting cold feet; it's not about a change of attitude. It is wrong to think the main issue is getting civil servants to complete their spreadsheets. Brexit has mostly introduced an additional element; a political call. It's about obtaining an additional level of sign-off.
fecm,
Q2 simply meshes with the mid-year target that has been mentioned several times. I'm pretty sure if you were to pick up the phone to RKH or PMO, or certainly if you had done in the last month or so, that they would have indicated to you Q2 as being the sort of anticipated time for potential FID.
'Shortly' also references Q2, so could be a pretty busy period (good or bad) with the Ombrina Mare outcome likely to be delivered around then also. Although I wouldn't claim to be an expert on the process by any means, I understand much to date re the EC has been one step short of a formal application. Once all the t's and crossed and i's dotted this could potentially move to something more formal where it is much harder for the can to be kicked. Whether that turns out to be good or not is obviously open to debate, and only time will tell.
That is what I have been able to piece together from a variety of sources and conversations. I may have added 2+2 and got 5. We will see.
Nigoli, the following sentences provided a reasonable degree of elaboration for you! I'm not (as others) going to say from whom I understand, in case that might result in the supply of various pieces of information, none of which in themselves is material, but altogether which provides a useful additional framework and background for decision making, drying up. All I would say is that if you make the reasonable enquiries, and speak to those, which one might reasonably be expected to, if you have made a significant investment that you might receive the same bits of information. For a small company like RKH, the reality is that there is far more information to be had than simply the official RNS', presentations, website, annual results, etc.
Mogger,
I have not read the full article. I do not currently have access, though have had in the past and have based that experience on the type of article/story that is normally featured; at best amalgamating information what is already in the public sphere rather than bringing new information to the table.
I also understand from other sources that this really is a question of EC signoff, and in particular signoff required from various government bodies/individuals that might not be usually required given the political sensitivities around Brexit, notably does the UK government want to potentially annoy Argentina/South America at the same time as reaching out to make trade deals. UKEF don't want to/aren't able to make the call on their own. This is separate to the simple issue of available government bandwidth which is how the Brexit card is currently commonly played and understood at the moment. Paradoxically, I think Sea Lion would probably have faired better with worse UK/Argentinian relations, rather than this middle ground. I also understand the companies will shortly be looking to force UKEF into a decision and obviously hope that is a positive one.
Thanks
The TXF article seems like a regurgitation of the expected timetable, rather than any new insight. All rests on an export credit sign-off from the FCO/Liam Fox. With EC in place other financing will fall in place relatively quickly; without it it becomes a much more drawn out affair.
Nigoli. Given that I suspect you have absolutely no expertise in international arbitration, any statements like the following are absolutely worthless.
"I don't see this one going the wrong way at this stage as the Italian government have already thrown the kitchen sink at it ,and as you say they have just thrown the last dice!"
"The arbitration will not be delayed and the tribunal will decide the outcome at no cost to Rkh if they were to lose. It's a win for me :)"
All I have said is that until the parties are sitting in the hearing anything is possible based on past tangible examples. Anyone who says otherwise is guessing.
Looks like a last throw of the dice by the Italian government to frustrate the process. The next entry will be important. There are other hearings which have been pushed back with only a week or two to go.
Many seem to forget that the current ZAMA drill is only the first step in a appraisal process which won't complete until the middle of the year. One would presume, even if the first well results are very positive, that it isn't the optimal time to sell just yet. Similarly, Sea Lion's value is held back until a financing package is in place.
They would surely need to get a very good deal indeed on Chevron's assets to warrant the hair-cut they would have to take today on the value for either ZAMA or Sea Lion that might be realisable in 6 months time. In a competitive bidding situation against parties with deep pockets this seems unlikely.
My guess would be PMO being 'seriously' interested in a very small part of PMO's portfolio, and any aquisition being mostly funded by equity.