Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Which broker diod you use to buy Montage?
Surely not....despite British_Mike's inside info. on the cores?
In essence BPC have raised funds, which cost near a million pounds to arrange, and the majority of which will sell below 2.3p, therefore incurring reimbursement costs . Given the amount required to sell, the share price would be hard pushed to rise against such volume, including even if JR rejected. So, in esssence management must have know this likelihood in advance, so why didnt they just raise at 1.6 or 1.7p without such a condition, as that is what it could equate to.
Also, if the JR is granted, I am guessing the lenders are permitted to sell in to any sudden crash in price,?
Here's hoping for the best, although I am sincerely hoping this doesn't turn out to be a Range Resources replay. The similarities are uncanny. A wildcat drill promoting the possibility of billions of barrels (in RR's case, it was water they found), in a previously untapped exploration area.. Years of delay to the drill. Increasing amounts of funding, resulting in billions of shares in issue by the time of the drill happening. External threats to the drill...terrorism in the case of RR. Production assets in Trinidad which struggled to cover costs, even when the cost of ol was higher.
As it turned out, the failure of the drill in Puntland resulted in the shares crashing, from which there was no recovery. Exacerbated by the death spiral of loans they undertook. The last I heard of them was they had to rename the company, conduct a share consolidation, and I one of their last deals was to buy shares in a Chinese nursery group! On the positive side, their share price did shoot up considerably after spud, although I don't recall them having the drag on the share price that we have currently.
The algorithms and bots ignore that information unfortunately. One wonders whether they are following the direction of the momentum, or whether they are using the opportunity to create that momentum. Being a FTSE100 company, the type of institutions and funds that invest here are always super cautious and reactive to negative news.
A definitive and suitable outcome is the predeterminant to any rise here I think, given their business relationship with EU and any perceived or real fall-out from a no-deal Brexit.
What happened to S. Potter's prediction of P-1 success being a near certainty, when a raise could have been conducted at prices far north of here. It stinks, and has now locked in lots of people now who otherwise would have not prefferred to hang around for the result. That's share speculation for you.
Thanks, clearly I spoke too soon. Would love to know who is offloading.
Is it coincidence that the big seller has disappeared? Or could it be that they too see the glaring holes in the applicants case?
Clearly even the applicants dont believe they have a case, hence the application at the last minute. I believe their sole hope is that their actions prevent BPC from drilling at the scheduled time. They realise that is enough to bring the drilling issue to a halt for the forseeable future, and buy them time to agitate further. In that sense their actions are targetting BPC directly, given that it is them who will suffer the direct financial consequences.
Further, they don't want BPC involved in their action as they do not have the funds to post the size of bond that will be required.
It sounds like they are on a hiding to nothing witheir case and pinning their hope on the courts placing a temporary halt on the drill, while also hoping the wheels of justice turn very slowly. Personally, I'm hopeful their action will get nowhere, and as BPC's lawyer intimated, will fall at the first hurdle.
ZagEgypt,
I am not entirely certain that the QC is in fact , "Chest thumping" as you put it. Certainly with regards to injunction applications in UK law, any applicant for an injunction must have a strong underlying claim. An application can be made 'on notice', meaning that the defendant has been told an injunction is intended to be be applied for. An application without notice will struggle to be granted by the court if notice has not been provided to the defendant. From the get-go, it has always been the QC's claim that any injunction will be applied for if the IM sets sail for the Bahamas.
I'm in agrerement with those on here who disagree with that letter being forwarded to the Tribune. Only as it it will inflame local feeling, given the patronising and 'privelidged' tone used in parts.
Scarface, if you check the trades either side of that £136k transaction, it would appear that it was actually a sell.
Its all a bit of a kick in the nads for this to be happening so close to the event. Particularly given the ups and downs this share has had over the last ten years. I dont believe a 10% fall in daily share price justifies a 'no reason' RNS tomorrow. Very happy to be proved wrong tomorrow though. Personally I am prepared for no RNS tomorrow, simply because the environmental group have not yet actually instigated any formal legal proceedings as such, in the form of an injunction. They have only intimated the threat of such. Therefore there is not much for BPC to formally reply to. Hence probably why, informally, James Smith is quoted in the Tribune today.
I am hoping that the environmentalists case is all bluster and bluff, but a part of me is deeply concerned that the environmental group's motivation and hope is that if IM serts sail that an interim injunction could be granted by a judge, even for some technicality that requires investigation, or which requires BPC to produce all documentation and paperwork to court, as they know that would scupper a whole lot more than just the timing of this drill. They are attempting to circumvent the three month time limit that has been mentioned widely, by directing their challenge at matters to which that would not apply., or so they believe. Neither BPC or the Govt. have engaged with the groups information requests, again so the group claims.
The threat is public and very real, and the question is whether the group has the chutzpa and financial backing to take it all the way.
Afraid not Startfromscratch. It's literally half the GBP price you suggested. Pretty dire outcome. I too had made good money out of Caza back in the day, but will have to take a hit on my current holding. A clear example of not getting emotionally attached to a share.
This is more than likely the continually constricting effect of Yorkville. Squeezing the life out of those companies desperate enough to have borrow from that bunch of sharks.
I meant, the Saudi's current stance to keep a lid on oil prices and drive out what they see as higher cost competitors.
Much as I hate to say it, being a holder, but it appears that Caza are actually no different to its peers, and are actually struggling financially in todays climate, and certainly more than has been let on by management, Todays announcement with the loathed Yorkville smacks of desperation.Even although some of Caza's oil sales are currently hedged. According to most objective commentators the low oil prices are likely to continue for a considerable time. So, if Caza require $4 million over the next month, the obvious questions have to be how long will this money last, what exactly can be done operationally now to counter the low cost of oil, and what are the managements longer term plans should the oil prices remain low. As it looks, if low oil prices are here to stay for the time being there is the real danger that Caza could get locked in to a death spiral of ever increasing/continued loans in order to counter those lower oil prices. Which is the Saudi's current stance.
Well we have been welland truly sold out by the Board. So, they reckon that AIM listing has been less than favourable for the share price? As with all other E&P oil companies, maybe they should successfully hit some of their own production targets first, and only then will they be in a position to objectively judge whether the market is acknowledging their efforts and gains.With so much planned this year for Pele, including the hook-up with Shell, it seems an odd point in time to de-list. Although maybe that viewpoint is true, only if you are a pi. The BOD, Tribeca and JCR have everything to gain from this move, and by selling out the pi's in this way. A reflection of pi's only holding 18.5% of issued shares. In my opinion, Tribeca, and most likely, JCR Group have been steering PELE down this path for a long time. I suspect that they have likely influenced or contributed, direct or otherwise, to the share price being held down over the past year to meet that objective.Nice result for them, and a derisory flick-off to the pi's.
The short-termers expectations were not matched by the actual results posted for Colon-3 sidetrack. PELE encountered a very tight formation down there, thus proving problematic to extract from. The fundamentals of the company are good, proven succesful management, revenue up 111% over last six months, profit up, gross production up 65%, $75 million credit facility arranged to finance ongoing development, Serafin-1 gas connection works commencing Q4 2010. An optimistic person might hope they might announce results of their their planned updated reserve report by year end, along with their decision whether to frac Colon-3 or not, new seismics and positioning of new drills in various blocks. None of this is happening tomorrow, but by year end things for Pele may be looking more exciting and justifiable of a price in the upper 70's or 80's.