Member Info for gwilliams316

Its amazing how many apparant shareholder are happy for a bod that has never been ratified by shareholders to in affect give the compnay away without approval.

Whether they are elected at the AGM they have now placed new directors without shareholder approval to run the compnay if they are not there and no doubt carry on down this new road they have drawn.

The whole thing is a joke imo.

Appointing Directors before an agm is not on.

AFFRM is clearly conflicted here and is venting his displeasure at his treatment by the board.

Hes right to question the deal on the table.

We have a lack of details, its worth, the people, the money , the partner and more importaintly the dillution.

Hes also right that it is his hard earned money and he has every right to be dubious of the bod, it is his perogative as a shareholder.

You keep saying there is no plan from TG, you are correct nothing has been revealed just yet, but imo there is no clear plan from the bod. Theres a potential deal but there are no details of it at all for shareholders to digest.

I believe Fridays presentation was basically a board begging for votes. It was good to hear from the new director, i thought RM was less than inspiring and SL was pushing the message weve heard over and over again.

But my personal highlight from Fridays presentation was the new Director stating the Texas assets are a great place to be. Sums up PPP. Weve allowed leases to expire in a great place according to the new director, which may or may not renewed.

In my opinion it adds to the fact that the Bod has failed to look after our assets and leases and as a result our balance sheet has been decimated, although we dont have that audited as far as i am aware. Please correct me if i am wrong.

I get people are desperate to just see some return but there is still hope.

Lets not forget the shorts here. They will be pushing a return to trading, huge dillution would be a welcome recovery for some. Just saying.

Anyway before im attacked by the usual crowd, have a nice day, do your own research and good luck.

I read the back and forth on here daily when i get a spare half hour and there really is no point to keep arguing.

We all have opinions and clearly there is a divide.

For me personally its about a board being elected and accountable to shareholders. I cannot move away from the fact we have been denied this right for too long and therefore do not trust this board to deliver for shareholders when for so long they have refused to engage.

We have to make our minds up on what we have in front of us. If you believe its good for your investment and you like what youve seen say yes if however you believe letting leases expire and moving from the USA to Ukraine is a poor choice then say no.

@hep, you talk of misinformation maybe you could help us all understand some of the below because im confused by it all.

1. Strange the Menzes joined if a JV with global was not on the cards, he signed stating he would serve as a ditector in a resolution sent to the board pre his appointment by the TG group which the bod rejected at the time then went on to appoint him.

2. Missing payments, this really throws me off, accusations of missing payments when we have an Rns from a couple of weeks stating Fhf had contol of the finance, who had control of fhf and the bank accounts??

3. No audit confirmation of the write down of the leases that as far as i can see.

Morning btw.

It would also be easier for shareholders to understand if the deal was presented in more detail.

Asimple what is your understanding of resolution 8.

As i understand it under resolution 8, the board are asking permission to do what they deem is necessary to deal with the write down of the assets.

I have a few issues if that is the case.

1. The write down of the assets have not been audited as far as i am aware.

2. The RMD deal or anything else can be covered under this resolution as well as the Petroquest and nobel lease deal.

I would have hoped for clear resolutions for open debate. Not one resolution thats not clear but seems to allows carte blanche deal making without further approval for an unaudited write down.

Maybe someone could help me out here regarding Lunns appointment that you seem to be discussing.

Taken from the appointment rns.

Rns 25th sep 24

"Presently, Mr. Lunn is currently a director of the following non-public listed companies; Lunbros Trust Ltd., GreenXXCorp Ltd., CFGH Management Limited, FHF Corporate Finance Limited, Petroquest Energy Ltd. and York Energy Ltd. In the previous five years, Mr. Lunn was on the board of RRR HoldCo Limited."

Taken from rns 28th oct 24

With the extraordinary efforts of Mr Stephen Lunn, our new director, we have now today received the missing bank statements primarily needed to complete our accounts for the 2023/24 year end.

Taken from rns 25th sep 25.

The situation with the former Corporate Secretary remains very unsatisfactory and the company is also currently reviewing selected transactions to identify whether there is potential to recover funds from FHF Corporate Finance Ltd (FHF). This is complicated by the arrangement whereby the company did not control, nor did it adequately oversee its accounting functions, and the Corporate Secretary was neither a director nor employee of FHF. These unusual arrangements have been terminated and Company now directly controls its own finance function.

So ive checked companies house. FHF are owned by i believe CFGH Management and as stated at the time of his appointment Mr Lunn was a Director of both companies.

In regards to FHF it appears on companies house a lady called JANTSCHEK, Katherine Elizabeth was Director from 2011 to June 24 (i cant be sure but i have heard the name Cathy mentioned as Anton Terkanyis long term partner).

Then a certain Anzcorp Trust ltd(an AT company was appointed after his death. He died in MAR/APR 24 i believe and they were appointed in June 24). This is a New Zealand based company.

Followed by Mr Lunn himself in August 24.

Weve been told in the RNS that PPP did not control the accounting function FHF did.

Who controlled FHF??? By the looks of it AT via his partner on paper, then on his death and as trustee and beneficiary of ATs estate, Mr Lunn.

So we have an rns stating the FHF situation was not good but you can see that our chair im has had control of FHF since ATS death in Mar/Apr 24 and de facto had control of the PPP accounts. A situation that stopped the accounts progressing under the previous board, my question is i suppose did the previous board ask for access to the data before his appointment.

As ever this just a little resesrch i done myself, please correct me if it is wrong as i do not wish to share inaccurate information and please do your own research.

This company honestly hurts my head, nothing is ever black and white.

New i never thought of that but its a great point. Maybe its being loaded up to continue to avoid shareholders wishes.

Good point.

Just a year late.😂😂. Your clearly unable to process the meaning of the message.

So for clarity.

Im unhappy that a board that has to date not held an agm to ratify itself and feels the need to appoint a director in a timeframe when it has finally announced an agm and said agm hopefully going ahead.

Is it allowed yes maybe, thats a whole different argument, does it look good i dont believe so no.

We wont agree here and i wish you all the best.

Asimple i didnt say it wasnt. My question is the timing. Re-read the message. There has been a lot of anger at shareholders being denied an agm vote for over a year, and that tbe board has refused to stand to date.

Then at the time of getting a chance to ratify the board they then add a new director and we will be in the same postion as before. Why wouldnt they add this to the AGM???

I do not need eduacating on the "Act" nor our articles.

I think you might need to lay of the gullible pills for a while and come down of your high horse.

I want the board to act with integrity if that is wrong then so be it.

Another board member not appointed by shareholders and wont have to stand as anniunced after the agm agenda. What a joke. This company has the chance to bring legitimacy to tbe board and fails once again to do so. Ask yourself why??

PPP is never dull😂😂😂

My take is at a time when the assests have been written down(not signed off by the auditor) and half the lease company is being taken by petroquest we are at our lowest point of value. Along comes an rto with an unknown company with an unkniwn value to the asset being backed in and with no shared data on the lease and just before the agm.

Not to mention any risk associated with the ongoing war, bombing or drone attack, Ukraine corruption issues and any resource deals that come out of any future peace deal that may or may not happen.

Were moving from the worlds richest country into a conflict zone.

I wont be engaging in back and forth arguments, thats my opinion and everyone will make their own minds up.

Only in the world of PPP, and i thought it had been eventful until now.😂😂

Afternoon asimple

Lunn needs the share payback to go through to gain those shares, its what was voted on at tbe last GM.

We were promised transparancy in and around these items and yet we still have no idea.

My understanding is that Anztrust which was antons ends up via multiple companies controlling tens of millions and i believe SL is the beneficiary.

We asked for clarification on this as we were told they were unsure of where the shares were going so we asked how can you raise shares if you do not know where they are going.

Again more questions.

If anyone can share if they have progressed with this please do👍👍

Wont we need another GM to sign off the 24-25 accounts before re listing???

Have i missed something?? What is Evans going to court for??

The spread has been a joke for a while. They have some great assets on the table now, this appears way undervalued given the intial data and the price of gold at tbe moment.

Results imminent as well. This could be a great few week.

This board have ignored companies house and the breaches they have commited, ignored shareholders for a year, written down the assets, assigned 50% to petroquest, failed to deliver anything operationally.

Its a no from me. We need a new board. Some people are celebrating they have actually announced an AGM, thats how low the bar is at present.

Get them all gone.

"Importantly the Company remains fully funded for planned works across all portfolio assets."

Them numbers are crazy👌👌👌👌

Is it a new broker as well??