Hi, Celtics - no way of knowing. Agree there was information put out there over the last few months so goods researchers previously interested in this region should have picked up on it. But my guess is a lot of punters still are not aware of the potential here and the 24-well drill campaign. What is interesting is that Clarendon, who were aware of the news, continued to sell down and must be close to having sold out by now. I cannot fathom that at all.
'it does not follow trading patterns that preceded the last two drills results.' I think that could be to do with the risk profile having changed. Before, we only had perhaps one more roll of the dice. Now we have about 24 follow on wells. Risk profile has completely changed imo. Don't forget, there has been no RNS from WTE on Exxon's 24 new drills planned, so most investors are not yet aware of the potential - still very much under the radar. Hence new blood may well be entering now.
It would be not surprising to see 20p here on the run up before results. At that level I was thinking of taking some off the table before the result. However, with now 24 more drills lined up, I shall be keeping everything I've got in here (sadly, only 10% of my portfolio), and adding more on any dips when I can find the funds. GLA
prior RNS for comparison: 'The Rødhette prospect is estimated to contain gross mean prospective resources of 41 mmboe with further potential upside to bring the total to 81 mmboe. The chance of success associated with this prospect is 41% with the key risk being related to fault seal and oil column thickness.
I just posted this opn the AET board: Well, who will be the lucky one? I had always hoped that the money would come VOG's way. (Matanda drill needs a partner). AET may have chosen to go along LBE's path by buying into drills as an entry play to later conversion into an asset? Cameroon. Existing gas production. Of course, there are many other possibilities - proverbial needle in the haystack. We shall soon hear more imo. Good luck all.
Well, who will be the lucky one? I had always hoped that the money would come VOG's way. (Matanda drill needs a partner). AET may have chosen to go along LBE's path by buying into drills as an entry play to later conversion into an asset? Cameroon. Existing gas production. Of course, there are many other possibilities - proverbial needle in the haystack. We shall soon hear more imo. Good luck all.
RE: As we approach the day we trade again01 Oct 2021 22:16
' Nigerian project supplies up to 15% of the country's power generation capacity' - Malcy interview. 'In Nigeria we supply the gas for up to 15% of the country's power infrastructure' - ********** interview.
RNS 30th Sept: 'the Accugas midstream business in South East Nigeria, which provides gas enabling over 10% of Nigeria's thermal power generation.' 'During H1 2021 the Company's subsidiary, Accugas, supplied gas to the Calabar power station and the Ibom power station to generate an average of 340MW of electricity per day (H1 2020: 355 MW per day), representing 11% of the total grid-based thermal power generated in Nigeria during the period. '
'Convertible Loan Note Draw Down Victoria Oil & Gas Plc, whose wholly owned subsidiary, Gaz du Cameroun S.A. ("GDC") is the onshore gas producer and distributor with operations located in the port city of Douala, Cameroon, announces that, following the General Meeting held on 10 September 2021, it has drawn down in full the convertible B Loan Notes in accordance with the the financing agreement with Meridian Capital (HK) Limited as announced on 18 June 2021 and full details of which are set out it in the circular to shareholders dated 25 August 2021. Roy Kelly, Chief Executive of the Company, commented: "We are once again highly appreciative of our major shareholder backing our efforts to deal decisively with legacy issues and move the company forward." - Jed - it says 'in full' ALL of it. B Loan Notes: · unsecured convertible loan notes · total principal amount of US$4.2 million. - I expect they are using it to order the drill equipment for Matanda. Expect RNSs on Matanda soon.
Jed, I'm not sure they know precisely (though clearly they know the rough amount). It suggests that it is not a lump sum payment from Treasury; more like re-examining accounts, applying the correct calculations to past and current business, and making an adjustment on a future monthly basis to give RSM their true 38% and with any back-adjustment over time, perhaps 12-24 months. But, agree, this is to give them the benefit of doubt. More precise information on the arrangement and rough amount would have been helpful. Perhaps we shall learn more from the delayed quarterly update and half-year accounts?
Usual comment from me (I won't elaborate - you've heard it all before): 'The Group has Trade and other receivables of US$138.6 million (31 December 2020: US$122.4 million). The trade receivables and contract assets (from sales) of US$146.3 million (31 December 2020: US$131.1 million) represent a net increase of US$15.2 million mainly due from customers in Nigeria under the GSAs in place.'
Jed, this was not made clear. We will pay no more than we would in the normal course of business under existing contracts. Were we holding back monies, and will now have to hand these monies over ? - I don't know. More clarity would have been helpful. It doesn't seem that RSM are contributing anything to our legal costs. A business arrangement, no doubt.
No one knows for sure, Rec. Will need the judgement and RNS for that. But, yes, I think it indicates that RSM expect to lose the ICC case, or at least, they no longer think they have anything to gain by continuing the UNICITRAL case after the evidence they heard at the ICC hearing. The ICC case may include additional matters though, and with different arbitrators, so we cannot be certain of the outcome, though the odds do look in our favour, and a little more so today.
Few trades, Rec, as everyone still waiting for the ICC ruling. However, today's RNS means that, if the ICC ruling is in our favour, then when that further RNS arrives the SP jump will be more substantial.
Perhaps, optimistically, this augurs well for the ICC result. It seems clarification of contracts was the issue, and that would have come through a better understanding of the earlier court proceedings when each side laid out their position more clearly. As RSM have agreed to existing terms, perhaps they now accept that their non-acceptance of terms for the ICC matters was unfounded, and expect the ruling to go against them. We don't know until the Fat Lady sings.
Note that this is about the follow-up hearing, not the result of the ICC hearing in April. 'The settlement of the UNCITRAL arbitration is without prejudice to all claims pending in the ICC arbitration Case No. 23991/MK. The ICC arbitration hearing took place in April of this year, and the ICC has yet to issue its Award.'
It is hard to know what to make of today's RNS as no figures are given. It seems we have agreed what the existing contracts mean, and we pay RSM in accordance with such clarification. 'The settlement involves the agreement of certain accounting policies and procedures, the clarification of certain decision-making processes, and an agreement on the amount of monies payable to RSM in line with their existing contractual arrangements from existing cash resources in country. ' Thus, I assume we are not paying RSM any more money than expected in the normal course of business. To that extent it is good news. It gives certainty, and avoids legal costs and management time - so one more legacy issue crossed off the list.
If they can agrre such clarification for the UNICITRAL hearing, it is a shame they couldn't have agreed earlier regards the matters of the ICC hearing on which we still await a result. I expect we will get that announcement very soon.