Member Info for Happysurfer

If only the "oversubscription" was genuine interest in the business.

It was front run with zero risk for placees.

News blackout for months now so will play into certain hands.

Its standard. End of April now due to covid extensions.

As an FD we do the same as do a lot of other companies.

I suspect they do not have to RNS if Wood are not interested. It just fades into the distance as being "a not the right fit" etc. No point in the company trashing their own SP unless they are legally obliged to announce.

At some point no news becomes not good news in this regard but we have no idea how long that period is. Hopefully it is all just delays in relation to covid, CC and potentially defining the finer details of any strategic partnership. Lets face it EQT selected Wood and there were supposedly many interested EPCs who tendered. It would be rather embarrassing to select Wood over the competition only to find out that Wood then reject us !

HB - it was in one of the rebuttal court documents whereby the company said millions have already been spend in relation to the claim by Aries. Clearly we do not know how legal costs are being split between the relevant parties but given that EQT is the proprietor of the technology in question one has to presume we have spent a lot already on this claim !

The company has said millions have been spent on Aries legal fees. We don’t know the split between all the relevant parties or indeed if any is recoverable pending successful outcome.

If they can raise more funds at circa 2p then personally I would be in favour of it. One could even argue it would be remiss of management not to take advantage of recent SP strength in said way.

Placement circa 2p in my opinion. Ties in with director transactions.

Not a bad thing to be fair. Aries will have cost a lot and significant pipeline to expedite.

Let’s see........

The 1.91p Director transfer is looking suspiciously like it is more than just a random price. The market seems to agree with a spread that is covering it. Let’s se.........

the key is they would align the rates to income tax but not allow a right of offset. So if you make capital losses you cannot offset these losses against your income tax bill on earnings. Basically reverting back to how it used to be a number of years ago.

If people have significant capital gains (outside of ISA/SIPP) then once can see why they might hedge their bets and ease out of certain positions.

I think at the moment there are a number of things impacting EQT:
1. Aries claim - we need it out the way. It opens up the massive US market and removes any skeletons in the closet for strategic partners to invest with 100% confidence
2. Wood - markets hate uncertainty. Strategic partnership with a signifcant EPC opens many doors. Even more importantly it removes any uncertainty that Wood did their due diligence and did not like what they saw...
3. CGT as above: Some EQT shareholders seen huge gains with potential for high CGT liability
4. Move from Crest: Should be a non-issue but some brokers will not allow to hold hence some shareholders might get forced to close down current position and re-open with new broker
5. Capital raise: Aries legal fees have clearly been considerable and there is a huge pipeline to try and convert and onboard. do they need some more cash and are insiders taking advantage of this as is often typical
6. Pipeline: substantial but clearly market wants evidence of conversion

It does make me wonder if the 1.91p will prove to have more specific relevance.

Given the legal costs with Aries and so much pipeline business to push forward it would not surprise at all to see a modest raise (around 1.91p !); considering this would be at circa 5x the price of the previous raise that might be considered reasonable business

Ebioss were the major shareholder 50% of EQTEC back in 2018.

Obviously they are not on the register now so not sure when this holding was relinquished.

Perhaps the Ebioss group is outdated now as I am sure it would be referenced in the Annual Report if still in play.

Let us not forget that it was EQTEC who commissioned this technology/operational review and put it out to tender. There were apparently multiple EPCs who tendered and Wood were selected. It would be a real egg on your face moment were Wood to walk away on that basis given the selection process and wide interest from other parties.

Both parties have already effectively selected one another and there would have been a great deal of data shared via NDA as part of those tender documents.

In my opinion the partnership is a forgone conclusion. It is the shape of that partnership which is to be defined.
HS

Q3 is all about what they actually sell for me. There is a big disconnect at present between production and sales. Also the price they achieved for Q2 seems well below the avg POG for the period.

The disconnect is explainable but just need one Qtr where it all comes together to make sure there are no other issues that are being played down at present.

Likewise confident Q3 will be that Qtr !

so the obvious question is why would they not patent their tech in the US in the same way they have done for the other markets they operate in ?

Swooped - don't disagree but it will get marked down tomorrow, 10% + is my guess.

They need to learn how to write an RNS with a positive slant, they have a habit of highlighting the negatives even when they have much to shout about. The take away from that RNS should be $17 production cost and strong cash reserves; yet the market will only see the comment re. material impact on cash flow forecasts (which is already a given)

Personally I would be surprised if the Spirit/Centrica sale has anything to do with lincoln tie back issues. It is clear Spirit are pressing ahead and making new drill commitments with other partners at present so there is no reason to treat the GWA partnership any different. Ultimately if it makes commercial sense then any potential suitor would expect them to act accordingly. Also completing a trade sale could take many months.

Ultimately I suspect there are other factors at play here which will no doubt become apparent at the CMD.

If there were any concerns about water cut then:
1. Why bring forward an update ? - it would bring into question the entire operating model and decimate the SP. You would want to be 100% sure before doing this as the ramifications are seismic; if anything you would delay
2. Why announce lincoln to be tied back if the model is in question. Throwing good money after bad surely
3. Why would Spirit suggest still intend to progress as planned. They will be full briefed on Lancaster EPS and the slightest suggestion of water cut issues in conjunction with a mixed bag ? set of results at GWA would have them running for the hills.

.....just trying to step back from the noise and look at it from an intuitive perspective

Nothing I would say RB.

Credibility would be shot especially in light of what happened at Kemin Resources; however they would not likely care about that.

Personally have been loading up significantly at these levels with a view that your hypothesis could play out but I would still be in the money were it to.

Perhaps they want the kudos of growing this business in to a major player and that alone will suffice to deter an early trade sale.

I think the SP is still languishing, as firstly we need definitive confirmation that the funds have been banked/first installment drawn down etc and secondly that we get some proof that they can actually execute and deliver on forecasts.

It would also be useful to see if any security offered against the loan.

Bonds a complete red herring imo. Arbitrage would have occurred many months ago when the SP was at or around strike price. There may be some trading around the edges but that's it.

SP weakness, imo, is a shifting of the risk profile post WD failure and Kerogen reducing exposure shortly after that result. The market is starting to factor in the increased likelihood of HUR having to "go it alone" (once again) and the additional risk that come with that scenario.

6-12 months of EPS is an internal measure. If a potential suitor considers that period is now far longer post WD then exit strategies and risk profiles alter accordingly; that is I believe what we are evidencing.........

Casa - are you just talking about bondholders that have not fully delta hedged ? Presumably if they have been hedging then the conversion and sale is just matched off against the short closing hence no real SP impact ?

.....which then further begs the question of how many months of EPS behaving as predicted is required before something approaching 100% confidence can be reached ?