Member Info for highlandmatt

Sorry, question was from Phoebus, not Zebra.

Hi Bradley, not questioning the transaction. My initial post was to Zebra's query about taking a liability on to the balance sheet.

Thanks Zebra. So the intention is to flip it. That makes sense and is fine. I work in contracts, so think very much in legal terms of buyer/seller, offer/acceptance. The detail for the first half of the transaction is contained within the RNS, but the detail of the second part is not. Technically, my view is that ownership has to pass first to POGT. I'm happy that it will all become clear in time.

Bradley - is that directed at me? I am a new investor and LTH, and have read the RNS. It is usual practice when buying something to hand over cash in exchange. Where PRD / POGT gets that from is a valid question. Paul says it won't be a placement, and the RNS says it will be funded by an unnamed local company. That is fine, there are all sorts of ways of structuring finance. There does seem to be an intention for something other than a straight buy, which I think it what is being explored here through discussion / debate? There does seem to be a slight contradiction between Paul's statement that PRD does not want to own/operate fields and have licences, but has now offered to buy one. Is there anything to stop us owning a field, and then leasing it to an operator along with the licence commitments?

Perhaps as it is PRD submitting the offer. The intention could be to instantly resell the asset to the local company?

...that a president seeking re-election would want some good news to land in campaign season, which starts tomorrow, and runs to 28 Oct? I'm sure the issue is just procedural checking, but if you did want to stage manage it, when would you release news of a boost to the national economy? Mid - late October? 1-2 weeks before election day?

Yes, but if it buys an asset and increases NAV, then fine by me. I assume the operation will more than cover the finance costs.

Could it be a peer to peer loan, whereby a local company can get a better return (5-10%?) than having their money in a bank?

@Sturm. Concensus of research notes and this BB is that current SP is more than covered by what has been proven so far, either on a NAV or NPV of future revenue basis. Therefore Chinook, Cascadura deep and Royston are free shots.

As you note, profits are down, so it seems sensible to pay a lower dividend?

@Ken. You know there is a global pandemic on, right?

Still profitable, still paying a dividend. Capex progressing. Still heading in the right direction.

The biggest risks we face are political not operational. So bringing in a chairman with lots of political experience is a good move in my view.

My guess is real bid is 4.10 and real ask 4.25.

Thanks BF. Matches my notes. Only slight additions:

1. Farmout -Gov undertaking final checks on docs submitted. Procedures to be followed. Nothing outstanding.
2. Drill/seismic - have been planning and tendering.
3. Kiliwani - flowed but 'watered out immediately'.
4. Funding - mgt trying hard to reduce costs.
5. Receivables - continue to be challenging, but focus on F/O. Don't want to 'muddy waters'.
6. Closing comments - F/O is key. Feel for shareholders. No-one thought it would take this long. ARA and AEX teams working hard to push things through.

Yeah. I think Dana wins :)

Bought another 1,000 for my ISA late on. Paid 73.01p when the SP was apparently 74p.
Pay day soon, so the transfer process will continue.

Maybe the outcome is certain, but the timescale uncertain?

I note in the RNS the use of the plural regarding 'sale of Tanzania assets'. Ruvuma and Helium1?
Might be worth asking the BOD if that plural is significant.

Just sold another small tranche for 55.07. Bid had just moved up.