Agree, oga want the field(s) developed, sto would fit the bill ideally, only problem is they need to move even sooner than xer on licence renewal for breasay.
The problem with AOW's 08.01h post12 Oct 2016 09:50
on ii is the present management incumbents do not imo for clear conflict of interest reasons want open sale to happen. They would be out on their backsides forthwith by new owners.
Imo xer could quite justifiably with oga go this route by saying market conditions and the severe cost placed on xer by decc with the over the board ewt have placed xer and shareholders in the position of requiring an open sale of a fully researched project to be made to clear their debt obligations in achieving same. The bod for now have worked an escape strategy with the bondholders for themselves in the hope or likely expectation they can capitalise themselves later while other shareholders are left stuffed. Jmo. Vote no.
Still sitting in bits in Singapore. Another piece of disingenuous words on the part of the ceo, no way could it be contracted until funding in place so it's never been in reality xel's rig. Yet more rc speak that's come back to bite him on the backside. So a bunfight now between kfels and tso.
Exactly, if cole already has this stitched up then a no vote will still get you these glorious terms, but there's always a chance, and you are at least indicating contempt for this complete mismanagement.
RE: Question, by voting no that should11 Oct 2016 10:42
Yes and if they had been as they should by now been able to actually by drilling add a reserves figure to chadwick how would that look added into the bentley give away.