Member Info for hxulcolrdoh

Going back to a point Corryvreckan1 made earlier - if another party tabled a counter offer (can they?) …

Given that CA/Kerogen can’t vote have harnessed their horse to the Prax cart – I’d have a thought a have 75% threshold of voters would not be hard to reach for a sensible offer.

Could this happen ? How would the offers be ranked ?

I'm sure he thanks his lucky stars that his beezer plan of May 2020 to buy 98m shares in SLE @ 21p fell through.

You win some. You lose some.

So I interpret CA comment ( https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CRS/final-results-m4dvqfren8ujjiw.html )

"Having previously banked profits of £43 million on Hurricane, the average cost of the Company's current shareholding is 6.7 pence a share."

not as “we initially bought HUR shares at an average of 6.7p and the £43m was pure cream”

but as “we initially bought HUR shares at an average of c 14.1p but offsetting profits banked this now 6.7p so that if we sold at something like the current price the whole exercise would have been a complete waste of time”

In the final results for the YE June 2022 ( https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CRS/final-results-m4dvqfren8ujjiw.html ) there was note on Crystal Amber’s Hurricane investment

"Having previously banked profits of £43 million on Hurricane, the average cost of the Company's current shareholding is 6.7 pence a share."

I interpret this as the average price paid for HUR shares (not having banked profits of £43 million ) was c 14.1p and if HUR was divested at something like it current price then the whole HUR episode would have been a complete and utter waste of time / have yielded little or nothing.

Or was the £43million banked almost pure cream ?

I think the former is correct.

Opinions ?

So if

a) I gave a fund manager 14.1p and they handed me back 7.4p (which I'd probably pay tax on) and they informed me that the balance due was 6.7p - I'd think the outcome was PATHETIC

b) I gave a fund manager 6.7p and they handed me back 7.4p (which I'd probably pay tax on) and they informed me that the balance due due was still 6.7p - I'd think the outcome was excellent.

How should the weasel words be interpreted ?

Also

"Having previously banked profits of £43 million on Hurricane, the average cost of the Company's current shareholding is 6.7 pence a share."

I'd probably interpret this as the average cost was 14.1p before dividends.

Why does that answer the question ?

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CRS/final-results-m4dvqfren8ujjiw.html

The share price weakness enabled the Company to take advantage by increasing its shareholding to 29% of the company. Having previously banked profits of £43 million on Hurricane, the average cost of the Company's current shareholding is 6.7 pence a share.

The downside appears to be protected by cash/cash receipts.

It looks like 'heads I win, tails I don't lose' ?

Hi SeaTank we are all entitled to our views. I for one like to hear both sides of a story.

Anyway I don't think my perception has changed. I think circumstances have changed. When I came to SEPL the narrative was "Nigeria has a rapidly growing population and rapidly growing economy. It needs an inflow of capital and expertise do deliver a better future for all. It will clean up it act with respect to the rule of law and demonstrate that it is 'open for business'". Roger was promoting SEPL on the basis that a win for SEPL (largely indigenous) would also be a win for Nigeria. He has stopped mentioning this.

In the second half of 2022 profit was NIL (not what I would have been expecting 18 months ago ), cash flow was down substantially on H2 (again the wrong direction of travel). ANOH will make a useful addition if and when it is delivered. It should already be operational. However it is like a rainbow. Take one step towards it and it recedes one step into the distance. The latest is the end of this year. Maybe H2 2022 was a 'blip'. Maybe it wasn't. The story has changed rather than my perception of it

Up until the last interim's I had a rather large wedge in SEPL. I have since moved to the sidelines not because my positive views of SEPL changed but because I have taken much more negative view of jurisdictional risk. I wouldn't recommend SLE but note that in last few days they've been dragged into the weeds.

A VERY BIG plus for me regarding the SEPL investment case is Roger Brown. My view would be that if anyone has the business wherewithal to drive the company forward then it is him.

I listened to the last results presentation (largely carried by Roger). I've listened to previous results presentations. The tone this time around was markedly subdued where it would have been aspirationally upbeat in previous presentations.

BigPunt, TheProviVan, I can see how either view could be taken from minimalist, guidance free, open ended communication that has been forthcoming in recent times. That has been my big problem with the company.

It is as if management thinks that vagueness affords wriggle room and a lack of accountability whereas the market seems to have been wringing its hands in despair.

With restructuring hopefully in the rear view mirror NOW IS THE TIME to set out a clear growth strategy and associated targets.

EXAMPLE from another company

The Company expects for the FY 2023:
· Revenue within a range of US$340m to US$360m
· Adjusted EBITDA of approximately US$87m at the mid-point of the revenue guidance range, representing an adjusted EBITDA margin of c.25%

By FY2025, the Company targets operating within the following financial model:
· Revenue CAGR in line with its addressable market of approximately 20%, representing approximately US$500m revenue run rate by 2025
· Gross margin of c.60%
· Adjusted operating expenses as a percentage of revenue of c.30%
· Adjusted EBITDA margin of c.30%, representing approximately US$150m adjusted EBITDA[1]

This post brings to mind the phrase 'cabin fever'.

Thanks for your HUR specific comments and insights though.

Don't understand it ( https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CRS/holdings-in-company-p9cozvcu4eqifuf.html )

Seems to be w.r.t share derivatives rather than actual shares.

Anything to do with this entry in the CRS account ?

On 1 July 2020, the Company entered into a loan facility with Intertrader Limited whereby it transferred
an amount of equity holdings with a value of £19.1 million as at 1 July 2020 to Intertrader Limited to
be held as collateral for CFD instruments.The interest charged on the loan facility is 2% per annum of
the daily overnight loan balance.The Company may draw on the loan facility of up to 25% of the value
of the initial equity holdings transferred.

There don't appear to be any.

I know OF thinks he is the cat's pyjamas in the world of wheeler dealers / slick operators. However I suspect he has bitten off more than he can chew in Nigeria.

Thanks ASI + Senseman for update.

MLM’s legacy should become clearer at the end of the month.

On Jan 13th 2022 we had the announcement where he and his team at PFG (then circa 360p) said to the Vanquis board

“Ok guys step aside. We can take it from here”.

Look where we are now. Since then there has been minimal, begrudging, perfunctory market communication. July saw a CMD mooted. Though apparently we couldn’t muster enough enthusiasm to be bothered. Oct 24th 2022 saw an all-time closing low of 136.3p

In a nutshell (whatever has happened behind the curtains) no one could argue that there has not been an abject failure on the part of the outgoing regime to maintain the support and confidence of the market.

With a new name/brand I for one expect that we have a new beginning and a new story. I for one expect the company to set out it’s stall. If the name change/rebrand was just an act of cynicism and it was ‘same old same old’ then would be a huge waste of an opportunity and worse probably counter productive.

Hi senseman I'm not calling you a liar / not threatening to litigate :)

but are you sure your information is correct ? have you links that confirm the content.

I'm look at https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/HUR/operational-and-financial-update-8z92q64b44sbnmh.html ..

which gave "a preliminary estimate of the liability up to the end of July 2022, totalling approximately $5 million" based on a EPL introduction date of May 26th 2022. This seems to conflict with what you are saying.

Thanks for clarification flyingpie

The cash that is currently flooding into company coffers ...

I presume this is exempt from tax / offset by the existing substantial tax losses.

Is this correct ?