Member Info for jimtheknow

Degsy (Startchild,....) The facts are:

1) BPC announced an All Share merger on Thursday 11/6/20.
2) 1 day later (Friday, 12/6/20) JM Finn disclosed their position of 26,543,592. 1.08% of company.
3) Monday 15/6/20 JM Finn update their position as being 26,793,592. 1.09% of company.

The difference between the two announcements is 250,000 shares, this will equate to around £6.5k, assuming JM Finn bought at 2.6p on the back of the (terrible) news that crashed the sp and which it has never really recovered. I would say they were aiming to benefit from an opportunity, buying on the dips as they say.

JM Finn increased their position by just less than 1% of their holding (c. 0.94%), this puts things more into context and people can judge for themselves as to whether they bought c. 26 million and continued to buy in support of this merger or whether they've caught with their pants down with a reasonable holding they were looking to bleed back into the market on news flow for their target % profit.

For the newbies. Holdings like JM Finn are a contributor to why you may struggle to offload your shares as the price rises going into spud, they'll get rid of theirs with relative ease because of their connections but you PI's will be sat holding onto something you may find difficult to shift as all of these wealth management type companies dump and saturate the market.

People talking about JM Finn in light of it being a vote of confidence are maybe being a little naïve. Again, to put things in context. I suspect it'd only take people like myself, Laallee, IK(?) and maybe a just a few more to have a holding of this size - c. 26m shares is not much.

Be careful everyone. DYOR.

Starchild (Degsy, ….) It's very disingenuous to state J M Finn built their position on the back of the merger announcement and a lot would say it is more likely they had held this position for a period prior to merger and were looking to make gains based on the expected news flow as progress towards P#1 was made. They, like others, have been caught out by this merger announcement and have simply been forced to disclose their position because of market rules.

The road to P#1 was looking relatively clear and known with the finance being sorted, EA, etc. They'll have been building a position at the low price levels to get out around or just before spud. Easy money for them with good gains, they won't have held for any drill results.

Novice.

"factually I can back up my comments for the pension fund. Unless you are calling me a liar?"
"Honestly you really think I’d be stupid enough to give you that information?"

So, my question to you would be: Honestly you really think we'd be stupid enough to believe you about anything?
In your own words you're now a "liar". I wouldn't have gone that far, i'd have just said you were embarrassing and your credibility is now completely in tatters. If I were you i'd probably find something else to do with your spare time than comment on here. Shame as you were almost appearing quite affable, but that's part of the ploy isn't it?

Bye.

Harry, but the fund manager will have always taken his annual cut and gave promises of better things to come as long as you just stick with it and persevere. Sound familiar?

Oh, and can you just help out by depositing a few more thousand into the account please to keep it all ticking along nicely.

Novice, come on then, some facts; pension fund name and monetary value of investment please? Lets see how credible you are after such a claim from yourself. You're continued credibility and participation on this board without being filtered now relies on you backing up your recent post. Don't let yourself down.

Tiburn, a lot of hope, promise, assessments, discretionary spending calls and the likes in everything related to the proposed merger and nothing of actual substance with regards a plan and how that will be funded.

Something i'd like to point out with regards the BPC presentation and funding. Eytan made a claim about the company being able to attract more money and he said something along the lines of pension funds being able to write big cheques. There is absolutely not a cat in hells chance a pension fund would write a big cheque for anything related to BPC & CERP under their current circumstances. Pension funds do not gamble on hopes and promises, they want to know their money is as secure as can be and they want a plan for payback on their investment, there is no plan for payback at this time with this merger. Even if oil tripled overnight they volumes CERP produce are so low it would take a number of years to recoup any initial outlay. This merger needs to demonstrate how it can fund itself against losses over the short term whilst developing CERP which will then 'organically' fund growth in the company over medium term. Like I said before, this is a loss leader to start with, and that may be fine, as long as the funds are identified to cover near term losses without hitting PI's - again!

The 10% farm-in from Stena may be the answer, so where is it?

I have quickly looked through the financial report this morning and there are a number of interesting bits, one which I found interesting is the Directors Interests on page 11. Between the reporting period in 2018 to that in 2019 the five Directors listed would appear to have increased their personal holding by a total of 2,557,000 shares, that's about 515k each. Assuming they were bought in the Open Offer that means they stumped up about £10k each.

You can be your own judge in whether you think this is sufficient participation in their own company, the one they run as a proportion of the salaries they take home (some have other interests aside from BPC). Remember this when they are telling you to dig deep and support them. We're all in it together they keep saying, we're aligned they keep saying - are we?

Definitely feels like there’s a bit of an orchestrated message being peddled by newish faces with newish accounts selling very similar messages since the turn of the year. Those who read these boards in silent with little experience, be warned of of what you read and always do your own research.

It looked like BPC’s path was going to be clear and reasonably predictable from Q1 onwards this year but as always it had a twist and it feels a bit like something unexpected might for these new people.

No it doesn't. A major is not interested in CERP assets and will never be, just look at how the industry is moving away from these small plays. Just look at UKCS.

IB, if the CERP assets were that good why were they priced at such a point they were able to be taken over by a company that has just about got a plan to fund it's first well? The real time value in the current climate of these assets are virtually worthless, it's a fantasy that they are transformational and will lead to a mid-tear company within 2 years by inclusion of CERP assets. And whatever potential CERP do have in their licenses is purely that, 'potential', it requires time and money to realise and the joint company has no identifiable spare money at this point in time.

The success of this venture still only relies solely on the success at P#1, CERP bring nothing to the party at the moment. So, this is business, it's not a gentlemen's club, if we want CERP then we should take it for the best price possible and this is when BPC have a higher MCap. An sp of between 5 & 6p could have easily been possible with further good news on P#1 progress and CERP would have continued to fail and devalue in light of current economic conditions. You don't take prisoners and therefore liabilities that compromise you're own position in this climate, its reckless behaviour and it needs to be curbed.

BPC need to outline where the funding is going to come from to realise CERP's potential as after P#1 is drilled there is no more money and therefore it will require an equity raise and if P#1 is a duster then this will be significantly punitive to us holders. Like I say, everything relies on success at P#1. And if P#1 is a success why do we need CERP?

Catch 22.

IK, it’s ok to disagree, don’t ever worry about that. If I feel something is not right I’ll challenge it and say why but other than that there’s no problems.

I would tend to agree with you that something else is due, I’ve said that all along. But if it’s not revealed before the vote I’m not being complicit in eroding this company further so I will be voting no without this. It doesn’t make sense to do anything other.

We’re being asked to blindly trust them again, it’s a bit like faith and religion and I’m not the type of person who much likes religion of any type or flavour.

I get CERP holders positivity because they have found themselves hamstrung in today’s climate through no real fault of their own. I’ve said before, it’s not always bad companies that go to the wall. Good companies fail too.

It’s not a great deal for BPC now. 3 or 4 months later with further P#1 news and CERP have been snapped up for 500m shares.

That’s fine if my figures are exact, but my guess is a dam sight more info in that respect than either company have put out. What are more realistic figures, I seriously want to know.

And I’m desperate to know there metrics now going into this deal, not what they might do in x years. If they have a target bopd in x years what is it and what’s the outlay to get there and how will this be funded.

Only wanting some basic stuff, what is the plan?

MrMagoo, no problem and thanks for your input. I definitely agree about Leo Koot, he seems a man capable of achieving things. Real things as opposed to being the chief alchemist at a dream factory.

As for being rude, this board is normally very well natured and most people will attest it’s not like me to write in the tone I did earlier, I got pretty fed up of listening to everything is great and unquestionable with this deal when undoubtedly it’s not as there have been no facts laid out as to where the payback is on this deal without further serious pain to the LTH’s who’ve kept this thing afloat.

We’re sick of promise and hope, we’ve had that in spade fulls, we want results on P#1 almost to the point of not caring too much what that result is. It’s like a slow undignified death of someone on life support that just when the medical facts say it’s time to switch off the life support there is a little flicker in the eyes in response to a name being called, and they leave it on. Most of us want some form of closure.

What also stinks about this deal is the continued contempt of the BPC BoD, If this deal was so sure a good fit it’d be so easy to spell this out in black & white but they allow ambiguity and assumptions to prevail. They will surprise you though just when you think you’ve been completely done over, remember the eyes flickering I was taking about.

Let’s say CERP produce 600bopd and make £20/b profit and run 365 days a year (very optimistic assumptions). That’s only £4.4m/yr and we’re paying £25m! That’s almost 6yrs before they have their money back. To promote and push this deal they have to sell a plan and story as well because frankly this lot have achieved little tangible in 10yrs and you wonder if they remember what oil looks like. They have to have avenues to money which won’t see further massive dilution other than the known path we are on. We agreed to big dilution, we didn’t agree to another 900m + more for T&T development.

We have to believe they had a farm-in lined up in Q1 this year as otherwise it was highly likely they were lying and have continued that lie with the ‘3 weeks’ rhetoric. They should be fired if that’s the case.

My faith in the P#1 geology is strong, the same can’t be said for BPC BoD. I believe they’ll eventually drill P#1 but poor Daisy’s udders are going to be like cobblers thumbs she’s been milked that hard.

The problem is though MrMagoo the time required to find out costs money, money which neither business has. The BPC board have a duty to explain themselves in this respect, they should as an absolute minimum outline the basics of a business plan to justify the spending of £25m of shareholders money. Some very simple metrics on current CERP production, what their profits are per barrel and where they will go chasing first and with what money. If anyone thinks that is an unreasonable request then they are as mad as a box of frogs.

MrMagoo, I am inclined to believe this. Leo Koot seems the only real credible tangible thing so far and without him and his backing of this the merger it would be dead. He carries a lot of weight with me, more than the entire BPC BoD, but maybe he is doing the honourable thing to salvage something for his CERP holders as without this I think CERP had have gone under or been sold for a fire sale.

In his own words he's allowing CERP holders to make the decision; sell up post merger for the value that'd have been locked in, or, hold on for the $0.5bn he'd hoped for them. He's doing what he can for them and it's honourable. Doesn't mean it's good business for BPC.

NoviceInv, Just had a quick read back through your posts. Welcome to the board, nice to have new faces around for debate. However, you might need to pump a few more quid into your investment here if you want to cancel out my No votes, I've got quite a few - many many millions. I also have no idea how Laallee is going to vote but ive got a feeling he may not be too happy with what's on the table and i'm pretty sure he has a canny few as well.

A lot of us are still waiting to be persuaded, we're all ears but if this is the best they can do then that 75% bar may prove to be too high.

I'll admit i'm starting to get a bit annoyed with all this now, it's like most (not all) people are blind and quite frankly, stupid. I don't doubt for a second CERP may have some reasonably good assets and they may find more and it is cheaper to produce onshore. However, the merged company will be dead before any of this is realised because at the moment there is no financial fat in play to develop any of these plans.

This all changes if some money were to be freed up somehow, that could be by Stena taking their 10% stake and negating some costs for P#1 or the ultimate dream of a major farming in on P#1. Without these the only visible path is the slow death of the company.

I 100% believe P#1 will get drilled on the information we've been told to date, no concerns there. I also think people who say sell up if someone doesn't like the deal are also stupid as a lot of us LTH BPC holders still want to partake in P#1 as we believe in the geology, in exactly the same way as Leo Koots does.

There is simply something missing from the puzzle we aren't being told. It could be good and it could be we're going to get a partner and money will be freed up. It could be bad and it might be our Family Office investors wants other options to claw money back should P#1 not go well.

The truth is we are not being told anything significantly material other than this is good for us - which it's not on what we know. This ONLY works if there's some spare money floating around and we can suffer losses for a couple of years.

To echo others, why haven't we been told how many BoPD CERP produce and what is their breakeven cost per barrel after all deductions? This is fundamental to whether it's a good idea for BPC holders!

BPC need to tell us the metrics of how this works, not what are the promises and hopes of what might be there or might be produced as these are just that - more hope and promises.

If this business case is not proved before the vote then it'll be a No vote from me and anyone who votes Yes is simply a fool i'd say.

We've been taken for a ride and for fools for far too long by BPC, it can't go on.

Unfortunately this is not true and is a myth of this merger transaction and my biggest problem with it all, CERP DOES NOT provide an insurance policy under the terms of what we know at the moment.

CERP are haemorrhaging money now and will be for the foreseeable, they may have assets that can generate money but until the assets are developed further, which requires time and money, they will need to be floated at a cost for a period of time.

The only value in this merged company is the unknown potential of P#1 as everything else is losing money and if P#1 comes back a duster then the value of the greater company is gone. The company that remains is then CERP, which is losing money and can't stay afloat as is, and a dust bowl in the Bahamas which will be essentially useless.

The only way this merger works is if a decent pot of money is identified for the CERP assets BEFORE the merger, if we don't hear how that can be achieved we might as well just drill P#1 on it's own.

Remember, there is a requirement to give up 50% of these Bahamas license area at the end of this term regardless of drilling P#1. 'License area' being the key words.