Member Info for jimtheknow

Bob, understand what you are saying in some ways, I think we all felt a leak was going to come at some point. However, how about viewing it from a different angle..... ......how about viewing it from the flip side of the coin and thinking someone is doing a bloody good job of keeping this identity under wraps for a reason. Surely if someone did leak the name and this blew a potential deal, well.... Although I don’t agree with it, i completely understand people’s current negative sentiment. Although I’m not negative on our situation I sure am frustrated, to the point it’s sometimes unbearable. However, protecting any deal if one is still in play is surely the Directirs ultimate goal for us shareholders. If a deal isn’t still in play then remaining a credible business partner and respecting the restrictions of an NDA is also high up there. Especially with at least 4 other companies now in play.

Isn’t the problem for people though Bob, you won’t pay double if we have someone on board, if we have a confirmed major on board you will almost certainly pay close to 10 times today’s sp, most people would go along with that I think. The sp will rise so fast in the instant the market opens it will not be possible to get a buy price anything close to treble today’s sp. Investing after a major on board is a totally different prospect, it’s not the same game. With a major in play you are then speculating on the chances of finding oil, which we all know is c. 30 - 35%. Plus, you would also be speculating on the possible margin between your buy in price and final sp on oil strike, no one knows what that will be. You might only get a 3 to 4 times return post major. All at a c. 30 to 35% chance of success.

For the same reason this sp went up, it’s gone down. The truth is no one knew or knows anything for certain. For me there’s as good an argument as any to say nothing has really changed with respect to our chances of a deal. When we were locked into the Exclusivity agreement you could have maybe said there was a higher probability we would get a deal with but this was a binary bet. Now we’re out of Exclusivity and with the company stating we are back in talks with the previous companies and new companies (this must mean there’s a minimum of 4 companies on the scene now) you could argue there is a greater chance of finding someone who fits with us. We can only speculate whether the paying major is still around and 1 of the minimum of 4, we haven’t been told they’re not around, we only know the fact they are not in an exclusive arrangement with us anymore. The fundamentals of our business haven’t changed negatively; no industry professional has ever publicly brought into question the geology, the politics and policy in the Bahamas’s remains unchanged and the price of oil has steadily increased. We need to remember the positives and reason for investing and put to one side the generally often short sighted nature of investors on AIM. My glass is firmly half full and I personally would go so far as to to say it’s possibly fuller than it’s ever been. Chin up everyone who believes in this company. If you don’t need your money out then have faith in your original beliefs and be as positive as you were in 7+p days. You have every reason to be. Bring on the 87p party. GLALTH

Potter is quoted as saying “more competitive” in the Tribune article which the reporter puts in the context of ‘bidding environment’.

Agree, this board has reached terrible lows. It used to be a good place for discussion and to knock ideas around but it feels pointless now. Yesterday’s press release in the Tribune should be something to be very happy about and it would go a long way to supporting what people believe about a Joint Venture. You can’t be the CEO of a company and be allowed to represented in a way which is so price sensitive without being able to substantiate it. Locked in negotiations with multiple companies are very promising words. Yes, we’ve heard similar but the environment was different at the time. Maybe now is our time. GLALTH

For me the fact MQ are in until at least December, had to interview BPC on suitability and are incentivised to complete a deal is very good. Potter stating new companies (I hope the use of the plural is correctly quoted) is obviously good. I take on board the comment on the technical discussion. It’s a shame that Potter chose to be technical here and lose people, he should put his thoughts/comments out for all to read and then we could each make our judgements on whether this was good/bad. What makes me very angry about this company is the lack of official news flow from them, they are shameful and treat investors with contempt. Why couldn’t any of this have been stated at any other time and help them to complete their own pictures? Utter contempt. Potters salary justifies a full time job and that should include investor relations. He is at the end of the day, working for us!

A colleague of mine was showing me some information that came from a private forum which would appear to have a lot of credibility. It appeared to give quite a straight and relatively detailed account of proceedings at the AGM and this appeared to be corroborated by quite a number of people. Maybe someone can share some of this information? I am absolutely certain there will be a group of people who will attack and undermine any information posted like that, they’ll never accept it as it doesn’t fit with their agenda, but for those with a genuine outlook on this board I think they’d find it interesting and useful. Can anyone help here?

Trivial to who, what is your point? We are talking about people trolling and trashing this board and why they might want to do it. If a person, or group of people, have a leveraged short position then they only need to try and influence the sp by a small amount, a few tens of pips, to make a contribution to their bread & butter. These people go around sniffing out poor sentiment on shares and weigh in with their bit. It’s easy though to spread fear and gloom and even easier to do it on a sp that is falling. They’re just here to make there 10, 100, 1000, etc and move and then they’ll be back when they see another opportunity. This is their day job.

I’d agree with you to a certain degree, I don’t think you are going to find short positions registered with the FCA and therefore appearing in their Daily Short Positions report. We are too small beer, risky and insignificant for any fund, high net worth individual, etc to bother hedging against us, we’re simply not in that ball park. However, what stops anyone having an online trading and investment account with someone like IG that does Spread Betting or CFD’s. I don’t have one of these accounts but through these companies advertising it is easy to see they offer a lot of markets, whether BPC is a tradable stock in these markets I don’t know? I’m sure someone on here will know. Any Spread Bet or CFD position taken with a provider like this will not appear on the FCA’s report, these are effectively bets against the ‘house’ like a casino. A small time trader can open a small position which is leveraged and deramp to his hearts content. As for calling me Scully, I was quite tolerant of you up till now. Terrible.

They’re starting, here they come!

I’m expecting a boring day, nothing new revealed and the derampers out in force. They’ll all open short positions in the morning and then the parasites will plague this board with doom and gloom without anything to beck it up. GLALTH

What qualifies the Company to issue an RNS that states they are sufficiently funded to complete well financing options? To know you have enough funds for this activity implies an end date is known, when is this end date?

Question regarding the companies Articles of Association. Clause 105.1, Directors Fees. If I’ve read it correctly, there would appear to be a limit set at £250k for Directors Fees but Simon Potter would appear to exceed this limit with his new $375k remuneration package. Can the company elaborate on this and what is the justification for exceeding their own rules?

I don’t think a great deal will be gained from the AGM unfortunately unless an RNS comes out first, which I’m not expecting. They have tabled their 4 Resolutions they want to get through and I suspect they’ll be cagey from there on and not give much more away, it’s not really the forum for such things. It’s a closed forum and the information discussed would not available to the masses, for the duration it’d be a bit like insider information. Also, given what they’ve deliberately done in the way they have worded the RNS, my personal belief is that they often show contempt to the shareholders that keep this company afloat, if any questions do get asked and answered I’d be very very careful in the way they are worded and what their response is. If they do answer any questions they may be very literal in their response to direct questions and not be forthcoming with anything else e.g. if asked whether negotiations are ongoing they may give a straight ‘no’ answer but they may know where that company stands and there may be no need for negotiations at that moment in time. I’d be asking more open questions like, are you still in contact with the major and can a deal with them be ruled out? We’re (mostly) all hopeful they will deliver on the goods at the end of the day and if so all will be forgiven but they will never win any prizes for their investor communications.

I forget the exact numbers but wasn’t the volume on the day of the crash around 150m? That’s a pretty big days trading for this company in comparison to other days but still only a pretty small percentage of the company. If those who’ve sold have had time to reflect and changed their view, they could probably be back in again tomorrow at the same levels and same exposure they had originally. Some may find they may even be able to get in at a better price. For those who are certain within themselves that it’s over and sold at a loss, it’s the old adage of only investing what they could afford to lose. This is not a top FTSE100 share, it had and continues to have risk. As it stands I’m still excited by this, I think something is still in play and now we’re out of the exclusivity period I feel news could come any day. Which may be good or bad. Either way though it would put us out of our suspense. GLALTH

I agree with your first point on they must have knew market reaction. On second point, well I guess a deal wasn’t done and still may not get done. They’ve caused a **** storm with what they’ve done, this is plain for all to see. Imagine though the flip side, they’d put a very positive note out, people go all-in and then a deal doesn’t happen. You might find a few people combing their hair with a shotgun if that happened.

Arm. This is the whole point though isn’t it, the RNS didn’t say the major had walked, as far as the written word goes it didn’t even come close to that. I’ll repeat what a million have said already, it said the “exclusive nature of negotiations” had ended. If people want to read that differently and interpret something else from what is written then they can do that - but there is absolutely nothing that states negotiations have ended. Only the exclusive nature of negotiations have ended.

Another AGM topic of discussion. I’d like to know what qualified the board to put RNS’s out and pieces in the press e.g. Tribune, that qualified them to use the words and project the positive sentiment that “they are happy to report negotiations are progressing constructively”. The non disclosure agreement will prevent the detail of this being discussed but they should be able to put shareholders a bit more in the picture now.

Along with all the obvious questions, I wonder if it would ever be possible to know a little bit more about who the share placing around May time went to? Was this taken up by a single subscriber, a wealthy individual, a company, a fund, etc? This would be interesting to know for me. Seem to recall people thought MQ took a holding in these. Just a thought for anyone attending.

IK. Thanks