Member Info for komakino

Yes, that's true. Hopefully we at least get a better understanding of where we are at in a couple of weeks.

RR, I've not come across any company that's been forced off by AIM. I've come across a couple of companies that have chosen to delist and go private, but both turned out to be frauds so I don't think that's a comparison worth making. I'm pretty sure AIM wouldn't force SAVE off just because they got fed up with waiting, if they knew that SAVE would immediately suspend for another reverse takeover.

I was just making the observation that forcing them to abandon the transaction might not achieve their aim of getting SAVE back trading if they just popped up with another reverse takeover. Even if we get another extension 1st Feb, hopefully we'll get some sort of an update that gives us more info. than we know at the moment.

RR,

just musing on your option 1 pull out or be forced out of the deal by 1/2/24

a) If AIM tell SAVE that they must complete by x date or they have to delist, then if there is still a good chance of completion but have not completed by x date, then delisting might well be the best option. For most people I would imagine that completion of SS deal pretty much derisks their investment here (obviously dependent on average buy in price and where the sp settles) so the delist option, whilst not great, might be better than just abandoning the deal because they couldn't meet AIMs date.

b) Given AK's stated objective of completing another acquistion by 2023, then If SAVE did pull out we could possibly just go straight into another reverse takeover situation if that is ready to announce. If that is the case then you can understand why SAVE want to complete the SS deal, no matter how long it takes. Not sure many of us would want them to pull out of the deal because of a demand by AIM just to go into suspension again.

Ah ok, thanks for the update RR, appreciated.

One other option I guess is to delist from AIM and carry on the deal as a private company, with a view to relisting at a later date, though that's not altogether desireable as listings are pretty expensive things in themselves. Hopefully we'll get some more clarity on 1st Feb.

If it goes on any longer there won't actually be any debt to incur! Not sure I'd agree with you on that RR as with these deals the govt. sign off generally comes well after the deal has been agreed between the 2 companies. With Accugas it was over a year later if memory is correct. If you are correct about AIM itself taking control and wanting to see significant progress by 1st Feb, then you'd hope that was something SAVE and the Nomad felt possible when agreeing to it.

Either way, we're just speculating to fill the time. Only 3 weeks left before we hopefully find something positive out!

Hopefully the fact that the last extension was only for an additional month and half rather than the obligatory 6 months suggests that they are close to finalising this one way or the other. Personally I'm comfortable with an additional extension if it means we get this across the line, but what I do not agree with is the total lack of communication on any aspect of the business. It'll certainly be an interesting next shareholder meeting either way.

Possibly TiL, but if the sticking point was signature payments then they'd just up those if they needed rather than increase the whole transaction price so the signature payments would increase. AK has always been clear that SAVE behaves in an ethically correct way (probably what cost us Chad) so it would be interesting to know what's going on behind the scenes, as I'm pretty sure SS are out for everything they can get. Doubt we'll ever find out though.

Til, that would only happen if the delay is actually a problem with Petronas rather than achieving the consent of the appropriate SS ministries. I think it's much more likely to be the latter in which case the acquisition price is immaterial imo

I'd agree with that TiL. I think most people understand the situation with SS but they certainly could keep us better informed on Niger and Accugas. The kpi for the debt revaluation was actually set in 2021 as a kpi for 2022, never mind 2023, so that's a spectacular fail by any reading. I'm sure there's valid reasons for this but they should be more upfront imo and explain the challenges rather than leaving it to us to get frustrated over the lack of closure.

The author replied to a query about the omission, so nothing sinister it appears. 'Thank you for bringing this to my attention. The article's focus was on the broader risks and opportunities surrounding Petronas' divestment in South Sudan, and regrettably, the specific transaction with Savannah Energy wasn't included. I appreciate the valuable information, and it emphasizes the dynamic nature of such developments. In future discussions or follow-up articles, I will certainly aim to provide a more comprehensive overview of specific transactions and their implications.'

Just check out the website

'In today’s RNS, the fraud Supply@ME Capital (SYME) has announced that it had secured funding for a “White-Label IM agreement: funding secured with Banco BPM S.p.A to execute an initial IM transaction”. The morons are delighted and the shares are up by 11% at 0.077p giving a £49 million market cap. The morons need to visit an Otolaryngologist PDQ as, if you scratch away beneath the surface this stinks.'

You have to subscribe to see any more but it's clear what he thinks.

30km, so not that far.

From the Annual Report: 'Savannah intends to continue work on its Early Production Scheme for the remainder of 2023.

The first phase is expected to deliver an initial production of c. 1.5 Kbopd. In this first phase, following well testing, raw

crude will be processed in a 5 Kbopd capacity Early Production Facility (“EPF”), and the processed crude will be exported via a c. 30 km pipeline connected to the Niger-Benin pipeline.'

*RNS

From the Harbour RENS

'Conditions to closing

The Acquisition constitutes a reverse takeover for the purposes of the Listing Rules for Harbour, with the intention that Harbour applies to retain its premium London listing on completion. Harbour will seek shareholder approval and re-admission of its Ordinary Shares and admission of the new Ordinary Shares upon completion to the premium listing segment of the Official List of the Financial Conduct Authority (the "FCA") (or a listing on the single category for equity shares in commercial companies if such new listing category, as contemplated in FCA Consultation Paper CP23/31, has been implemented by the FCA and taken effect at the relevant time) and to trading on the main market for listed securities of the London Stock Exchange. Harbour will, in due course, issue a circular to its shareholders to convene a general meeting to seek approval of the Acquisition and publish a prospectus.

The Acquisition is subject to, amongst other things, regulatory, antitrust and foreign direct investment approvals, as well as Harbour shareholder approval. Completion of the Acquisition is expected to occur in Q4 2024.'

TW posted that he hasn't changed his stance on Syme and that the said post was a falsification posted maliciously. He still maintains it's a fraud.

He was probably just about to sign off for his department knowing our luck!

Probability of economic success is only 28.4% according to the RNS so suspect that's what the market doesn't like

I'd treat anything the ex-oil minister Djerassem Le Bemadjie says with extreme scepticism Lst. Exxon and Save have a contract and I'd be stunned if Exxon entertained any discussions with Chad over compensation without fully engaging Save.

Hi Zengas, not seen anything that specifies the amount. The only date I've seen in the media for the ruling is that of June 2025 from this article.

'As for the case between the Chadian government and Savannah Energy, ousted from the Chadian oil company by Ndjamena after it bought ExxonMobil's shares in Chadian oil, it will be decided from June 2025 before the Court of Arbitration International Paris, according to the Chadian side.

In the meantime, Ndjamena assumes the “nationalization” of its oil. “ We are working to compensate ExxonMobil for its shares ,” explains Djerassem Le Bemadjiel. He expects “ in return ” from the American major that it will “ compensate ” Chad for leaving without having restored the polluted soils.'

https://www-rfi-fr.translate.goog/fr/afrique/20230920-tchad-la-justice-am%C3%A9ricaine-ordonne-le-gel-des-comptes-de-cotco-%C3%A0-citibank-gabon?fbclid=IwAR0WMeMMEg1hisf5vLIKy2tGN1N2NREaw-0Q_v7ZShEHw2da9ZXWdp39bFI&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=facebook&utm_source=shorty&_x_tr_sl=fr&

Thanks TiL,

The 2012 Petroleum act states this on pre-emption rights

' 23.Pre-emption

(1) Where a contractor decides to dispose of all or part of its interest under a petroleum agreement, the National Petroleum and Gas Corporation shall have the right of first option to acquire the interest on the same terms as agreed to with the potential buyer.

(2)If the agreed consideration is not a monetary value, the National Petroleum and Gas Corporation shall have the right to pay the corresponding monetary value of the agreed consideration.

(3)The National Petroleum and Gas Corporation's right of pre-emption shall lapse unless exercised within sixty (60) days after receiving notice of the acquisition.'

The recent Caltech fiasco will have ocurred after the 60 days notice so suspect that there's an element of the SS Govt. making it up as they go along. Hopefully the recent court ruling around the Chad situation will caution the SS govt. on trying something similar and will enable us to get this over the line.