Member Info for LayLadyLay

And still the 600k and 200k and 250k sells appear to be continuing unabated. Why don't they see the huge potential?

Spoken like a true gentleman neon.

LGO - Typical, they can't even get that right...

... or deliberate to buy more time

ulvers - I realise you were referring to the sp but I don't think people should fixate on the sp of New BPC shares at completion. CERP shareholders have to decide if they see value going forward beyond completion. Only those hoping for a quick cash out such as Willec are fixated on the daily fluctuations in the sp over the short term. It's the assessment of long term growth in value of the assets that should be the focus of attention. I'm sure you know this already but some punters will be confused by the micro details of the merger and imagining the opportunity for a quick kill that probably won't materialise.

ulvers - "if there are further positive developments in the short term then it will be fully reflected in the price CERP shareholders receive at the time of deal completion"

What price at completion are you referring to? This is not a cash offer.

"For each Columbus share held by Columbus shareholders, they will receive 0.803 BPC shares (the "Offer")"

An interesting viewpoint from pr100 on advfn.

There is very little difference between a merger and a takeover. Usually, the only difference is that a merger is mutually planned and agreed whereas a takeover is an aggressive, often unexpected, move by one of the companies involved. It's an unequal merger and it looks like a takeover because hardly any CERP personnel are involved in the new company. If approved by shareholders, the enlarged entity will presumably be given a new name since "Bahamas" PC will no longer be an accurate description. Other corporate changes may be announced at the same time - possibly including a leading executive role for LK. I assume that the mooted $4m from Predator is no longer on the table or LK would surely have carried on. If it does now materialise, BPC will have paid much less than the headline price for CERP and will doubtless channel the cash into Perseverance. Both sets of shareholders need to see how the CERP valuation was arrived at before they can vote at their respective GMs. And CERP shareholders need to understand why this cheap deal was being worked on back in April and why the CERP BoD are recommending it. On the surface, it looks like an admission that CERP's claimed future prospects and "transformational" recent discovery were not true and that the broker was complicit in misleading shareholders. There's no secret Perseverance farm-in. BPC shareholders would rightly be furious if their directors had given away a quarter of the company with such price-sensitive news kept secret. The stock market regulators wouldn't like it either. LK now in a lose-lose situation as he cannot sensibly explain this sell-out without antagonising at least one set of shareholders and incriminating himself. The video may never appear if it has been conveniently pulled by the nomad. He will have to answer a lot of tough questions at the GM - but most PIs will already have cast their vote by then. If there is no public Q&A session before then, he is running scared. On no account should any PI vote for or against this merger without seeing clear answers to all the obvious questions. At this stage, he has lost trust.

I'm looking forward to the interview. I expect that his new masters are reviewing what he has to say to make sure he is singing from the same hymn sheet as them.

I suspect that Leo has been negotiating from a position of weakness combined with a desire to draw a line under his tenure and find an exit route for himself and the CERP BoD; this because he knows he has failed to live up to the hype around is appointment. He will disappear to pastures new once the dust has settled.

Some of you are struggling to understand the mechanics of the deal so I will try to explain in simple language.

Assuming the deal gets voted through and meets any other contingent requirements, all shares in BPC and CERP will be extinguished on a date to be announced and New BPC shares will be listed in the market. The sp of CERP and BPC shares, immediately before the transaction is completed, has no bearing on how many shares are issued to those with BPC shares and CERP shares. The formula has been laid out and BPC shareholders will still have the same number of New BPC shares they had at close on the day before completion. CERP holders will receive the same number of shares they had at close on the day before completion but reduced by a factor of 0.803. The New BPC shares will begin trading at whatever sp the market determines, which may be higher or lower than the sp of either BPC or CERP on the last day of their trading.

baraboy and rhodi - the Del and Rodney of CERP

The Perseverence well update issued by BPC on 25th March gives a hint of something strategic brewing.

"Company has begun considering other opportunistic strategic alternatives arising as a result of the current global crisis."

The move to acquire Columbus is opportunistic for BPC. It remains to be seen what the benefit is to Columbus. The Covid-19 situation offered Columbus an opportunity to put back publishing FY19 accounts until September 30th. They are normally published at the end of June. Based on the timetable for the merger, the accounts may never see the light of day, which is a shame as it would perhaps have highlighted what state CERP is/was in financially and provided some production metrics which have been hidden from shareholders for too long.

Rampers will be imaginative in attempting to sell this based on dangling the 'there must be something more to this' carrot. It's unlikely in my view that there is a major waiting in the wings or anything along those lines. My own view is that BPC are seeking to down risk reliance on Perseverance 1 which would leave them exposed to potential failure if the drill is unsuccessful. Acquiring CERP opens up additional opportunities for cash generation and BPC may think they can make a better job of it than the current CERP BoD as BPC has more cash available to progress the SWP.

I think a yes vote will be safer than a no vote which could leave Columbus in a holy mess, if it's not in one already.

Irene - " don't understand why LLL is promoting it to be honest "

It's not because I think this is an amazing deal. I have felt for a while that CERP could be closer to the brink than we realise. Real information has become scarce and if S1 was as good as many hope and S2 is a free carry then it doesn't make sense for the BoD to go down this route, which is akin to pawning the family silver. That they have seemingly thrown in the towel to accept this deal suggests that the alternative to accepting this deal could be liquidation at some time in the very near future.

I may be completely wrong in my interpretation but if survival is the motive for accepting this deal then I do think that a yes vote would be the right choice because it gives shareholders another chance of ultimate success, however slim that chance may be. The alternative outcome may be even more shocking than this deal.

In my opinion CERP will never be the same again whichever way the vote goes. I don't think there will be any going back if you vote against. One way or another this is transformational for CERP.

It's a risk whichever way you vote but a yes vote opens up a forward path whilst a no vote will create indecision and uncertainty.

Leo, ever the salesman:

"Columbus shareholders will gain access to the high impact Perseverance 1 exploration well in The Bahamas, which we expect will be drilled in Q4 2020/Q1 2021. If successful, Perseverance 1 will transform the company as it has a P50 prospective oil resource of 770 million barrels, with an upside of 1,440 million barrels. It is rare for a relatively small oil & gas company to have access to a prospective resource of this size."

I would think carefully before voting against the deal. I have felt for a while that CERP is running on fumes, with little cash to advance any of its projects and relying on issuing shares in order to settle liabilities. Despite bullish talk about potential I feel that this deal could be a risk worth taking as the alternative could be the end of the line for the gravy train and many long term holders losing everything they dreamt about.

Bamps - "There must be a reason that the wells are not in production, possibly sand issues. "

Or no oil?

Bully check out this link and scroll down to Tulip's Strategy. You will find similarities to the strategy at CERP. That's not surprising as Leo Koot is non executive chairman of Tulip. It gives an insight into his modus operandi.

https://tulipoil.com/

And don't forget to add dilution to the imminent news flow. Who wants to guess when CERP will pass the 1bn shares in issue?

The so called gusher is producing what at the moment? Reminds me of GY-670 when Neil Ritson was claiming 1000 bpd open hole flow rate.

As for Irene, I expect she knows that the more rampers wriggle and jiggle and moan about her confirms that you know she is right and are trying to drive her off the board. Good luck with that!

Saffron 1 MC 90-95% water.

Bully - "CERP can survive for almost one whole year without any revenue or cost saving"

In La La Land, maybe, but in the real world it doesn't work like that. I knew what you meant but it's a nonsense scenario.

The secret of survival for CERP is simply printing money each month (shares) in order to pay it's bills. Do contractors earn a premium for accepting share payment in lieu of cash? There must be some kind of incentive I would imagine, otherwise why do it?

If CERP had to pay all its debts in cash then I doubt it would remain viable for long.

Chesh/surprised - "Mad math , just for you Irene :) £4.2m"

US$4.2m

Bully - which is it? lol

11:54 "If we start to take into account revenue"

14:48 "I am not taking into account revenue"

No need to answer ;)