Member Info for lejjb

Ditto, they would not have announced that the CEO was going part-time to focus on the "strategic review" and "no growth planning" if they were not certain that an acceptable T/O offer would be made.

Sure, anything can go wrong, but AST's BoD behaviour since April has been consistently going towards a takeover.

Some profit taking, and a bit of MM exploitation of the situation to balance their books.

Let's see how it settles at lunchtime.

Happy Friday all!

They have to exercise those first, yes, but they said at the conf call that they have provisions in their contracts should they not be able to exercise them - they did not say what those provisions were.

The advertised spread is artificially wide - vs the actual sells and buys. Let’s see if that works - at present, a flurry of trades already.

I must say that it’s a big assumption that one entity bought 30% this week IMO, and is way too big a proportion to go easily under the radar.

Competition or takeover?...

Last year was issued on the 28 Sept 2017, so they have about 2-4 weeks to close as much as they can to mention it in that report.

Anything in the pipeline for which we are waiting an update - there's nothing that I can think of.

Thank you Scott1092.

(I meant "...by the end of September, it's likely...")

Guessing the SP in the short-term is a mug's game.

However, it's likely to be well above the 2p (IIRC) options that the BoD has, which (tell me if I'm wrong) is the price of the bulk of them.

RogerA, Targaryen2 - thank you.

I never thought that, we're all good. Where did you buy today if I may ask?... ;-)

RogerA - thank you, but please can I check that you are referring to the Dommo Energia board on the Brazilian page of ADVFN (I speak a smidgen of Portuguese), which is what that link was leading to, and not the UK ADVFN aboard about NUOG? Cheers.

Ultimately, if you don’t like the look of a company, it’s indeed better not to buy in, so your approach is good.

It’s possibly because I met the BoD twice (maybe you have too?...) that I have been swayed me in the favour of staying in AST in the current conditions, particularly as CH has come across to me as a reasonable man all things considered.

Best wishes for your shopping spree.

After a brief look through, I didn’t see anything on that BB that appeared to support the claims made about MFDevCo. If you have, please can you direct us to it. Thank you.

You suggested a possible problem, I gave you the likely (contractually-agreed) remedy.
;-)

And my point is that there is a JV agreement that has to make sure in clear terms that Geo does its part.

If it does not, nobody will want to work with Geo or touch the field with a barge pole because it would be tainted with legal problems.

Laks - it's the other way round.

A JV agreement is a contract between the two parties behind the JV. So it would responsibilities for each party towards the other one.

It would be commercially suicidal from Ascent not to add terms in the JV agreement according to which Geo, as owner of the license, would have to make sure it renews the license and makes sure it behaves in such a way that Ascent is not worse off.
Otherwise, Ascent would be at the total mercy of Geo's goodwill.

So according to a very basic type of JV agreement, Geo would have to comply with terms from that agreement, for the benefit of Ascent.
In return, Ascent operates the field and would have duties such as properly maintaining the well, keeping them in production as far as practical, giving Geo its share of the profits, etc.

CH partly covered that in his Interview of yesterday with LSE if I recall correctly. I recall that he pointed out that Geoenergo had no say in the T/O negotiations but was very interested in knowing the outcome (obviously!).

Also, the valuation of the recoverable resource that CH provided back on 27 April 2018 of £200m is what AST actually has rights to, so he had discounted the 25% of Geo already.

The JV agreement (whose details I don't have) would have to include rights and obligations on both parties, including license renewal duties that Geoenergo would have to comply with.