Member Info for lejjb

He is indeed replying to select (short and polite) e-mails, and based on his response, I have just about enough hope not to sell it all off quite yet.

Just.

...not anymore, darn.

onefineday - many thanks for this.

Is AimReg part of the FCA?

Unbelievably, in spite of all the (understandable) bile, we've had almost certainly a few more buys than sells (6,872,240 vs 6,822,688)...

Still some people with hope then!

That was me who said that. That was in reference to the need to restimulate the wells ultimately. Thank you for clarifying that it is a very common technique.

I suspect they are currently getting legal advice to make sure they follow the EGM procedure, and the submission of the appropriate resolutions, correctly.

Well done bonkers!

I disagree that there is nothing to do.

We were told months ago about the possible use of compression equipment (right name?) to keep pg 10 active without restimulation a bit longer. What's happened to that?!

yup

A waste of company money and of CH's own time to record that interview IMO.

E-mail sent to you. Ta.

No sh!t Sherlock.

Nope, nothing new really. It was recorded last week it appears.

https://twitter.com/TMSreach/status/1090201861318238208

Hi boys (and gals?)
What do you think of it?
Worth a dipping a toe in?

Never try guess where a share price’s bottom will be. Even more so without the help of a very well made chart. It’s a mug’s game dude(tte?). As raised here by many others before, it might be a long while before this share goes to its true value - whatever that is.

Has he?!?! When do you think he started?!?! (IIRC he announced the plan to resort to legal proceedings in early November 2018. And there was Xmas since then. And you have to factor in time to find and appoint lawyers in the UK and Slovenia too.)

O2B@C - yes, you can often argue that European laws apply to various national matters (and I have some in mind here, albeit just very vaguely), but you do not "test the water" when filing a court action.

Never.

If you do not have the best case you can put together, a court will spot it and is more likely to dismiss it out of hand and you are opening yourself to the payment of damages to the other side, and more importantly it may then be impossible to go back to the same type of court again.

In rough layman's terms, most courts don't allow people to file the same action twice, unless BIG material facts have come up since then. Things you could not be reasonably supposed to have known before.

Otherwise, you will have effectively exhausted your chances,

The relevant RNSs of 2016 onwards stated that the Slovenian court's decision of 2016 had contradicted the explicit legislation in that respect.

The contents of those RNSs paraphrased the legal opinion that Ascent had received.

I don't recall why Ascent decided not to appeal that court's decision on that basis.

I can't honestly comment more as I know nothing about Slovenian law and procedure beyond what we were all told in the RNSs.

I’m no Slovenian lawyer but that’s inaccurate: the INA sales were done in reaction to the (illegal) court decision of 2016. The cost of buying and maintaining the pipeline and the loss of profits due to selling the gas at a discount to INA are likely to be claimable.

FinnFCR - thank you.