Member Info for LewisMJ

>Are they actually going ahead with a lawsuit?

I don't know. I'd be surprised (you never know what has gone on) if corporate law firm would take this on. It is expensive
and definitely not a certain outcome. I understand the frustration, but it belongs, I think, with the BoD - they maybe could have done a better job, but that is over a period of years.

>It is a Telegram group for POG investors. Only nice people are invited. LOL

Well, according to admins:

"An application for sanctions relief by the Company (i.e. to continue to pay GPB) would not have made a difference to the Company’s solvency ...
The Company was and remains unable to extract sufficient funds to pay its debts due not only to UK sanctions but also due to Russian sanctions and banking restrictions, coupled with a sudden and serious deterioration in market conditions for the operating subsidiaries in Russia.
.... the Company is still unable to pay the sums due under the Term Loan or the Facilities to the assignees of those debts (UMMC and Nordic, respectively), even though they are not sanctioned, in the same way that it was unable to pay GPB when it was the Lender. A licence would not assist the Company in this regard."

So, legally, that would be one side of the argument even if they did try to sue the government, the counter argument is - POG would have folded like a deckchair anyway. But the POG investors can hire a corporate law specialist to see if that argument holds true or not. My money is on it being very hard to argue against.

Someone asked a question. Another person (myself) responded with the correct information. I would assume
anyone would actually prefer to know what is happening and what the process (not finished) is; rather than be left in the dark.

"scum", "conniving thief", "w----r", these are some of the names you've called either myself or others
for taking differing views to yourself. Every time someone posts a view you disagree with,
you seem to resort to personal insults.

If you've a problem with BoD/Opus/Government, take it up with a lawyer and see if you have a case, or not.

>"all I am not an experienced stock buyer, however my dad passed away, he has many share and a lot in POG.."

You can speak to: petroshareholders@opusllp.com
Opus are the firm handling the administration of POG.
They should be able to provide you details of the administration and what happens next.

>it does not seem legitimate that the deal can go through if it essentially transfers assets and money to Russia,
>whilst under Sanction.

Best ask a lawyers. Though, POG isn't under sanction, neither is UMMC ?

POG PLC is a UK company that owns subsidiaries in Russia and they are selling their assets to a non sanctioned company in Russia. What money would be transferred to Russia??

It seems similar to BP; they exited their 9.75% shareholding in Rosneft.

They are allowed to get the funds from the sale, so it is a question of how far the funds stretch.

>I have to say Mr lewis you must have looked long and hard for that story. How did you find it?

Not really if you Google the name to see where your story came from, it is the 3rd or 4th item on the first page of results.

>And to blame him for Cornish property prices and homelessness is bizarre
I didn't specifically blame him, my comment was general one, I've some sympathy for locals in Cornwall, where its a real issue for locals that can't afford to stay in the area that they grew up in.

>you don't own any shares you've only been here since april and you've always defended the bod .

I've not defended the BoD. I have said that some criticisms of the admins seems wide of the mark.
As for PoG my interest - I owned shares years ago, made very modest profit and sold all my holdings (this was even before the company was renamed). More recently, had a look post invasion and decided it was doomed, so didn't get back in.

Not a plant either.

www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/cornwall-manor-house-near-falmouth-4929443

Maybe he will sell some of his houses in Cornwall. The locals may have the chance for somewhere to live. Rather than be priced out by Russian oligarchs buying up properties for privacy.

>Is that a threat you thieving conniving ****er

No. Just offering advise. You've nothing to gain by publicly calling people crooks etc. Yes, you may feel aggrieved, think the BoD have failed etc. But, you are better off wording comments in such as a way that it avoids any repercussions to yourself, that is all.

i.e. Don't give anyone ammo to use against you.

The term 'class action' is misnomer, they don't exist in the UK, we do have group litigation orders though.

Lawrence: People should keep their counsel on some things, last thing you need is a defamation claim if you'd already lost big on POG. If you have legal concerns with BoD , Govt. application of Sanctions etc., I'd keep those between yourself and a lawyer who can advise if you are mistaken or not. Equally if people solicit funding for legal review, from yourself, you should check its going to an appropriate firm, poss. pay your contribution to that firm directly. I'd advise not paying indirectly, if you chose to go down that route, for obvious reasons.

"Also consider joining the class action…"

I believe in the UK the term is 'group litigation order'. Maybe get some legal advise sooner rather than later. They can tell you if the sanctions were legal or just regulatory risk etc. etc.

" trading at 20c area tops..."

Yep, basically looking at about 1000% YTM (well if what I saw was correct) if they payout bondholders fully, at least for those that bought at those levels (I'm guessing most didn't). Decent pay day for Nordic (I think), they may have assumed < 100% recovery rate.

No, I'm not the same person as Big Blu.

Why I'm here is none of your business, you don't have zero say in who can contribute to this board. You have zero control over it, all you can post is your opinions. And people can make of them what they will.

I don't think the Administrators are heroes. I do think some comment about them are unfair and have also crossed the line into defamatory. I would advise people to be more cautious.

>That was months ago ;now it is the strongest in the world and Russia now is trying to cap it.
That is wrong. The rouble is not freely convertible, it represents their current account surplus, not in a good way.

>ironically is that gold and silver especially are finally on the charge and as soon as the Fed
Liftings rates and still (for now) the reserve currency, people can hold gold or USD with Fed tightening and earn yield.

Lets just see how it plays out. We'll see who was right and who was mistaken. Give it time... Maybe you will be vindicated. Lets just see...

>russia like a number of countries use BRICS system now and left the corrupt SWIFT system

By "BRICS system", I assume you mean CIPS....

CIPS isn't direct equivalent to SWIFT. CIPS is mainly for renminbi settlement. Most companies that use CIPS also use SWIFT. And, Western companies can use CIPS if they want to, some do.

So meaningless comparison on two grounds:
1. They aren't directly the same thing.
2. CIPS isn't blocked to Western countries.

What was the point you were trying to make?

"WTF, the rouble's probably the strongest International currency this year !"
Effectively not freely convertible. There are currency controls.

Lawrence, I was referring to the point the Administrators made re: potentially deferring the sale due the decree.
Which would halt the fire-sale.

I mentioned sometime ago re: querying the decision of the BoD to waive bankruptcy protection in Russia too. I did say that I thought some of the criticisms of the Administrators wasn't well thought through.

So does look like Administrators are doing due diligence. As I said, there is some fair comment (re: could the BoD have done things differently) but the Administrators are doing the best they can it seems.

>Are the UK citizens paying any price for the sanctions

Yes, lots of shareholders, pensioners are. BP lost about 25 billion sterling in earnings. Way more than the value of POG.
If you argue that all shareholders should be protected from sanctions impact - you'd have to say the government compensate BP to the tune of 25 billion and similarly for a host of other companies.

The government can't afford to do that, not in a cost of living crisis.

Specifically, if regulatory risk is an existential threat to a company: that isn't something that taxpayers should pay for - it is reasonable for the government to assume that people should have diversified, and therefore no, I don't think taxpayers should pay out to POG shareholders.

In the case of RBS and Northern Rock, arguably the government shouldn't have bailed them out - but there was a systemic risk, where the cost of not doing so, would be greater to taxpayers. In this instance, the cost to taxpayers of not bailing out POG, compensating BP and others is neither here nor there.

POG was/is majority owned by overseas (Russian) investors. Should taxpayers pay out because some investors didn't diversify their holdings? I don't think so, there is no systemic risk , not doing so won't lead to bigger losses for the UK taxpayers.

I'd argue there is nothing that makes POG shareholders 'special', BP shareholders lost more. That it was an existential problem for POG is down to the management of POG. This is after all a company that for years had 'issues' with Auditors too - PwC, KpMG, resigning I believe. The government can look at the history over the last few years and conclude, that the taxpayers owe POG investors nothing, it didn't seem to be in great shape anyway. Could they have refinanced all the notes etc.. that is debatable. POG would have been in some diffciulties sooner or later I think, Ukraine accelerated it.

"Bad choice...... BP has been raking in bumper profits as the oil price"

No, excellent choice. Rather the whole point ...

BP was effectively forced to dispose of Russian assets. So, if POG shareholders are compensated, the govt. presumably would have to compensate all companies that had to write off assets. The fact that BP did put all its operations in one region is an obvious plus. And the business has been profitable - they still had a negative impact from the sanctions though, so did many other companies. Bail out one - you bail out them all.

And, of course, regulatory risk exists. That doesn't mean people should have 'seen it coming' but been aware of the risk and suitably hedged/diversified their portfolios (as pretty much most people did).

>we need compensation at the very least from the government. They fired the torpedoes that sank POG

'compensation from the government' .. is never from the government: it is from other taxpayers.

Who should taxpayers be asked to fund - all shareholders? So, mainly Russians, if not, which shareholders? Just Brits - not sure that would be legal.

During a cost of living crisis, I don't think it would go do well for the government to fund shareholders in what was a effectively a Russian company listed on the LSE. If they compensate POG shareholders; then they'd have bigger bills - e.g. BP share holders lost out, not relatively, but likely the actual amount larger than POG. So too a host of other companies.

The government will argue that share investors could reasonably be expected to understand risks and ensure that they diversify their holdings across regions, industries, etc. & consider, amongst other things, regulatory risk.