Member Info for Madpunter

Earsbern - Symore_Bottoms makes one big mistake in his production calculations, T39 which is a gusher and accounts for most of the production didn't come on stream until H2 2018.

Ziggy - How is the reply worded and what was your actual wording in the query?

The following post can be viewed in the Frontera Archive P23 4th post from the bottom :-

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=23

Production
Page 5 (see link below) of the Frontera Archive 10th post shows 312bopd of light crude produced in 2018 without T39, plus 75bopd heavy crude. Page 3 (see the link below)first post of the Frontera Archive shows 4 train loads auctioned in 2018 = 23,500t = 181,185bbls light crude and 27,375bbls heavy crude. Total 208,560bbls, which means that 291,440bbls must come from T39 in 2018 if Zaza's statement of 500,000bbls of production is correct. Therefore, with a flow rate of 1500bopd for T39 there would be another 4 trains (9,000t )filled after the 22nd October 9,000t trainload, but with a 45 day wait for payment after auction, plus xmas, they wouldn't be paid until 2019. Also, this flow rate would give a total of (1500 + 312 + 75)bopd = 1887bopd, up to two thousand bopd referred to by Zaza.
Revenue for 2018 would then be (181,185bbls x $65/bbl = $11.777m) + (27,375bbls x $40/bbl = $1.095m) + ($630k in the bank) = $13.5m in Total .
Page 9 (see the link below) 12th post of the Frontera Archive estimates $12m operating costs for 2018 based upon $6m for H1, but without lawyer's fees and payments for YA.

Therefore, $13.5m -$12m = $1.5m profit for 2018 less the lawyer's fees and payments to YA, which looks pretty close to the actual $1.2m referred to by Zaza.

The 4 trainloads of 9,000t not paid for in 2018 will equate to 277,560bbls x $60/bbl (the price of oil is lower this year) = $16.6536m. Add 256 days x 1812bopd light crude = 453,872bbls x $60/bbl = $27.832m. Add 256 days x 75bopd = 19200bbls x $40/bbl = $0.768m = $45.2536m revenue so far this year + $1.2m profit from 2018 = $46.4536m. Assuming operating costs (not including lawyer's fees and YA payments) of $12m = $34.4536m. IMHO FRR will easily have enough to cover the lawyer's fees, YA payments and the DoS within the 12 month period. In fact FRR may be close to paying SH/O, which might explain the meeting with only SH/O's lawyer's present in the Caymen's.

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=3

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=5

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=9

emblaze1 and Tsbs - When SH/O resigned and used the resignation letters for the rest of the directors of FRCC, FRR no longer had any control over FRCC or any of it's subsidiaries. This would include the operating company, FEGL, which would have been where the monies for the oil revenue was deposited prior to SH/O initiating the liquidation. Assuming my production figures are correct then there would be at least four train loads of oil revenue since the start of the year, as 4 are unaccounted for from 2018 9 (see my production post to follow). Symore_Bottoms makes one big mistake in his production calculations, T39 which is a gusher and accounts for most of the production didn't come on stream until H2 2018.

WHamBoy - Creditors have 21 days to prove their debts or claims from the publication date of the notice. Therefore, I would assume a few weeks at least after this period before we hear that Mourant, SH/O and the liquidators have been paid. As the process is under way, if that means that FRCC has already been liquidated to enable the liquidators to pursue FEGL, then the 5% RA will revert to the ownership of the GG. If that is the case, then a deal with the super majors could take place at any time. However, I expect they will want all lose ends completed first before a deal is ratified, except the case in California against SH/O. IMHO the California case will no longer have any relevance regarding a deal with the super majors, after the LN debt owed to SH/O is paid via the Caymen's court.

ZiggyZag - FEGL is the operating company that was beneath FRCC, which has been put into liquidation. Therefore, FRR cannot touch any assets in FEGL, so any money paid into FEGL prior to the liquidation which wasn't used by FRR prior to the liquidation, is now out of their control. It is now in the control of the liquidators under a court Supervision Order. IMHO the liquidators were reticent to go after FEGL, as they possibly thought there was insufficient funds to warrant spending money in the courts to collect. The Zaza interview in the Ukraine stated a $1.2m profit for 2018 and 500,000 bbls of oil produced. A quick back of an envelope calculation by the liquidators would show that about 4 trainloads of revenue was due after the end of 2018 (see my production post (4th post from the bottom of the link below). IMHO this coupled with a possible belief of FRR avoiding payment, due to not paying Mourant, was enough to prompt the application for a court Supervision Order.

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=23

Timster - To give them more time. The start of the liquidation process was months ago, when the money wouldn't have covered all the debts and if FRR goes bust, then then lose Block 12 to the GG.

Timster - The process needed speeding up. Until the liquidation was completed, the 5% RA remained in FRCC. Therefore, after the creditors were paid if a deal was done to sell Block 12 before completing the liquidation, FRR would still own the 5% RA which would then become a future dividend. However, if the liquidation is complete before a deal, the 5% RA reverts to ownership of the GG, increasing their percentage under the PSA to 53.45%. IMHO this is what the arbitration was all about, namely leverage to obtain a larger piece of the pie. Therefore, assuming that I'm correct, the liquidation process has been holding up the deal with the super majors. Hence, the release of information about production and profits by Zaza in the Ukraine interview, plus the withholding of fees owed to Mourant. Both will have helped push the liquidators into a Supervision Order, as they will think that the monies from the sale of oil is in FEGL, which is beneath FRCC and out of the control of FRR.

Earsbern - It is also worth noting that if my production post earlier yesterday was right, then at least 4 train loads of oil revenue would have been received by FEGL, which if my memory is correct is below FRCC. Therefore, I think that the liquidators would have to liquidate FRCC first. It is possible that the liquidators didn't expect very much money to be in FEGL until the recent interview of Zaza in the Ukraine. Therefore, if it would have cost them more in court fees than they were expecting to obtain from FEGL, they may have been reticent to take that path. This could explain both the reluctance to pay Mourant and the recent revelations about production and profit, otherwise why did Zaza have the revealing interview?

Earsbern - SH/O started the liquidation process when he resigned, but the process stalled when they found there was only a 5% RA in FRCC. IMHO this was partly why Mourant wasn't paid as the liquidators were in contact with Mourant and their case for unpaid fees triggered the Supervision Order.

IMHO this is what everyone has been waiting for, as until FRCC was liquidated, the 5% RA was owned by FRCC, but will now revert to the GG. IMHO this will then pave the way for a deal with the super majors, as the GG's share of Block 12 increases to 53.45%. IMHO the creditor's can be paid out from the revenue for the oil Zaza referred to in the Ukraine interview and the case against SH/O just becomes noise.

Part 2

Posted by bugsy-b @ 20:03 :-

FRONTERA IS SUING GEORGIA
"29.AUGUST .2019 21:37 ECONOMIC
FRONTERA IS SUING GEORGIA AND SEEKING $ 3.5 BILLION IN COMPENSATION

https://www.bm.ge/ka/article/frontera-saqartvelos-uchivis-da-kompensaciis-saxit-35-miliards-itxovs/39074

Posted by Sycric @ 22:55 :-

Any suing of countries normally is on this. Cannot see if so seems like fake news.

https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Pages/cases/AdvancedSearch.aspx

The two posts copied above were posted on the 29th August and copied from the second and fifth posts down of the link below :-
https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=22

IMHO the timing of the 'old news' posted in the link by bugsy-b and the fact that there's no listing in the link posted by Sycric points to someone trying to influence the case in the Ukraine.

I've copied my post from the 12th September below :-

Arbitration
My post from the 9th May (copied below) speculated about a 'Trojan Horse' plan involving Block 12, the GG and SH/O, but where did FRR get this idea from assuming that I'm correct. The court paper's show that SN's declaration refers to a Trojan Horse plot by SH/O using OML and MND (see extract below).

This 17 information was especially crucial, in light of FRC's past experience with OML, 18 and its fraudulent attempt to present MND as a "Trojan horse" investor to obtain 19 FRC' s trade secrets and confidential information in aid of a hostile takeover bid (copied from the fourth post of P11 of the Frontera Archive posted on the 23rd May).
https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=11

The arbitration request by the GG that was reported by ShareP....'s (fill in the blanks as you see fit), started what appeared to be an orchestrated shorting attack on FRR. The leak is assumed to have come from SH/O, as the modus operandi of SH/O is to target distressed companies and restrict their funding capabilities. The subsequent naked shorting by YA and shorting by TW et al greatly restricted the avenues for funding. Thus, SH/O possibly saw the arbitration as FRR's Achilles Heel. Move on year and IMHO the Achilles heal has turned into a Trojan Horse. SH/O may have assumed that due to the following two points, the assets were unlikely to be moved :-
1) The request for arbitration by the GG.
2) The fact that if Block 12 was moved from FRCC without the approval of the GG it reverted to the GG.
IMHO due to the previous points and a window of opportunity between the two court cases, then SH/O tried to take control of the assets, by resigning and trying to liquidate FRCC. IMHO the arbitration appears to have been a lever in the negotiating of the sunk costs between FRR and the GG, which are about $400m. These costs are recoverable from production under the PSA, prior to the 51% (GG share) and 49%(FRR share) split in production. The price of the 1% in ground value of Block 12 (26.7kMMbbls x $60/b = $16bn) halved for FRR's share = $8bn. Therefore, the 5% royalty equates to $400m of the $8bn, the same amount as the sunk costs. Thus the arbitration request may have allowed the deal with the GG, which removed Block 12 from the clutches of SH/O's cronies. At the same time this facilitated his removal from the board and his veto of a possible loan with GC. Therefore, the arbitration turned from being an Achilles Heel into a Trojan Horse. All conjecture, but the theory fits (copied from the 9th post down in the link below posted on the 9th May).
https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=9

Gipps - in case you missed my post on production from the 13th September I've copied it below :-

Production
Page 5 (see link below) of the Frontera Archive 10th post shows 312bopd of light crude produced in 2018 without T39, plus 75bopd heavy crude. Page 3 (see the link below)first post of the Frontera Archive shows 4 train loads auctioned in 2018 = 23,500t = 181,185bbls light crude and 27,375bbls heavy crude. Total 208,560bbls, which means that 291,440bbls must come from T39 in 2018 if Zaza's statement of 500,000bbls of production is correct. Therefore, with a flow rate of 1500bopd for T39 there would be another 4 trains (9,000t )filled after the 22nd October 9,000t trainload, but with a 45 day wait for payment after auction, plus xmas, they wouldn't be paid until 2019. Also, this flow rate would give a total of (1500 + 312 + 75)bopd = 1887bopd, up to two thousand bopd referred to by Zaza.
Revenue for 2018 would then be (181,185bbls x $65/bbl = $11.777m) + (27,375bbls x $40/bbl = $1.095m) + ($630k in the bank) = $13.5m in Total .
Page 9 (see the link below) 12th post of the Frontera Archive estimates $12m operating costs for 2018 based upon $6m for H1, but without lawyer's fees and payments for YA.

Therefore, $13.5m -$12m = $1.5m profit for 2018 less the lawyer's fees and payments to YA, which looks pretty close to the actual $1.2m referred to by Zaza.

The 4 trainloads of 9,000t not paid for in 2018 will equate to 277,560bbls x $60/bbl (the price of oil is lower this year) = $16.6536m. Add 256 days x 1812bopd light crude = 453,872bbls x $60/bbl = $27.832m. Add 256 days x 75bopd = 19200bbls x $40/bbl = $0.768m = $45.2536m revenue so far this year + $1.2m profit from 2018 = $46.4536m. Assuming operating costs (not including lawyer's fees and YA payments) of $12m = $34.4536m. IMHO FRR will easily have enough to cover the lawyer's fees, YA payments and the DoS within the 12 month period. In fact FRR may be close to paying SH/O, which might explain the meeting with only SH/O's lawyer's present in the Caymen's.

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=3

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=5

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=9

Gipps - I always thought that the GG oil auctions were for FRR's oil, to verify the amount produced until the cost recovery pool has been exhausted. The production would then be split 51% GG and 49% FRR under the PSA. In early November 2018 I emailed YJ and the GG to ask if it was FRR's oil, with no reply, yet in late November 2018 Mole had a reply stating that it was not FRR's oil. While the auctions were listed they could be matched to production, but in the spring of this year both the FRR website and the GG website changed, with the historical information unobtainable. If the auctioned oil was FRR's, then with the court cases it is possible that FRR didn't want SH/O to know what revenue FRR was getting from production. If not it is a bit of a coincidence that both websites changed and no oil auctions were listed from last autumn until now, where with recent production and revenue figures made public by Zaza, secrecy would be null and void.

Just to clarify, I haven't nominated those companies due to any negative feelings for LLOY, but because I see both as shares that have floundered due to impatient investors. Both have good news to come in the next year IMHO. DYOR. I wouldn't normally post about other shares, but as it's a fantasy portfolio, IMHO that makes it alright.

Asperger1 - I suggest SOLG and SDX for your fantasy portfolio. If you want more information, just ask. DYOR.

errazel - My previous post is relevant to wine industry, as when Georgia exports vast quantities of hydrocarbons the exchange rate will make other exports more expensive (see extract from link below). Therefore, their 8,000 year old wine industry will find it more difficult to export, just when their wines are starting to get the recognition they deserve (see link at the bottom of the post). IMHO, as FRR will be instrumental in this process, they are duty bound to help foster business links to overcome this obstacle. IMHO this is also an indication of a deal the super majors and the GG and the importance of FRR's links in high places.

'The devil's excrement': How did oil become so important?
Elsewhere, from Iraq to Iran, Venezuela to Nigeria, few oil-rich countries have prospered from the discovery. Economists call it the "curse of oil".

Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonzo, Venezuela's oil minister in the early 1960s, had a more vivid description. "It is the devil's excrement," he declared in 1975. "We are drowning in the devil's excrement."

Why is it a problem to have lots of oil?

Exporting it pushes up the value of your currency - which can make everything other than oil prohibitively expensive to produce at home.

That means it can be hard to develop manufacturing or complex service industries (copied from the link below).

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49499443
https://www.latimes.com/travel/la-tr-georgia-wine-20180908-story.html

The whales had been saved, and the world was about to change.

It's the source of more than a third of the world's energy.

That's more than coal, and more than twice as much as nuclear, hydroelectric and renewable energy sources combined.

Oil and gas together provide a quarter of our electricity, and the raw material for most plastics.

Then there's transport.

Early industrial societies used whale oil widely in oil lamps and to make soap and margarine. With the commercial development of the petroleum industry and vegetable oils, the use of whale oils declined considerably from its peak in the 19th century into the 20th century. In the 21st century, with most countries having banned whaling, the sale and use of whale oil has practically ceased.
Extracts from the links below :-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49499443
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whale_oil

IMHO folk on here are worrying about the wrong things. I have no worries about ZM or SN, but I do worry about becoming finally financially independent and then losing it through remaining in the EU (possible default by Italy and the EU crashes or when majority voting comes in after 2020, railroading a USoE, with very high taxes to pay for the poorer parts). Even more frightening would be a Corbyn government and the resulting communism. I only have 4m shares, so funding a lifestyle in another country outside the EU and keeping one here to protect against the above is not very likely.