Member Info for Madpunter

Arsenal221 - IMHO it will be over much sooner in the Texas court when the 'privileged' information is disclosed.

When I read the dates for the California Trial and that Discovery had not commenced, I expected the case to move to another jurisdiction, hence my post on the 7th July copied below. IMHO there's nothing to worry about and the 'Smoking Gun' will soon be revealed.
Goit - IMHO SH/O doesn't want the case dismissed from the Californian Courts , unless it is with prejudice. IMHO the 'smoking gun' would then become the new evidence to enable an appeal in another jurisdiction. However, if Discovery is granted and produces the evidence required, then the 'smoking gun' becomes irrelevant (see the extract below from SH/O's lawyers on 13th June, posted by Taffy52 on the 16th June).

JURY DEMAND Defendants hereby demand trial by jury on all claims and defenses for which a right to jury trial exists. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendants respectfully pray for judgment as follows: 1. Plaintiffs take nothing by virtue of this action, and that judgment be rendered in favor of Defendants or, upon consent by Defendants, that this action be dismissed with prejudice to re-filing;
https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=14

Amazing, hundreds of posts in recent months about the lack of evidence against SH/O and the absence of discovery, yet when a possible reason is posted there's no comment. There's also no comment on the possibility of the liquidation of FRCC being a factor. Everyone seems fixated upon the lack of money for FRR, yet the Dolphin bid and DOS indicate solvency and the writ is not against FRR, but against SN and ZM.

1) FRR have no money.

Unlikely, as the court case is still proceeding as far as we know in California and FRR has recently submitted a bid for the Dolphin Licence in the Ukraine. Also, the writ is against ZM and SN, who should have enough money to pay, based upon the offer of the $5m loan.

2) The legal agreement with Mourant for fees may have been with FRCC, which is now in the hands of the liquidators and only has the 5% royalty. This may explain why the writ is against ZM and SN.

3) FRR may be in dispute with Mourant as suggested by ScottPalmer250 in his post @ 11:41, part of which is copied below :-

If this great ruse to expel Hope from the Board, stop liquidation and get control of the company by not paying the $2 million owed to Hope was engineered by the lawyers and they lost would you pay them?

We know that 'Discovery' evidence was not submitted in the Cayman's as reminded by ZiggyZag's post @ 12:02, part of which is copied below :-
Rediscovered below from our council in Taffs posting of court docs 31st May ....

Defendants again attempt to focus this Court’s attention on dicta and interim rulings in the Cayman Islands Action. No discovery was ever conducted in the Cayman Islands Action, and few documents beyond affidavits were submitted to the court in that action. ......

What if discovery proves the case against SH/O, but opens up the possibility of Criminal Proceedings in the US by the SEC? Could this have resulted in a stay and a lengthy delay, time which FRR doesn't have, if SH/O's lawyers had objected? The extract (copied below) from the link copied below, would seem to indicate the possibility.

However, a court may stay a civil proceeding if a defendant would be unjustly prejudiced by providing information in said proceeding that may incriminate him or her in future or current criminal proceedings.

https://www.lexology.com/gtdt/tool/workareas/report/asset-recovery/chapter/cayman-islands

I'm not a lawyer and we don't have all the facts, but the possibility of a stay might explain the absence of the 'Discovery' in the Cayman's and may also be linked with the non-payment.

Gipps51 - IMHO if BP are finalizing a deal for Block 12, then it makes sense that the Chief Accountant for FEGL would be seeking another job.

Gipps51 - If the $19bn is true, then we are near the 3%, which would be around $48bn ( 3 x $16bn). The GG gets 51% of the oil and there's the 5% royalty in FRCC to consider. The $19bn would equate to FRR's 49% share, therefore 100% = $38.7755bn (but not including the 5% royalty). The $38.7755bn is for only 95% of Block 12, which equates to a value of $40.8163 for the whole of Block 12.

AJW - $19bn = £15.2704bn using today's rate of 1 GBP = 1.24424 USD or 1 USD = 0.803706 GBP.
Therefore, with 15,760,835,403 shares = a share price of 96.888p. Plenty for a special dividend, leaving enough to drill Moldova and Ukraine, assuming FRR win the tender.
https://www.xe.com/currencyconverter/convert/?Amount=19&From=USD&To=GBP

Sorry, the last part of the 17:36 post should read :-
Therefore, the 5% royalty = (667.5 x 5/100 = 33.375)Mbls/y x $60/bbl = $2002.5m. After deducting the GG's 51%, FRR would receive $981.225m, which is £788.337m at todays exchange rate of 1GBP = 1.24468USD. This equates to a dividend of 5p with 15.76bn shares.

Gipps51 - That's from the CPR. There's been plenty of work since and it would have cost money to have another CPR. Remember Zaza stated we have 202TCF of gas and 18MMbbls of oil and the super majors think we have more. The Eldari B proves we have more, as I don't think that was included in the CPR.

I've copied my reply to AussieB from the 6th May below :-
AussieB - The deal I'm referring to is between the GG and FRR for the transfer of 95% Block 12. However, it's possible that the super majors have come to the same valuation. The valuation is based upon the price of oil this year at around $60/b, with a typical buyout price is 1 - 3% of the in ground valuation. Block 12 contains 18kMMbbls oil and 202TCF (at the same recoverable rates as the figures in the CPR = 2.9kMMbbls and 140TCF) . If this is converted to oil equivalent (1TCF = 170MMbbls oil) = 2.9 + 23.8 = 26.7kMMbbls. At $60/b = $16bn, therefore FRR's half share of production = $8bn at the 1% valuation. The 5% left in FRCC would then be equivalent to $400m, which is the value of the sunk costs. The 5% left in FRCC could also satisfy the judge that it was provision for the debt owed to SH/O, who could have then negotiated with the GG to recover the $20m in exchange (Grimbold and regdik both suggested that the 5% could have been provision for the SH/O debt). All conjecture, but the figures seem to equate.

Therefore, if there's a buyout of Block 12 $19bn would be within the 1-3% typical price of the in ground valuation. As the GG gets 51% of production, then the $19bn equates to a valuation of around $40bn ( 5% will remain in FRCC, as it is at present under the control of the liquidators). Once SH/O is paid (either from money from FRR or damages paid when FRR win in court ), then the 5% royalty after splitting with the GG will become a very good future dividend.
Just for illustration, if the hydrocarbons were extracted over 40 years, then when at full production 26.7MMbls/40 = 667.5Mbls/y. Therefore, the 5% royalty = (667.5 x 5/100 = 33.375)Mbls/y x $60/bbl = $2002.5bn. After deducting the GG's 51%, FRR would receive $981.225m, which is £788.337m at todays exchange rate of 1GBP = 1.24468USD. This equates to a dividend of 5p with 15.76bn shares.

Zib - My Answer to bedex's request of a 'business as usual' type of message from FRR is why I see the the need for total lockdown (I've copied my post from last night below).

Bedex - IMHO a 'business as usual' type of message from FRR would not be good enough for a lot of shareholders. Also, TW et al would no doubt put negative spin on such a statement, pointing out the lack of clarity on flow rates equates to very poor flow rates. If FRR release the flow rates then it may attract more super majors into negotiations. I have always thought that Block 12 will end up with a consortium of super majors, namely BP, BH and ExxonMobil and I still think this could happen. If FRR are negotiating with up to three companies it will take time, but add another one or two and the negotiations will take very much longer. FRR don't have lots of time as they need to pay off SH/O within 12 months and to appease the GG. Therefore, the only scenario which makes sense is to keep schtum.

Bedex - IMHO a 'business as usual' type of message from FRR would not be good enough for a lot of shareholders. Also, TW et al would no doubt put negative spin on such a statement, pointing out the lack of clarity on flow rates equates to very poor flow rates. If FRR release the flow rates then it may attract more super majors into negotiations. I have always thought that Block 12 will end up with a consortium of super majors, namely BP, BH and ExxonMobil and I still think this could happen. If FRR are negotiating with up to three companies it will take time, but add another one or two and the negotiations will take very much longer. FRR don't have lots of time as they need to pay off SH/O within 12 months and to appease the GG. Therefore, the only scenario which makes sense is to keep schtum.

Freeatlast - If FRR don't pay all their bills they will not be keeping afloat, therefore, there's no need to single out any bill like YA's. I haven't mentioned paying off SH/O before the 12 month deadline.

IMHO the $60m and the $150m loans were both about leverage in a deal with the super majors and until SH was off the board the loans could have been vetoed. Without a loan then the super majors may have only offered a small price for Block 12, as FRR would not be able to demonstrate that they could progress. IMHO the $150m loan will be signed off but never drawn.
Prior to the loan, if the production revenue was enough to pay off SH/O and keep FRR afloat (maybe with additional money from SN and Zm), then why risk capital drilling more wells. If something went wrong with the first well it would have a negative impact on both the loan and any deal with the super majors. Furthermore, without any extra production, the reduced capital may have stopped FRR signing the DOS. IMHO this is like a game of chess and FRR don't need to force the play, but just let the game unfold as they know they have the winning strategy.

alwaysbeclosing - IMHO the name's a clue. He'll always be closing his shorts. Another numpty for the filter pool. Your filtered, goodbye.

There was a placing in March 2018 just before suspension from AIM, where the total shares increased to 220m. If we can vote to increase to 500m, is there a chance of deal? Are we being offered a choice between more than double the number of shares or oblivion, or is it just box ticking before oblivion?

Posts by Oopsi @ 15:19 and ZiggyZag @ 15:37 have been copied to the Frontera Archive :-

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=17

Posts by Jonathansxx and Phil_2018 on Tuesday; Taffy52 and Ivyspivey2 yesterday; and Dave73 @12:07, have all been added to the Frontera Archive.

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=17

Why is the news of Zaza no longer on the Atlantic Council being brought up again, as I posted about this on the 25th June (post copied below) and copied it to the Frontera Archive?

There have been plenty of posts about SN's past involvement with the Atlantic Council, but I can't remember reading about ZM being a director (see page 33/36 in the first link below and 116/117 in the second link below).

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/Climate_Leadership_in_Uncertain_Times.pdf

https://issuu.com/atlanticcouncil/docs/downstream_oil_theft_web_0106

ZM was also listed on page 11/12 of the first link below, which was from January 1st 2019. However, ZM is not listed on May 8th 2019 in the second link below ;-

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/Transatlantic_Air_Power_and_What_to_Do_Now.pdf

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/about/board-of-directors

https://www.lse.co.uk/chat/general/commodities-and-mining/frontera-archive-41C7D130-7E51-4344-82E7-83B697F53322.html?page=16

bedex - Why did BP wait years to buy into the Permian Basin, which has similar permeability and porosity to Block 12? I'll give you a clue, the unconventional geology took a couple of decades to crack, as the wells silted up just like in Block 12 . Then add the problems with SH/O; the drop in the POO; the invasion; hostile takeover attempts; the arbitration; and the suspected naked shorting by YA. This all added to the time and cost to get FRR to a point where the super majors are hopefully ready to sign on the dotted line. The super majors may have offered a deal in the past which was not acceptable to FRR, as until there's proof that the hydrocarbons are not just present, but can be extracted, the price would have been too low.

While the production was thought to have peaked in the early 1970s, new technologies for oil extraction, such as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have increased production dramatically(copied from the link below).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian_Basin_(North_America)
https://www.dallasnews.com/business/energy/2018/07/27/bp-gets-foothold-permian-basin-biggest-deal-two-decades