Member Info for Manyana

Daddy, it seems, is now living in France in a big chateau even though he claims he is bankrupt. A judge wants him in America in a month's time to answer questions about his nurse. His solicitors claim he is too ill to travel so is he perhaps on the way out and they need somebody to look after mummie's money?

The nurse claims he promised her millions in Providence shares back when Daddy owned about 45% of the company. What are her chances?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/us-judge-orders-tony-oreilly-to-testify-in-pennsylvania-in-former-nurses-case-93c9pfg2l

Ranger4,

You forget that Barryroe is a major financial asset and Providence has been paying through the nose for that asset in liicense fees over the years and they have invested $175m in exploration costs which can be reclaimed against Barryroe.

If they are prevented from developing it you can be sure the present "gang" will be seeking redress in the courts to reclaim those payments. That was the reason the Smith "bill" was rejected because the government reckoned they would have to pay up under the "money message" provision.

If you have the courage to listen to the dog fight that is taking place in Ireland with the run up to the election you can listen to this.

Remember, this is the pack who could have a big bearing on the future of Barryroe.

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/claire-byrne-live-leaders-debate/SI0000006738?epguid=IH000383124

Fine Gael plans to "move to 70% renewable electricity by 2030." That still needs 30% from other sources and removing coal and peat will mean it has to come from oil and gas. They know even 70% is a fudge but at least they have put their foot in the water.

This world has gone mad.

The latest statement from the UK is that by 2030 there will be ten million electric cars on the roads in the UK. So what happens to the other 30 million cars, what are they going to use? Lies, more lies and damn lies.

Last week there was a quote on parking in the UK which said "there are 37.5 million cars in the UK and only 8 million parking spaces". The program was to do with illegal parking so I am sure the DVLA provided the figure of 37.5m. With natural increase we can expect this to rise to at least 40 million by 2030.

So the statement that there will be 10 million electric cars by then means that, unless they can develop a car that runs on water or air, 30 million cars will still be using diesel, petrol or gas by 2030. And they think they can do that with renewables?

And what about tearing out the 10 million gas boilers and replacing them with electrically running heat exchange units at a cost of £10,000 a time?

So gas will certainly be essential for decades to come and oil will not be far behind. If Ireland wants to be a minion of the Russians for gas now that Brexit has happened and there is no guarantee that the UK will continue to pass it gas, surely there is a lot to be said about developing local resources and in that context surely Barryroe is the best option on the table which has at least some chance of delivering that.

Trouble is, on a bad day, Fine Fail and Fine Gael may not total 80 seats between them. And certainly on a very good day neither of them will exceed the 80 seats so it will be a hung parliament either way. And unless Sinn Fein does extremely well they will not have enough with either to exceed the 80 seats either.

The one ray of hope is that Brid Smith will lose her seat in Dublin South Central. Last time she won beating the Fine Fail candidate by 35 votes for the last seat. Fine Fail should do better this time which means, hopefully, Brid Smith is for the birds. The only danger is that the Fine Gael candidate could lose her seat which would let Smith back in.

This Irish election is more precarious than the one held in England where Boris performed way above expectations.

The onl

Hung parliament is a certainty but the issue is whether Sinn Fein perform as well as the polls say.

They are currently equal top with Fine Fail with Fine Gael in third place. That could mean Sinn Fein hold the balance of power. And even though both Fine Gael and Fine Fail say they will not go into a coalition with them you might find one or other does in a last ditch stand.

If they get in, expect a vote on a United Ireland within two years.

Probably no RNS before 8th February when the Irish election will be held. No point in telling us what the future will hold until we see the colour of the new government.

Looks like a hung parliament but Sinn Fein could actually hold the balance of power. If that happens all hell will break out and we will all be going there in handcart.

Tomorrow week for the election and possibly the week after for an RNS.

First of all, the surveys did site clearance as well as environmental work. Check out Providence site on this.

Furthermore, the issue with Barryroe has always been that drilling holes have found numerous oil locations but they do not know, or at least they have not told us, they are all joined. up. In the work schedule it was estimated they would need 24 wells. That does not indicate joined up to scatter gun.

And we have never heard anything more about the gas. We know that PSE have permission to decommission the two well heads and now they are looking to decommission the piplines et al. "The Minister previously consented to the plugging and abandoning of wells and the removal of the the two platform topsides structures. A further application will be made in due course which will encompass all remaining structures in the gas fields,"

This is dated last September and as of yet it would seem the final decision has not been made by the DCCAE but I would suspect, if Providence is interested in any of this infrastructure whey will wait until the final decision because decommissioning is very expensive and if they took it over before the deal to decommission was given it would save PSE a lot of money.

Forget the TOR bashers. There are two ways to look at TOR. Either he was too foolish or too unlucky. His big mistake was to raise some $200m and not develop Barryroe. The question "Why? has always worried me with the niggling thought that Barryroe is not what O'Reilly "talked" it up to be and he left before the proverbial hit the fan.

Was it greed or stupidity that stopped O'Reilly and then his big mouth on top of that got him the boot?

What intrigues me now is that Linn is no more than two weeks in the job when he submits a site survey for a new spot in Barryroe. That location cannot have been chosen by him unless he has divine powers so the presumption it was chosen by McCoss. But why was it chosen? What was wrong with the other two which they surveyed last September that they had to choose another one or is it just to protect the license? Is this the "sweet spot" that links all the previous finds together?

So there are far more questions than answers and we have still to see the colour of our new man's money The only thing we can do is wait for some sort of clarification or will it be another dose of the "proverbials".?

They have to speak soon if not for anything more than the EGM to put in place the options scheme and then they have to get the Annual accounts for 2019, which I presume will not make pleasant reading, ready and presented so we can only hang on and hope for the best.

So let's get the hankies out and wave O'Reilly off as tomorrow is his last day as a "consultant". Perhaps the new world starts in earnest on Monday morning. As I say may "manyana" bring us hope as long as it is not like the old saying "tomorrow never comes".

We still do not know why they have decided to do a third survey. What was wrong with the other two or is the third one, specified by Linn, part of a new campaign as specified in the following item.

https://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/gardline-wraps-up-barryroe-site-survey-for-providence/

You will note that this article states "EXOLA (40%), a Providence subsidiary, " whereas the Linn request for a site survey to DCCAE states "Exola DAC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Providence Resources plc" so they have obviously got the shares back from APEC. So does this mean full steam ahead?

Perhaps we will only get an RNS when Tony has finally left. Either way, it would be good for them to tell us something about the new strategy and we will surely hear about a funding in February if no new deal is around the corner.

In the meantime, the share price drifts lower but then, what's new?

Thank you Bronxville.

Especially when you are a bit of a f(arse). Reading your postings I reckon you don't have two brain waves to rub together.

There is no point in contacting the company. They will only tell you what they want or what affects the company via an RNS.

I see Tony's profile now designates him as "self employed".

Interesting statement in site survey request.

It says "Exola DAC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Providence Resources plc" which means Providence now owns all the shares in EXOLA DAC. Does this mean they have retrieved the shares from APEC? After all, with 50% of the shares owned by APEC, EXOLA was not a "wholly owned subsidiary" of Providence and not even partially owned because it did not have a minimum of 51% of the shares.

Furthermore, EXOLA is a DAC (Designated Activity Company) which means it has to have two directors. Who are they?

As for the survey, it is interesting that they are applying for this survey when they already carried out two in September last year. So why are they doing a third? Is it because they have discovered "the sweet spot"?

The one sure thing about the survey is that it is current as the request letter is signed by "Alan Linn, Chief Executive Officer".

And who is going to pay for it? We did not discover last year where the money came to do the survey in September but having got permission from DCCAE it was necessary to do those to protect the interest in Barryroe.

The first RNS from the new gang at Providence will be rather interesting. Still no sign of it but they are obviously doing something given this request and we are now in Annual Accounts period for the year ending 31st December 2019 which must appear sometime in the near future unless they are going to drag those out as long as possible with a final date of 30th June at the latest.

Nobody has answered my question, "why has Linn been "given" 15m share options when they don't exist?"

You cannot have share options without a share option scheme and we won't have one of those until it is voted on in the EGM which has still to be announced.

Does anybody want to hazard a guess.

Then give me a reason why he took the job when it is potentially no better than the one he left.

And why have they issued him with options, technically illegally, when no options exist? They have no option scheme in existence to offer them. It is a future offer only to determine an option price.

The options can only come into effect after the EGM and only then if approved by the shareholders. We have still not been told when the EGM will take place and there is also the situation regarding the February run out of cash and there is also the position of the accounts for 2019.

So he takes over a company with nothing more than a wing and a prayer. Why?

To make any real money out of those options at 4p, with a potential money raise in February where the share price will probably sink once more below 2p if no good news appears he would have to get the price up to say 14p within a year to exercise 5m options at 10p a share profit giving him £500k less 11% USC off the top plus £200,000 tax equating to far less than O'Reilly's salary which he took tax free because it was though a "foreign" consultancy.

So all we have is another b/s merchant who according to Plunkett has the mantra "“Alan recognizes the considerable potential of the company’s assets, in particular Barryroe, and I am sure he will enhance our options in taking this exciting project to the next stage," said chairman Pat Plunkett.

So what's new? So why did he take the job other than he is another ex Tullow discard.

Perhaps to continue the conspiracy theory O'Reilly left because he knew the game was up and that Barryroe is nothing more than a bag of worms.

After all, if it was such a bonanza why did he not develop it over the years and if he needed money, if it were a gift from the gods, why did he not persuade his step-mother to develop it. After all, she is so rich she would have plenty of the readies being worth somewhere in the order of $2.5billion.

Perhaps she has now given him some of that and that is why he is now off to live a life of luxury. Why put up with the hassle when she lives in the Bahamas which is probably as nice a place as Malta.

How is that for a theory?

"I don't see why a major would insist on a company changing its CEO as a condition of doing a deal."

Exactly.

But a CEO with a reasonable bundle of shares along with the Chairman with his 1.75m shares and options would agree for the CEO to go if a deal was dependent on a different CEO.

And what is Linn coming into this bag of worms for as he has been around the block so often he must have a good idea of the market by now and at 62 he has only three years until Ireland's official retirement age of 65. With what is there now it cannot surely be the Great Hurrah.

And If O'Reilly was "pushed" why did he agree to stay on as a consultant until the end of January and why is he not working out his two year contract? Has he been promised a big pay off when things get better? All good reasons to stand down if there is a hope of some bunce from a project which is potentially worth billions but is currently worth nothing.

Simple question: why have your shares got any less rights than a major investor? Every share in a company is equal and has a single voting right so one share have no more power than the next. The only reason a major investor might have more rights than you is because they have more shares which they can use in a vote.

Have we had a vote? Did you get a request to vote O'Reilly off? No, nor did I and if it had been used without our permission we would sue Providence for abuse and misuse.

Here is the official position on shareholders voting off a CEO.

"Shareholders can exercise their voting rights in person at the corporation's annual general meeting or other special meeting convened for voting purposes, or by proxy. Proxy forms are sent to shareholders, along with their invitations, to attend the shareholders' meeting. These forms list and describe all the issues on which shareholders have the right to vote. A shareholder may elect to fill out the form and mail in his or her votes on the issues rather than voting in person."

And just to prove that each share has an equal right here is the statement from the EGM where it stated:

"Following Admission, the Company's total issued and voting share capital will comprise 657,424,848 ordinary shares of €0.001 each. This figure may be used by shareholders as the denominator for the calculations by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, securities of the Company under the FCA's Disclosure and Transparency Rules."

So it could only be done in an AGM or an EGM. Was an EGM vote called and did you receive notice as we had the AGM?

Otherwise, you are saying Providence ignored company law.

Just a further point. If O'Reilly was remiss with the deal with APEC and it heralded his demise why has Boldy CEO/Executive Director at Lansdowne not fallen on his sword too?

Surely he was party to the APEC deal having agreed to put 10% of Lansdowne's 20% into the pot which means he agreed the deal was a runner.

So, if O'Reilly is guilty so is Boldy. So why is he still there?

I think fantasy has taken over this discussion. O'Reilly left of his own free will and there has to be a reason for it. Looking for "goblins" in the fire is a waste of time.

Two points obviously missed; if O'Reilly had done something wrong or had not decided to go of his own free will why has he agreed to stay on as a consultant until the end of January and, furthermore, he had a contract running for two years with a one year notice starting in 2019 so he could only have been given notice in 2020 with one year to run.

So dreaming up Sherlock Holmes strategies, why not look at the facts. The shareholders could not get rid of him even if they formed a claque and said they would all pull their money out but neither they or you or I could insist on him leaving without an EGM to vote him out.

So, lets get real, follow the rules of company law and wait to see what the next move will be.

So why did he go with those terms and conditions? Because something better was coming along. We don't know what that is but hopefully in time all will be revealed.

A further thought crossed my mind. Why did Providence announce a share options deal to Linn when no share option scheme actually exists. They have, in fact, offered him an option deal on the basis that a new deal will be agreed at the EGM.

They also offered him the option deal now while the shares were grovelling around the 4p mark, as that is how the new deal, presumably will work, based on the share price the day before the offer.

So, by preempting the new deal and granting Linn potential share options, which of course is legal, they must anticipate that the share price is going to rise, possibly before the EGM which will ratify the share options scheme.

Given that we have once again entered the twilight zone of a share price drifting downwards a bit of good news would not go amiss.