Member Info for Manyana

But why does PVR not tell us what the problem is? Because it does not know.

It knows the money went into the system but it does not know why it has not come out. Who knows how it will end up. Providence is hedging its bets because it does not know, obviously.

After all, O'Reilly is as worried as the rest of us otherwise why is he an insomniac and keeps ringing APEC at 4.30am in the morning which is about 11.30am Hong Kong time.

For whatever reason, the money is locked somewhere in a quagmire and until HSBC transfers it or says it is illegitimate and won't be paid that is where it will stay until it is cleared one way or the other.

If Providence had had millions in the bank this situation would not have arisen but ti is its shortage of cash that has caused the problem as it is clear this issue could go on for months until their remaining cash had run out, hence the capital raise last Monday. But it is no harm to sort this thing out now as the $9m is only the entry point to a $200m development. If the $9m is "hot" bang goes the Barryroe development until Providence gets a new partner.

If this phase can be corrected the rest should follow and since the actual drilling will be with COSL which is a wholly owned subsidiary of CNOOC it is clear CNOOC must have a vested interest in Barryroe no matter how you dress it up and it is possible it is that "hidden" relationship which is causing this problem.

Obviously Providence are as confused as the rest of us and the equity raise the other day was just an insurance policy against the whole thing becoming a bag of worms.

How do I know the money was sent as a transfer from APEC to Providence? Because HSBC said so. The question is why it did not arrive? And it wasn't in that churn you talk about because I found it and it was empty. Perhaps you got there first?

Why would HSBC, named Best Bank In the World in the past, make such a statement confirming that APEC had transferred $9m? Why would it lie for APEC? And has it said the money has come out of the system or is it still in there somewhere?

Has O'Reilly only given us half of the story? Money in, yes, but hasn't told us the money is out. Pride perhaps?

I read O'Reily's statement that HSBC had confirmed the transfer from APEC but have you heard something else or do you think he is telling lies? If he is he is liable to go to jail. Perhaps we could all visit him in Mountjoy or Portlaoise as he languishes there with all those IRA renegades, shoplifters and car thieves. Or even worse, he could end up in the back end of nowhere in Clondalkin.

Answers on a postcard please.

Longwait,

How do you know it is not as a result of the riots? Fact or speculation?

Surely it is not for APEC to prove that its financiers are legitimate but for the financiers to do that. How long is a piece of string?

If APEC has posted the money then it cannot be in breech of contract. It is only in breech of contract if the funds deposited into the transaction are proven to be fraudulent and are therefore not legitimate tender.

You then ask a strange question "If APEC have told HSBC they will provide it, how long is HSBC prepared to wait? If you are talking about the money, HSBC have said they received it but if you mean the proof that's like asking your neighbour "are you sleeping with my wife?" instead of you asking your wife.

And, by the way, I am not saying this is what has happened de facto but saying it is a possibility.

According to people like you, APEC is lying and has not deposited $9m payable tp Providence. HSBC are lying because they said APEC had. Providence is lying because it says HSBC has agreed that the money is in the system?

So why is everybody lying according to you?

I await your proof that HSBC business in Hong Kong is not being disrupted because of the riots. I will gladly accept your proof when you supply it.

How do you know remittances are being made to and from HK with issue and how do you know they are coming from HSBC?

It is HSBC's support for China that has put them at loggerheads with the protesters.

Proof please.

For the last four months HSBC business has been disrupted by the riots in Hong Kong. And as most of HSBC's business comes from mainland China do you not think they could easily be holding up the APEC money as they are having a major impact on ever aspect of Hong Kong business.

And worst of all, the riots have now curtailed horse racing in Hong Kong which has always been one of their main attractions as today's headlinesays "Hong Kong Protests: weekly horse race cancelled due to political unrest". Disaster. Things are really bad in Hong Kong when the racing is cancelled.

So we might not see APEC money until the riots and unrest in Hong Kong are put to bed. When that might be is anybody's guess.

Anovas,

Here are two men and their dog who can get access to $1billion. Obviously they have not got the cash in hand but will only get it when they buy an asset but they want to go back to Africa where Plunkett wants to go with T5 as well. Obviously it is easier dealing with African countries' governments than the Irish one when it comes to oil.

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. When will the Irish Government learn that playing politics is alright for Europe but in the end it makes you poor.

The main issue is that Heavey will have nothing to do with O'Reilly or his family so there is no way he would want to get involved other than to buy EXOLA but O'Reilly would fight tooth and nail to stop that.

On another issue that seems to have been missed.

How did the issue of Providence working outside of Ireland come up and what exactly was the proposal?

I wonder was it Plunkett's or O'Reilly's idea for Providence to work outside of Ireland which came up as an "unexpected" motion at the EGM as it was not on the voting sheet. I see that it was kiboshed at the EGM by the Institutional investors.

This issue obviously only came up at the EGM as it was not on the ballot sheet. Can anybody who attended tell us how the issue was raised, who raised it, and how it became a resolution as it was not on the EGM circular. I presume it was raised by Plunkett and O'Reilly and I note it was voted against so who actually voted against it? Was this an attempt by Plunkett et al to roll Providence into T5 or vice versa?

Does anybody know?

Aidan Heavey raises $1billion for new oil venture. And Tony can't get a puny $9m.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/energy-and-resources/tullow-founder-aidan-heavey-secures-1bn-for-new-oil-and-gas-venture-1.4036236

Goodbye.

APEC and its connections to CNOOC through COSL cannot be a scam. The Chinese government would be lining up the management to shoot them if they were.

It is a simple binary choice. Either the money is dirty or it is clean. If it is clean it will come through at some point. If it is dirty it will be confiscated and the APEC deal is off. China is the world's death penalty leader so who is going to mess with them. APEC's and Providence's hands until the money issue is resolved.

Yesterday, Providence took out an insurance policy against "dirty" money by raising the $3.7m which keeps it afloat, they say until next February 2020 which seems short to me given that they still have a little in the bank and they say their new annual run rate is about $1.9m. But I suppose caution is the watch word.

I am sure O'Reilly is playing it close to his chest but who wouldn't. After all, why did he not raise $5m which would have lasted a further year and he could easily have done that given it was so easy to raise $3.7. And now with the new management structure of 3 with himself at the helm who is going to fire him or blame him?

At least, compared to other shares, Providence is exciting and ever changing. There are a number in my portfolio which just sit and beg even though they gently grow. Providence on the other hand can be hell today and possibly heaven tomorrow.

That is why I call myself "Manyana" because you never know what tomorrow brings. Unlike Kinegaad who thought he could confuse us by using its Irish name.

How is it that nobody has mentioned, other than me, the fact that in the same RNS as the abortive money from APEC that Providence mentions the abandonment by Total of the Diablo Ridge license.

Total had only two license interests in Ireland, - FEL 2/14 (35%) and - FEL 2/19 (50%). Today it has only one FEL 2/19 which is also shared with Providence.

So why mention Total in the same RNS as APEC and to point out that they have dropped Diablo Ridge? Clearly Total is being lined up as the replacement for APEC and the sooner the better.

As I said before, I would be happy for Providence to pull out of the APEC deal because there was always the danger than APEC would just mothball it but with Total on the horizon and keen to expand its oil reserves it would make an excellent partner.

A Jauguar AF is a frivolity and should only be bought out of frivolity.

Better to put the €50,000 into Providence now and have a million before long but I don't think my neighbours would be too enamoured to see me driving around in a Rolls-Royce Dawn or Wraith.

Saw a beautiful bright red XF the other day, beautiful lines and that would be good enough for me. Other than Rolls-Royce, Jaguar is the quintessential English marque (even though now owned by the Indians), so not for me those German tin boxes so it will look good but not too posh.

And I would like it in honour of our founder and mentor, Sir Anthony O'Reilly who was known in his executive days in the past to be seen driving around the streets of Dublin in a Jaguar "E" Type.

I'll tell you what, Cionnathagad, any house I bought would be better than the ********s in Kinnegad where I presume you come from given your name. Kinnegad, the last man standing's cheap commute to Dublin. You are welcome to it.

When you consider I have been in this company since it was Atlantic you should have a good idea what prices I paid for these over the years when you could buy them for peanuts. In fact, I got into Atlantic/Providence through a share inheritance for which I paid nothing as they were left to me by a person who thought that the sun, moon and stars shone out of daddy O'Reilly's rear end.

In fact, I participated in the 100:1 consolidation and I also invested in the 25p distribution so how do you think I failed to make money when they went up to nearly £7 from next to nothing. Get real.

Then you ask me why I chose 70p. Shows how stupid you are. These shares, when there were only 60m went to £7. Now there are effectively 600m shares so a price of 70p puts the company effectively on the same valuation. as it was after the Barryroe find. So, 70p is not a figment of my imagination but is an effective price for the shares to reach the same parity. Do the sums.

Have been buying more this morning as the current price is ridiculous. The MMs are having a field day with this and will end up making the biggest killing of their whole portfolio.

As for APEC, they are obvioiusly still in the race but not the only runner and the move by Total to ditch Diablo which I could never understand why they took it in the first place is interesting as Total would be one of my preferred targets to get involved in Barryroe and hopefully on the same terms as APEC.

With the withdrawal of Diablo, Total has next to nothing in terms of licenses in Ireland now reduced to one which is years away from being developed so with the new embargo on licenses Barryroe is an excellent way to get a foothold and Total are keen to find new development opportunities.

https://www.total.com/en/ireland

So, goodbye APEC and hello Total would be brilliant and you can bet the shares in Providence will be way north of 4p.

The only current fly in that ointment is that Providence have obviously already signed over 50% of the shares in Exola to APEC which they must now get back. How stupid to do that before they got the money.

The fact you sold them at a "small" profit is the very essence of the laugh I am having. And I have been here much longer than you think but I decided at first to say nothing until f**ls like you kept saying things which are totally false which gives me the opportunity, to show you up for the fool (s) that you are as a form of mental gymnastics.

Please point out something that I said which cannot be verified either in the DCCAE oil license conditions or Providence's website or company law. It is clear that most people on here haven't the first idea about any one of them or how to apply them in what is a very complex legal world.

Please put me a list of what I said which is not correct - verbal diarrhoea ( reckon with your brain you spellchecked that one) you called it - or, in the event you can't, why don't you just do an oozlum bird trick and give us all some peace.

And I hope you are holding far fewer shares than I and I bet I make more money out of mine than you do out of yours because I do what you cannot do - research. Its all there if you know where to look even though you want to call it bulls**t.

I love being a pretentious prick in your case because it really gets up your nose. On that basis I am the winner as it is you who is frothing at the mouth and I am having a good laugh at your expense.

Keep it up and make sure you do not have a heart attack as you spew into your cornflakes

Would you prefer to invest in Tullow Oil or Providence?

Given Tullow's debt it will take at least six years profits to pay it off and that is as long as the oil price stays at a reasonable level of about $60 a barrel. Providence, on the other hand has no debt and about $4.5m in the bank as of this morning.

As for the loan from APEC, perhaps people forgot what was written on 5th June where it says:

"The Company understands that this delay is due, in part, to a change in the composition of APEC’s funding mechanism. The Company will issue a further update in due course. "

So whoever has either taken over the funding or has come into the loan has got to be vetted for non-money laundering. Perhaps it takes this long to clear.

Who knows, who cares. At least Providence is solvent and that is all that matters.

Ranger4. If Providence shares go to 50p will you agree to pay O'Reilly €1m a year?

Another who knows nothing about how a company works. The CEO's salary is based on a financial committee made up of board members and while shareholders can object they have no power.

So, Ranger, as of tomorrow there are three directors in Providence. O'Reilly acting as CEO, and two non-executive directors, Pat Plunkett and Angus McCoss. Which of them is going to tell O'Reilly, legally, what his salary should be?

More sounds of screech owls I hear.

I am not a hack but the crazy comments I read on here has certainly "hacked" me off.

Longwait. A Bit of reality at last.

APEC says the money is in the HSBC system and Providence previously stated that APEC's funders had changed. And, as you say, either APEC are liars, HSBC are liars and Providence are liars. However, if the money is in the system and for what ever length it stays there the APEC deal is "ON".

If, on the other hand, we have been led up the garden path then somebody should be in jail because they have supplied false information which is not allowed under financial services and/or company law.

Providence can have as many "backstops" as it likes but APEC have done their part if the money as been transferred into the system for delivery to them so the "deal" is on backstop or no backstop.

As for the share price. For those who remember what happened in 2012 between March and April. In March Providence share price was for the birds when it announced it had found oil in Barryroe. In April 2012 Providence raised $100m at a share price of £4.80 a share selling 13.1m shares. March, peanuts, April bonanza. Here is the broker forecast for that time.

Providence Resources (AIM:PVR) BUY Share price 695p Target price 1,538p 121% Upside Market cap (£m) 448.

And here are the six-month figures from that time.
http://www.providenceresources.com/sites/default/files/interimresultshalfyearjune2012-finaltables.pdf

So it is very simple. It is a binary bet. If APEC comes good or Providence find another partner share price will be 70p based on that broker forecast (back then there were 60m shares now there are about 660m).

If no APEC money Providence will bumble on and will do a deal with either Total, BP or Cairn and the share price should go back to say 10p on a promise and I will still be covered.

But I know what I have done and I know if they hit 70p I will buy myself a nice big red Jaguar XF, a few fat cigars and have a ball. What will you naysayers do if I am right?

Let's see who is right and while peole on iii wished I was dead at least I am not brain dead which seems to be the timbre of this particular BB which seems to have more in common with screech owls based on their comments than with sense or reason.

That's rubbish Mamms.

If you ever ran a company you would know that in a takeover losses can often be the biggest advantage. Some of the biggest takeovers in history was just to get hold of losses to offset taxes. Technically you end up buying a company for nothing if the losses exceed what you pay for it.

How much is Providence worth without Barryroe? About $250m. Why? Because every cent you spend looking for oil can come out of the profits you make and Providence has spent that amount over the years on failed projects all of which can be repaid out of Barryroe profits or can be transferred to a third party if one was to buy either Providence or Exola?

Why do you think O'Reilly has been running around for the last seven years on futile projects instead of developing Barryroe? Two things would happen. They would find billions of barrels of oil in another hole and it would become a major asset in its own right or they could use the costs of the futile development against future Barryroe profits.

So now that oil exploration has been closed off to new entrants to the Irish scene because there will be no new licenses issued the only way into the market is by buying somebody else who must continue to trade to take advantages of those losses.

Ireland oil and gas licenses are the most beneficial in the world and so anybody who comes in for Providence has to keep them as the developer to make use of those losses.

This information is all contained in the licensing agreements with DCCAE and was the terms agreed by both Ray Burke and Pat Rabbite when both were Ministers for Communication and they bent over backwards to get offshore oil exploration going in the hope of attracting the majors.

Another interesting point. If anybody finds oil or gas in Irish waters it must be sold to an Irish interest. You cannot just "tank" it back to China, for example, unless you pay for it first in Ireland.

Finally, your point about our 10%. 10% of today's price at 4.75p equates to .475p a share. You could not even buy a sweet for that so it is totally irrelevant. If you are brave the shares are a snip at that price and you might never get the chance to buy the shares at 4.75p again.

That's rubbish Mamms.

How much is Providence worth without Barryroe? About $250m. Why? Because every cent you spend looking for oil can come out of the profits you make and Providence has spent that amount over the years on failed projects all of which can be repaid out of Barryroe?

Why do you think O'Reilly has been running around for the last seven years on futile projects instead of developing Barryroe? Two things would happen. They would find billions of barrels of oil in another hole or they could use the costs against Barryroe's profits.

So now that oil exploration has been closed off to new entrants to the Irish scene because there will be no new licenses issued the only way into the market is by buying somebody else who must continue to trade to take advantages of those losses.

Ireland oil and gas licenses are the most beneficial in the world and so anybody who comes in for Providence has to keep them as the developer to make use of those losses.

This information is all contained in the licensing agreements with DCCAE and was the terms agreed by both Ray Burke and Pat Rabbite when both were Ministers for Communication and they bent over backwards to get offshore oil exploration going.

Another interesting point. If anybody finds oil or gas in

Have you ever been to Malta? The last thing you need there is a tanning machine and O'Reilly lives there.

His wife and children live there and I presume he needs his salary to fly there every weekend.

Interesting day on Monday. Hopefully we have some closure to this debacle one way or the other. APEC in or APEC out but not more sitting on this fence. Plenty of big fish in the North Sea to get another partner especially as I presume they are more confident now after the survey of the two sites.