Member Info for Manyana

I don't believe you have the option to put questions at an EGM.

And why would it be only for management and directors. I know it is the last day for two of our directors who are vanishing into the mist leaving only O'Reilly, Plunkett and McCoss but surely the two departing directors are not going to make any decisions since they are for the birds.

And of course shareholders can attend because they have to vote either in person or by proxy or through their nominee. I have some historic shares which are not in a nominee account and I have already had my proxy form which I have sent back but alternatively I could have attended and voted in person.

I would like an explanation of the following from the presentation on the 12th where it says:

JUNE 2019 - SEPT 2019
PAYMENT EXTENSIONS
AGREED WITH APEC

What does "Agreed with APEC" mean? It sounds like Providence saying "Would you like an extension?" and APEC saying "Yes please!!!" Strange way to do business.

If this is subject to the Patriot Act then Providence are strapped until the money is released or is pronounced "dirty" and is not passed through which could take months. So how did O'Reilly claim at the AGM that it would be ready by next Monday when they hold the EGM?

And if it was subject to the Patriot Act why have they been bulls***g all along about backstops? Why did they not just come out and say it was in the Patriot Act process? After all Plunkett has been borrowing billions for Tullow over the years, used to run a stockmarket for ABN AMRO in Ireland and surely knows his way round the financial markets. Has he lost his marbles since he joined Providence?

So how was O'Reilly able to say that the money would be there by next Monday? Can anybody at the AGM enlighten us?

If somebody expressed that opinion on iii they would have been banned. I stopped using iii when they made a dog's dinner of the site which, in the main, was a very good site up to then. I even had iii shares back in its early days and made money out of them.

As for you, if you give it you have to be willing to accept it, and given you vitriol it is clear you have been shafted here over the years and you haven't got the first clue as to what a narcissist is but you seem to like the sound of the word. So if you want a word battle be my guest and you will certainly come out second best.

That is what upset the people on iii when it was clear they hadn't got a clue what they were talking about and it was pointed out to them when they thought they were being clever.

Bring it on, friend, I am waiting.

And you are a simple minded gos***te.

Do you actually think I was serious? Having reviewed the mental ability of this board, and especially you who keeps crying into his milk do you not think i post on here other than to have a bit of fun when I am listening to a bunch of people who do not have the first clue as to how either companies work or how company law is implemented.

Go back to bed Rip Van Winkle. You are far more intelligent when you are asleep.

O'Reilly cannot be kicked out as there is nobody to kick him out and he has a contract until next year's AGM when he will be voted on.

Furthermore, if it can be proved that the money is in HSBC and HSBC has not actioned it for months then Providence can surely sue HSBC. The question is, is the money "hot" and unless HSBC can prove that it is then Providence must be in a very strong position.

To that effect, they are correct in the share placement as a revenue guarantee in case the HSBC fiasco continues on for months. After all, it took about three years to get the Transocean case to court.

So it might be a fact that the notion that if the money did not come through by Monday that O'Reilly' leadership might come up for discussion is meaningless unless he sees a better deal on the table part of which is to pass the reins to somebody else but that is another story.

I suspect there is another player in the wings. Otherwise, why did they bother to go ahead and pay for the survey when finances were in jeopardy. I think they did that because of another potential partner asking for it to be done as a prelude to a deal.

Perhaps if Tony steps down we could ask Boris Johnson to step in. No matter what you think of him, he has show he has cojones and would give those pesky Chinese a run for their money. More women than hot breakfasts and yet they elected him Prime Minister. Must have something to do that.

This "suggestion" which will need some work to become law has actually increased the value of Providence's asset base. If no new licenses can be issued it makes the old ones more valuable. Could easily now make Providence a target for one of the biggies.

It also must placate the banshee Brid Smith and stop her wailing and gnashing her teeth. Obviously a ploy of Veradkar in preparation for an Irish election.

All we need now is for Providence to issue an RNS to say that the money is now in the company's accounts or that we are going to get a new partner.

Has Leo Veradkar taken over the ghost of Frank Carson? "It's the way I tell 'em" was Frank's catch phrase.

Yesterday we heard that all oil exploration of the coast of Ireland was to be stopped but gas would continue. And then it is confirmed that

"The implications of Mr Varadkar’s exploration announcement was confirmed last night by a spokeswoman for the Taoiseach. Existing licences and options for oil and gas will remain valid but Minister for Climate Action Richard Bruton will bring a memo to Government within a month to set out how the change will be implemented."

"Existing licenses and options will remain" So what has changed? Nothing. All current licenses and options will remain.

As Frank would say "It's the way I tell 'em". Or as Shakespeare says in Macbeth "Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."

I just checked with Morningstar (previously Hemscott) who say he had the 1m shares as of this morning before this deal went through.

On that basis, Pat Plunkett is currently holding 1.75m shares and not 750,000.

##

Anovas,

The closed period is 60 days before the AGM and the financial results so technically he was entitled to buy since it was after the AGM which was on the 12th.

http://www.stockmarketwire.com/article/6600118/Director-Deals-Providence-Resources-PLC-PVR.html

He is said to have bought them on 18th but of note is the statement that he now owns 750,0000 shares but what happened to the one million shares he bought just after joining the board? It stated then that "The Company announces that Mr. Pat Plunkett (Non-Executive Director & Chairman) has purchased 1,000,000".

Has he sold them or does he now hold 1.75m shares?

Yes, he bought in the market because the shares he bought are the 10p ordinary.

This might indicate that the money has come through because he cannot be accused of insider trading because O'Reilly has stated that the money is on the way. As they say "a wink is as good as a nod to a blind horse".

Happy RNS tomorrow?

I see it has just come up on the RNS.

This cannot be part of the capital because the new shares have not been issued so he must have bought these in the market. The new shares will not start trading if they are diluted at the EGM before next week.

Where did you see that Anovas? In Director's dealings perhaps.

Even if it is part of the capital raise it still shows a level of confidence.

Please stop hoping TOR is for the birds. He has a contract until next year's AGM at which he is sure to be reappointed on his famous contract.

The article:

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/drilling-for-oil-to-be-banned-in-ireland--varadkar-952504.html

What are the time scales and surely the only thing they can do is stop issuing licenses as they will have to pay billions to the current license holders if they want to stop them.

Sounds like a great opening gambit in New York but it will be interesting to see how they are going to do it.

And it will have no effect on Barryroe other than to make it potentially more valuable and now they can really start talking about the gas as well which is equivalent to 45mbbls of oil at the last assessment.

Hasn't lodged since Friday or I am sure he would have given us an RNS.

Perhaps the postman rings twice and he has not heard it.

EGM moves closer when they turn the shares into wallpaper.

What has got stuck in your craw glaw? I see from your posts you are a "newbie" here so what rabbit hole did you pop up from.

There are numerous people here who have lost their shirts on this share over the years and if O'Reilly could be trusted and the money will be paid by 30th September they would average down but they know his track record is so poor that they have to grin and bear it.

Do you think the share price would be a miserable 5.7p if he could be trusted when Barryroe is potential sitting on about $15billion value?

So a little bit of advice for you; p***s off back where you came from as it is clear from your posts you are nothing more than a mouth.

When I want your advice I will ask for it.

O'Reilly's normal form over the years has been always "hedged" but his latest statement seems to be more positive about the $10 being on its way.

However, this is a snippet of an Irish Independent article from the 5th of July which says "Providence Resources has been notified by HSBC bank that the $10m (€8.9m) due from Chinese backer APEC Energy Enterprises has been transferred. The Dublin-listed oil and exploration company received a letter from the bank on July 5, the date the funds were due, advising of a payment date of July 9."

So HSBC sent Providence a letter on the 5th of July saying the payment date was July 9th. So what happened to the payment?

Even Sherlock Holmes could not solve this one.

Since the EGM is held at 10am on 30th September what happens if the money rolls in on that date after the EGM because the backstop has up to the 31st? Will they still issue the shares?

Backstop cut off 31 September. EGM 10am 30 September.

One good thing that has come out of this is I now know I hold shares in Providence outside of nominal accounts having had an Attendance card posted to me from two addresses ago. and since it is an online submission now I have voted in favour of the resolution.

Interesting too that the invitation comes from Pat Plunkett rather than baby. At least he must have run his eye over the deal.

I note as of two days ago that our other director, Angus McCoss, was very pleased, in his role as Exploration Director, with the Tullow discovery off the coast of Guyana.

b

You are wrong Mamms when you suggest that the money should have come through last year.

The first tranche $9m was due just before they survey started and the second $15m is due just before the drilling takes place.

Since both amounts are loans payable at LIBOR+5% and Providenc had enough capital without it as is obviously clear from the statement that they had $5.3m in the bank as of December 2018.

The survey last year was kiboshed by An Taisce even though obvious preliminary costs had been paid by Providence so the money was not paid because Providence could not see why they would pay interest on a loan they did not lead. Good business practice, in my book.

Now we move to this year which raises the issue of why the $10m has not been paid.

According to the information to hand from O'Reilly he has been informed that the money is in the HSBC banking system which is probably why it is in limbo because in 2016 HSBC were scheduled to be sued by the US government for billions because of money laundering but HSBC were not investigated because of the banking crash which would have followed would have brought down the whole banking system so instead HSBC paid a "no prejudice" fine of $1.9billion.

You can now see why there are being so cautious about the $10m and you have at times criticised the APEC credentials as to their legitimacy and obviously at the moment China and Hong Kong are not on the best of terms so you can easily see HSBC Hong Kong playing "silly b*****s" any which way it can when it comes to dealing with China.

What interest me, though, is O'Reilly washing his teeth at 4.30am in the morning. Is he an insomniac perhaps? And as for contacting APEC to check on the money what does he expect to hear? And if he is so convinced that the $10 m is in the system he must doubt that it is totally "clean". Why?

Because if he thought it was clean he would be sure it would get through. If he could guarantee that he could easily raise a $10m bridging loan but he has not done that. He has gone out and raised a paltry sum of money by selling shares to institutions at ridiculous prices. Is that just a planned sop to his big investors because you can be sure, if the money comes through the Providence share price will probaby be near last year's high of 17.5p which means those investors who bought at 5.1p will have a bonanza.

So, perhaps O'Reilly does not want the money to come through too soon because there are "friends" out there who are going to make a killing if the share dilution and share issue takes place.

Oils strikes in Saudi are huge and it will be interesting to see how quickly they can get back into production.

In the meantime will be interesting to see the price of oil on Monday when it closed at about $54.5 a barrel. This should clear the cobwebs out of a few heads when they start thinking about "stability" and "security of provision". In that game, Ireland is surely a prime candidate and this, I am sure, will clear the heads of the Chinese who are said to be big into buying into the Aramco float.

It is probably this will throw the Aramco float of $100billion out of the window and since China was one of the potential investers in that they have very little locations to invest their money so how about Barryroe?

The substance of the following article is more pertinent tonight than before it was written.

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/aramco-s-3-trillion-float-now-looks-like-a-pipe-dream-20190813-p52gjq.html

Just a few points.

First of all, from what I read in the Irish Times, for example, APEC have paid the money into the system but it has not come out the other end in Providence's bank account. According to the Irish Times the culprit is HSBC. But, of course, given the close relationship between APEC,COSL,CNOOC and HSBC there is nothing to stop APEC ringing HSBC and telling them to hold it without paying it over.

The share issue is obviously a backstop in case the money does not come through and it is far more complicated than just issuing shares. First of all, Providence shares have a nominal value of 10p a share and the distribution price is 5.1p. Under stock market rules you cannot issue new shares at less than the nominal value so Providence is going to have to revalue its nominal share value and this requires permission from the stock market. They plan to revalue their shares at .001p.

Technically the nominal value of a share is not important other than it is used as a guide as to a company's well being so you see Providence, with this revaluation looks a basket case.

The new shares can be issued once the revaluation is done but only with the approval of the shareholders which is the reason for the EGM at the end of the month.

So I suspect the revaluation and the share issue is totally necessary if APEC fails to deliver the money before then but it is possible both the revaluation and the share issue will be crushed if the money comes through.

As for the $9m loan, it is just that, a loan. What Providence does with it is up to them. Like the follow on $15m both are subject to interest at LIBOR + 5% repayable out of oil revenues as per the 10% Providence and 5% Lansdowne payments that will be paid off the development debt until fully paid.

Finally who is going to get rid of O'Reilly? That would be like a turkey voting for Christmas. At the end of this month the only directors will be O'Reilly, Plunkett and McCoss. Might sound like a good idea but no chance but looks like a nice subsidiary for Tullow who have just pulled out of a big deal sale in Africa over tax.

Finally O'Sullivan's gang. What have they achieved and what have they cost? They have achieved nothing since Barryroe was declared commercial in 2012 and have cost in the order of $120m in wasted "wet" rather than "oil" holes. With that money Providence could now be pumping oil out of Barryroe. Good riddance, I say, and not a day too soon.