Member Info for Manyana

RTO might be a possibility.

24th will be interesting if nothing happens in the meantime but I am interested in what "inter alia" will bring to the table on 24th. "Any Other Business" could be interesting.

Two issues.

What happens if the CVL is rejected? Since 75% of the votes are needed to enact it, the chances of it being rejected are surely great given the equity held by major shareholders unless they are party to a plan to breathe new life into the old dog and bury that other old "dog", Ryan.

If, on the other hand, it is passed it is possible within six years to resurrect it as follows:

"Reversing a Creditors’ Voluntary Liquidation (CVL)

If a company is insolvent i.e cannot pay their liabilities as they fall due then it may be best for the company to enter a CVL. If the company suddenly finds that they are able to pay off the debts and become solvent again then the process can be halted if the company’s assets have not yet been liquidated and the company not yet been struck off (dissolved). Similar to MVLs, halting a CVL is not easy and requires a court order. If the company has been struck off it is only possible to reverse the liquidation via a process known as ‘administrative restoration’. Applications must be made within 6 years of the formal dissolution and the process is initiated by the company director submitting a Form RT01 to the Companies House who will make a decision to accept or reject the application."

Does this mean, when Ryan is for the birds with his Greens in the next government, Barryroe could fly once more?

Will we see any action before July 24th or will it all come out on the day and what are the "inter alia"(s) that are possibilities also mentioned in the announcement?

That is only a technical hitch and the court case seems to be without merit. They are trying to complete deals that were agreed last year but as usual Nigerian "deals" are like a pain in the head.

Furthermore, it does not take away from San Leon's claim against Barryroe for its 4.5% nett profits and is also a justifiable reason to take an action against Ryan through the Energy Treaty Charter.

Having valued their interest a few years ago at about €35m that could be another thorn in the side of Ryan et al. And it also raises the issue of "money messages" under the constitution. The lawyers will have another field day with this one.

Thanks to all who furnished the articles in today's papers.

Now all we need is for the funding of Barryroe for the next two years to be taken up, either in a loan against future profits or some equity considerations.

There is also the San Leon 4.5% nett profit from Barryroe that it has a legal right to when San Leon gave its 30% equity in Barryroe to Providence (aka Barryroe) in return for a zero cost carry in 2012. That surely also gives San Leon the right to also take an action against Ryan as it would seem they are also a UK company.

SAN LEON ENERGY (UK) LIMITED Company number 08429495 trading on LSE AIM

That would be two kicks in the proverbials for Ryan.

Interesting headline in today's Sunday Business Post:

"https://www.businesspost.ie/analysis-opinion/daniel-murray-it-was-only-a-matter-of-time-before-ireland-was-sued-over-energy-treaty/

Gist is "it was only a matter of time before Ireland-was sued over energy treaty"

Not being a subscriber that was all I got. Perhaps there is a subscriber on here who could elucidate us on the content.

Everybody is forgetting the San Leon 4.5% nett profit which is part of the Barryroe deal.

In the original Barryroe deal San Leon gave up its 30% equity in Barryroe to Providence in return for this as it was a zero cost.

About two years ago Oisin Fanning, CEO of San Leon, reckoned the value of the 4.5% nett profit at about $35m.

Being like a dog with a bone you can be sure Fanning will be looking for his pound of flesh if he can get it in any dealings with the government payout.

The RNS today is putting the worst case scenario out there to protect the directors.

If you read the Irish Times article it clearly states that the discussions are ongoing with the major shareholders as follows:

"The company is known to remain in talks with major shareholders – including beef tycoon Larry Goodman and businessman Nick Furlong, who owns the Pageant Holdings investment vehicle – about the prospect of raising funds to keep BOE afloat. They have until the egm to commit such funds."

So, they are obviously looking at the legal issues and how they can put the boot into Ryan while at the same time putting the gun to the heads of the major shareholders to persuade them to fund Barryroe. What form that will take will be interesting but at even €50k a month - which seems expensive - and is funded for say two years until Ryan is well gone post the next election will cost a total of €1.2m which to this group is surely peanuts.

If you were Larry Goodman or any of the other major shareholders would you walk away especially as Lansdowne have now started the legal process of kicking Ryan in the proverbials.

Interesting take on the issue in the Irish Times

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/2023/06/30/barryroes-major-shareholders-have-24-days-to-avert-liquidation-of-oil-explorer/

Says major shareholders have 24 days to avert liquidation. Can the "big boys" afford to lose their spondulics?

Of course it is not positive but the fat lady has not yet sung.

The voting to liquidate the company needs a minimum of 75% of votes so what will happen if the big shareholders refuse which is quite likely as they hold the biggest part of the pie? Surely they have nothing to lose by vetoing the decision but everything to lose if it is passed.

Still fun and games to be had here until the AGM and a final decision.

Just been watching a relative of mine playing for Ireland U20 World Cup in South Africa. Ireland thrash Australia 10-30. Looking good for the latter stages of the event.

Far better than watching paint dry as we wait for a Barryroe decision.

By the way, having been through four CEO's in about three years surely a united company under the aegis of Stephen Boldy, CEO of Lansdowne would be a good bet. Currently been CEO now for nearly 21 years.

After all, he must know something if he was willing to spend so much time at the head of what, on paper, is a "Noddy" company and having previously worked as a Geologist for the Irish Department of Energy Petroleum Affairs Division he must have real faith that Barryroe is a runner.

We still live in hope.

Somebody is obviously funding Ashurst on the Lansdowne deal as they do not come cheap.

As I posted on Lansdowne mission statement by Ashurst, Dublin:

"Our Dublin office signifies our commitment to clients operating in complex and ground-breaking EU competition investigations, merger reviews and appeals. Our highly regarded team has extensive experience of advocacy and the conduct of cases before the European Courts."

Since the government have to respond within three months, perhaps Barryroe will wait on that response as any positive deal for Lansdowne will equally respond to Barryroe as Lansdowne cannot be government paid under the "money message" which means the only way will be for Ryan, whether he likes it or not, is to approve the appraisal.

As for the Barryroe accounts we may have them tomorrow but even if we don't they are still in this game and since they cannot appoint a liquidator before the AGM, what is to say they will not put a merger with Lansdowne into that mix since a merger would also have to be approved by the shareholders.

Interesting times ahead. This game is not over until Ryan sings the fat lady's song.

Ashurst is a good choice to drive this one. Note from Ashurst, Dublin office:

"Our Dublin office signifies our commitment to clients operating in complex and ground-breaking EU competition investigations, merger reviews and appeals. Our highly regarded team has extensive experience of advocacy and the conduct of cases before the European Courts."

Enough said and quake Ryan. This crowd are after your proverbials on a stick.

Here is a report that Norway are going to develop 19 oil and gas projects.

Here is the article from today's Examiner.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-41172055.html

They can develop nineteen and we cannot even develop one.

While Norway is not in the EU it is a member of the EEA and when you consider that "Through the EEA Agreement, Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein are equal partners in the internal market, on the same terms as the EU member states. "

When will our a/h politicians wake up and smell the coffee?

The merger could not take place unless and until Barryroe publishes its figures as its shares are already temporarily suspended and if no results by Friday will be suspended by the stock exchange at 7.00am on Monday.

Can't merger without the shares and merger useless if shares suspended.

Ps200306,

If Larry Goodman was to purchase, say, 340,000,000 shares in Barryroe bringing him to say 45% of the equity why would you object as long as he revoked his right to bid for the whole company?

And there are a number of big shareholders who would most likely want a share of that pie.

https://barryroeoffshoreenergy.com/significant-shareholders/

When daddy O'Reilly was the major shareholder in this company he had about 3.6billion shares when there were 8billion shares. Did he do a buy out before he went bust and had to sell off his shares to pay his debts? No

So with a previous shareholder holding 45% of the equity we did not object then so why now? So if Vevan, who currently own roughly 20% were to up that to 45% what's different? And if all the major shareholders were to shell up pro rata up to the 45% rate would we care?

We didn't then, so why now?

The shares are "temporarily suspended" but that is the company's decision and can be rescinded at any time.

The suspension next Monday would be at the directive of the stock market which is a totally different kettle of fish brought about by the non-publication of the results.

The first thing is the survival of Barryroe.

" If the Company is unable to publish its account by 30 June 2023, then trading in the Company's shares will be suspended from 7:00 am on 3 July 2023."

That takes us up to this Friday, three days away, so we are now close to the bone. If they fail to publish the accounts, shares will be suspended at 7.00am on Monday morning.

Will they make it?

Have you checked out the following report by Ryan and his cronies to the Dail dated March 2023 regarding oil and gas leases and you will find "Barryroe" all over the place and Exola is still referenced. Check it out at:

https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/256910/53ad4c42-01ce-45f7-a074-d7da54159f76.pdf#page=nul

Next report due by end of June, 4 days time, so worth checking that to see how the department now regards it.

So, based on this, I presume Barryroe are still paying the license fees for their acerage. Perhaps that accounts for the exorbitant run rate of €50k per week.

Here is the last legal directive enacted as "Amendments to the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960".

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/a77ee-amendments-to-the-petroleum-and-other-minerals-development-act-1960/

Where in the 1960 law and all its subsequent amendments, including this latest one, does it say that the applicant must have assets relating to 3x the costs of the appraisal?

If it does not say that, and as clearly stated that, "They (recommendations) have no binding force" how can it be "lawful"?

The worst case is that Ryan will be gone in another year or two and a new minister and team will be appointed, unless of course, he falls off his bike, in the meantime.

All Barryroe needs is the cash to survive until then and all will be well. And surely a company with two employees and a run rate of €50k a week is surely exorbitant. What are they spending our money on?

I am sure Lansdowne is not running at that rate so I suggest Lansdowne do a reverse takeover of Barryroe and then the rules for fighting Ryan could become very interesting. At worst case, all of Barryroe would come under the ECT action.

Also, why has Barryroe not asked the ordinary shareholders to stump up? After all, years ago, Providence (aka Barryroe) had 8billion shares at 8c. So surely issuing 1billion exercisable warrants of 10c in five years at say 1c would give them €10m which would easily see them past the demise of Ryan and the cronies he blackmails in the form of Varadkar and Martin who dare not say "boo" to this goose in case he gets his and the Green Party's feathers in a twist and they fly away resulting in an early election.

"was it lawful? Yes, it is legal to make this a requirement". No, it was not lawful.

To be "lawful" it must be incorporated in a law and that has to be approved by The Dail before it can be enacted.

Since you say it is "lawful" when was it enacted?

Here is the EU directive on Ryan's statement, which clearly shows it is a "recommendation" and not a law.

"Recommendations allow the EU institutions to make their views known and to suggest a line of action without imposing any legal obligation on those to whom it is addressed. They have no binding force."

Note: "They have no binding force". So where is your "law" that enacted it?

Ryan, even as minister, is subject to the same laws as you and I, so when was his "law" enacted?

Every three months the Minister, Ryan, has to submit an acreage report to the Dail regarding oil and gas leases. Here is March 31 of this year. He will have to submit another one in a few days time at the end of June. It will be interesting to see what he says about the Barryroe leases.

https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/256910/53ad4c42-01ce-45f7-a074-d7da54159f76.pdf#page=null

We wait with bated breath.