Member Info for mcmullank

Spread now 1.94 - 2.00 with nuys going through at full Offer. Still more to go here

Sorry the spread has just went down to .02

The de-listing has not been agreed yet. The issue is still to be voted on. I agree that it looks likely that the company will de-list but until then there is every change that the SP will rise and anyone in for the short term can make a good return especially given the very small spread (currently .03 or 1.5%)

If you use selftrade and go to perform the trade, it will state the maximum trade size. This lets you know the maximum trade you can perform at the best price. It may be that you can purchase or sell more at a lesser price and you can find this out by attempting a trade slightly bigger than the maximum size of the best price trade.

Selftrade allowing 100,001 on a buy trade.

150k maximum buy, 2.5m maximum sell. Looks like a shortage of shares in the market, it won't take any huge buying for this to rise.

1.92 Spread is closing. Breakout will happen in the next couple of hours if the buying pressure keeps up.

Can see this rising another 25-30% in the very short term.

Cant you read, they have found rocks in Ireland!!!! Now let me go out and have a look in my Garden, it may be worth over £3m

http://www.investegate.co.uk/Article.aspx?id=200909161300011627Z

Looks like the directors will continue to milk this company. No trading and they are not proposing any reduction on the director's overheads! Company will be consuming $800k+ per annum for zip.

SNOZZY I don't disagree with you NAV calculation however you have to take into account that 1.4m of the assets are not tangible and therefore should be ignored if you want to work out the per asset value of the share. Why? If I buy a business for more than the net tangible assets, I have to account for it somewhere and this is where the goodwill comes in. There is nothing to say that the deal wasn't beneficial, its just that there is noting to put your hands on and the addtional payment over asset value is a judgement made during the negotiations and purely subjective. Another person may have thought the business was worth asset value only and therefore I overpaid. Just my thoughts on reading accounts. So in summary, my asset value of the company would be 2.4m with a fair asset value on the shares of 13.3p however you should also take into account that the company has nearly 1m tied up in inventory and needs to sell this to make money. At the current p/e ratio given the state of the industry, I would make around 6p fair value.

Look at my previous post to explain the fall. The pertinent question is was it an over-reaction or will the company struggle without their two key fund managers. Personal opinion is that it is an over-reaction and price will lift again on positive results

The biggest reason for the fall is the resignation of the two key fund managers who manage over £3bn of the companies investments. The climb back from 70p to 80p is off the back of the management update. I think the fall is over-done for the reasons you have stated and also the fund managers will be staying on until next year anyway.

This is a possibility, however normal contractual terms are that all sums become due should a party enter administration. Therefore the drilling equipment suppliers become creditors of the company for the full amount of the contactual obligation. This would significantly increase the short term liabilities of ONSL and result in a smaller return (if any) to OIL.

I agree with what you are saying regarding security of supply etc. However, it appears that the banks have managed to bleed the company dry. The company last reported net assets of over $600m mostly in oil assets but needed the financing from the banks. A couple of weeks ago, they get agreement not to have the plug pulled in exchange for a maximum 24.9% of the company. Two weeks later, the banks refuse further funding. The problem with the company is that they state that they are continuing a strategic review without any influence over their greatest assets (administrators will be looking after creditors first and foremost). The company is already due the UK goverenment millions of dollars on deffered PRT. Plus points are: 1. Oil production is hedged but this is with RBS who just happen to be the lead bank in the syndicate (conflict of interest if ever there was one!) 2. Producing assets have value but cost of extraction under current structure is very near current prices. It will be very trying times for Oilexco and I cannot see how anyone can put a value on the holding company until there is some news on the disposal of ONSL. There could potentially be a large rise in the SP but anything before further announcements is just speculative investing. Enjoy your new year.

It may be producing Oil but if you look at the last set of accounts, it has hedged the price only to $40 and is not producing enough cash to pay it's liabilities. In addition to this, the banks have 24.9% of the issued equity under the agreement announced on the 19th December should it sell the assets or be sold. The company has liabilities of $600m dollars in contracts signed.

If you read the announcement, the company is nearly but not yet bust. The statement includes the following: However, there can be no certainty that any binding offers will be received or accepted or that any transaction will be completed or, if it is completed, that there will be any equity value for Oilexco shareholders. The shares of ONSL comprise substantially all of the assets of the Company. Reads to me that the vast majority of the company is the shares in ONSL and therefore if in administration, there is nothing the company can do to influence the sale of the assets.