So after 18 months of negotiating a Farm Out with multiple interested high class parties, the first act pursuant to this agreement is the requirement to place at 0.7p to see us through, does not look like the outcome of a skilled piece of negotiation as far as I’m concerned.
I would expect a deal of this nature, having been involved in the execution of large contracts, albeit a different industry, will be in part, at least “ceremonial “. I am sure there will be a signing ceremony with the appropriate dignitaries, PR machines, CEO’s, lawyers and associated hangers on. Getting this organised does not take five minutes. When I saw the word “scheduled” for June, this it what I anticipated was being organised and that the finer points had already been resolved. As we have heard nothing to the contrary with one week to go, I would be extremely surprised if this does not happen next week, or, in the alternative a firm date for it to take place shortly thereafter
Hi Brom. Certainly not unusual for a preferred bidders to be named. (UK major infrastructure projects are normally 2 stage with preferred bidders named in advance of agreement of finally executed contracts).
The main reason I would like to see them named is that that there is usually a “standstill” period to ensure no legal impediments or challenges. This would confirm this period had passed without incident.
As a not inconsiderable LTH, and on the assumption that Dave Wall may pop in here every now and again, I thought it was not too impudent to provide some reflections on the way my investment is being managed. As Managing Director of our company I expect Dave to execute flawlessly and be to held account, and commensurately rewarded, for his performance. There are a significant number of areas in which DW has performed admirably, primarily the portfolio of assets in our possession, and which I hope are being viewed enviously by others involved in exploration of the North Slope. There are however, a couple of not inconsiderable shortcomings which need to be addressed. Errors of prediction – DW has attempted 3 times to abstract oil from our assets and has yet to succeed. I have some sympathy for him in this respect as, whilst in no way being a geotechnical expert, I can grasp the concept of this not being an exact science [notwithstanding the £m we have expended on attaining this science]. He is, however, ultimately accountable for making the predictions that are supposed to monetise our asset and as such, this must count as a manifest shortcoming “debit” side of his ledger. Errors of judgement - This is an area I take more issue with. DW must [should] have realised that Winx was putting the credibility of our data prior to a farm out in the shop window. If we are going to say “Hey! Look at this great asset we own, we are sat on billions of barrels of oil, please provide me with your best offers by 31st March and i will pick the one that excites me most”, then pick an area that is definitely going to deliver. The concern for me here is that FO partners will be suggesting the same thing – you played your strong hand to secure a deal and you came up short! I also think he has extremely limited scope to credibly extend the FO past the 31st March. It was inferred that the date was extended into Q1 due to the high calibre of companies actively viewing the Dataroom. If that is the case, DW should be in control of the deal. If we truly have something that is exciting the market; and we have extended the courtesy once, why should we need to do it again? “You want this deal, make me a BAFO by 31st March, I am in charge of this deal”. I am unsure of what DW could credibly say to shareholders in the event he can’t close it.