Member Info for Moho30

As well as country focus rather than chasing turkeys, Seplat have also been a lot smarter in their bond/debt issuance, which given the SAVE board made up mainly of financiers and bankers has to be another fail.

Thanks Scot, and I admire your positivity. Just playing devils advocate for a minute. The $200m is a 'facility' provided by a Bahrainian group called Blacksea WLL - about which there is very little information, but seems to be an oil trader and there may still be some ex Vitol people involved. The dd will come when the facility is requested to be utilised and will be secured on a producing asset and future oil sales - against which Blacksea seem to have first option to trade the product. The one advantage I suppose is that it can only be used against an asset with existing or imminent production into SAVEs account, and Blacksea may provide some rigour that the deal might actually complete.

Regarding the true-up mechanism this is essentially a hedge in place as doing business in these countries you are very likely to be working with a depreciating currency. There seems to be some comfort attached because they are receiving the devalued USD equivalent amount, but if this was an oil price hedge at $100/bbl and the price had sunk to $30/bbl, and the hedge wasn't being honoured there would be an almighty outcry. The acquisition economics were based on a negotiated USD/NAIRA rate and if that's materially different then the project doesn't work. I appreciate this is factor of doing business in Africa but there seems to be a litany of these instances which have cratered the business model, and if they can't deal with them, maybe they need to adjust their model - or find another solution to dealing with them. As I say, me playing devils advocate. I'm still holding and been a recent small buyer, but it's not one I feel particularly comfortable with.

Scot - While Andrew seems to believe in his own ability to turn things around rather more than the market and some of the IIs do, I'd get more comfort if the CFO brought a few shares - and he earned $1m pa from the last accounts, so not exactly short of a bob or two. The only shares he appears to own are some options exercised through the employee share scheme - unless he participated in the discounted placing. The single thing that matters currently and I think has probably convinced a number of II to bail is the liquidity position. We've still not had an explanation of the deeply discounted relisting fund raise, (or not one that made any sense) which I originally interpreted as an indication of working capital distress. (Heard the strategic investor story too often !). I think more clarity on the receivables and debt structuring from the CFO or Chairman without the Andrew spin would help. The other concern is that while Chad and South Sudan were clearly projects where Savanah lost control over, we seem to have arrived at the same position in Nigeria. They can't tell us how or when the receivables will be settled, so the whole working capital forecast is a bit of guesswork - which will definitely spook some investors. At the moment they have not created value through the Nigeria acquisition - or anything they have been involved with. No idea of where this is heading but I know where the focus should be to stabilise the share price and regain a bit of trust. Hope to goodness Andrew leaves the potential $200m acquisition pot in the bottom drawer till he's sorted this out.

I'm really glad addressing the balance sheet issues has become a priority so long as the cash collections goes towards reducing net debt and not some other half ar**ed acquisition. I had assumed the 7p placing suggested some serious short term liquidity issue which I'm glad I seem to have been wrong about - but it has been the single most destructive event leading to the share price collapse. The strategic investor story is one that is rolled out a lot after heavily discounted placings, so need to hear more. Still seems to be a persistent seller out there.

On the plus side you can now buy for sub 7p ! Never thought I'd see the day. My singular worst sipp investment. Hard to judge direction of travel. The Board seem enthusiastic, the rest of the market decidedly less so. I'd like to see a total focus on getting value out of what they have and sorting out the balance sheet. Recent attempts at doing deals outside their main areas of operation - which is obviously what gets Andrew excited - have been totally value destructive. Hoping the 'strategic investor' and the $250m deal fund is not going to take us into another train wreck.

Still seem to be plenty offloading. Probably better opportunities elsewhere. The SAVE story seems to have slightly fallen apart, and not sure where it's going next. Hoping a focus on existing assets and rebuilding confidence. A bit of positive PR might not go amiss either.

May have swerved one there, albeit taking an exceptionally long detour..

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-03-31/south-sudan-on-the-brink-risks-triggering-wider-conflict

Probably not just TT selling. I think a lot of people have been spooked by the last week, and the lack of any clear information from the Q&A session. I'd prefer to see a Q&A with the Nick Beatie - and focussing on the balance sheet. In particular:

Why are receivables around 1 years worth of revenues and what's being done to get this down ? They only have approx $30m in the bank and fairly sure that is well committed, so they're juggling cash. If customers decide they don't want to pay, then they're in a hole. The customer receipts does seem to be getting out of control. No point trumpeting new customers when they don't pay.

The $200m is ring fenced for future acquisitions. It will have conditions attached, and they can't just draw it down. It's basically not worth a great deal imho, as I'd rather see them focus on current projects - and no further acquisitions.

There is a reason that Niger hasn't moved forward - and it relates to the fact they are juggling cash. Just hope they don't lose it - as this was the original reason I invested, but I can see this is a possibility.

I'm afraid it's time to hand over control to the accountants and bin AKs passport. S Sudan, Chad, have been disasters, and the Jury is still out on Accugas pending actually getting paid ! I would be very interested to see the going concern forecast they have to come up with for the auditors. Still time to save it from being a basket case, but Stephen Jenkins and the rest of the Board need to step up.

Longshort - Hard to believe, but yes.

I also suspect it's because there are a load of shares out there at 7p, and whatever the talk of strategic investors, the opportunity of a quick 30% turn is going to keep the share price depressed for a while to come. I still can't get my head around what the point of it was but don't worry as AK says, it will give us all a chance to average down. Doh

IG certainly went 100% margin, so demanded full cash cover for the position (and paid zero interest), and still charged daily long fees to cover their hedging costs. No idea how they got away with it, but they've only gained from the prolonged suspension.

I think the number of shares out there at 7p is going to provide a substantial brake on share price momentum for a while. The talk maybe of getting new supportive investors in, but there will be no tie in and the opportunity of a quick 50% return will be just too juicy. Seen it so many times. Don't rely on TR1s either as its the investor responsible to file them and many fall short of this obligation especially if based offshore. Love to see it back to 20p but not holding my breath.

Lots of chat about value creation. He obviously hasn't seen my SIPP today !

Rumpel - That's what worries me as well. For a Co with assets supposedly valued north or $1bn, why are we having to do such a spivvy placing at 7p ? That's presumably all the II would pay, and they're the only ones that have been kept up to date with what's going on. Loads of smoke and mirrors, and that scares me. Agree with earlier comment, that they've probably only come back to the market as they had to raise funds. Looks like hardly anyone has been at the helm for last 2 yrs. No point doing gas/power deals if not being paid. There's a reason assets in Africa are cheap !

it may not count as fraud, but it's definitely bordering on the incompetent and unethical. projects that matter - my ****. i can't believe they're still peddling that line. it should be "investors that don't matter". they've kept us in the dark for 2 years and then spring this on us. if we thought ir have been quiet, i think they'll be totally offline until further notice.

I think this deal has been through so many machinations, and the original deal on which the suspension was based is all but dead. If a new deal with a term sheet is out there that constitutes an RTO, then tell us and stay suspended. Otherwise I see no reason why the suspension should continue. If as AK has stated someone has advised them they should stay suspended, it can only be the Nomad and they shouldn't have a problem saying so. Clearly Wildcat Pet (and their Nomad ?) have taken a different view. They have even issued warrants based on an RTO event but they are clearly taking the view that it's not concrete enough to warrant a suspension. The prolonged suspension x2 has without doubt added a large risk premium to the shares when they do eventually return as I for one do not wish to find myself in this position again.

I'd rather they relisted - even if just to introduce some accountability to shareholders. Absolutely don't get the - lets not list until we have some good news brigade. That's not why we're suspended. The share price when trading should arrive at whatever point it merits whether the route is a continuous flat line or up/down as news and events influence - and I'd rather have the latter with the Board being rather more accountable than they are now. I'd also like them to respond to my query to IR as to whether we are still looking at an RTO - which it doesn't look like any more, and if not, get the bloody thing trading !

"..we understand that being transparent about what we do and how we do it is important" - If you understand it, maybe you'd like to follow through ! What on earth was the point of that post ?

I appreciate that some here do get responses from the Co IR people, but I'm guessing there are also most who don't. I've never had a response to any of my messages - which are general in nature - more relating to process - and certainly not fishing for insider info or opinion. I'm not a huge shareholder - Not quite six figures spread between my SIPP and ISA, but I do find their lackadaisical attitude towards PIs irritating and a maybe a wider reflection of how they view PIs. I have worked myself in ops/commercial roles for a number of AIM Cos - too small to have a dedicated IR person, but we still tried to respond to most reasonable shareholder enquiries (Admittedly most are requesting info that can't be divulged or simply a rant). I'm imagining IR hasn't been particularly stretched over the last two years, apart from maybe trying to appease frustrated IIs. Hoping they have rather more to do in the very near future.

I'm glad the ludicrous situation is starting to get some coverage. I really don't see how you suspend on the basis of one deal - and that because it would be construed as an RTO, which then doesn't happen, and commence talks on another deal - which may or not be construed as an RTO (we haven't be informed) and just roll over the suspension. Just keeping talking to someone AK and we could be 5 years away. Problems when Nomads reliant on a few big cos, and something to be said for rotation - same as auditors. Too cosy.