Member Info for Moleinahole

Yes indeed. They have known the direction of travel for a while one suspects.

The LOG timing I think was driven more by other factors around the administration. But Deltic makes alot more sense not least because they got some 32nd round items that fitted well.

As I say its not end of the world for phase 1 and 2 but I'm not looking forward to next broker note based reduced reserve numbers. And the company need to work a bit harder to find some future capacity for the pipeline now 2 of the targets have come up short.

Harvey like skipper before it has proved a costly but necessary drill but a good lesson in the value of a drill compared to desk based proving using seismics etc.

Dunderhead I would say that RNS considerably increases the risk of a cheap buy out of IOG.

Its a very dissapointing RNS - Redwell in particular has been written off the largest prospective block is a real surprise. Harvey has confirmed its basically a smaller but still just about commercial add on and not the money spinner add on. 1 of the 2 32nd rounds is a dud even before we accepted it but the other seems to have another small accumulation quarter size of what Redwell had. That one however is one CalE went in with. So they seem a good judge of the prospects.

The phase 1 and 2 will proceed and should be ok - its the future strategy that is now problematic. They will need to go and find something or be vulnerable I feel. As LOG admin are not here for long haul that is the issue. That 30% is available for a more modest price I suspect after that RNS.

Not an RNS that will help LOG administrators sell shares! But f a sombre down beat read.

Need to digest the details further but leaves future strategy bit up in the air on the reserves front.

The MM will have a problem pricing this with no retail volume but LOG Admin looking to shift stock.

I'm surprised someone like Lombard have not effectively shorted by selling some of their holding to drive the price down and then either pick up the LOG stock on the cheap or make their options worth less. LOG seem to have a counter party who picked up the last lot but only at a discount.

So they have put the wide spread back. This will go sideways or down a bit you would think till the next tranche managed out of the way. So no real incentive to dive in hence it will need some news (Harvey re-analysis maybe?) or a predator to start accumulating you would think. The rig and subsea is important but is not going to attract punters.

2021 should be IOG year - just going to have to wait a little but longer to see out 2020.

Yes there it is as expected. Not surprised as there have been payments to the policyholders from FSCS just before.
Absolutely nothing we can do and nothing to do with the company. The bondholders are doing better than me with their investment here.
The concern is whether they intend to continue they will not get a good return at this level so that should tame their enthusiasm a bit but they are in profit down to 8p on this tranche. Given they are drawing from the FSCS I wonder whether that has altered the return they are seeking from IOG shares.
The question now is who has them now and how many are they planning on selling.

Right replacement more important than any - and he was not just walking away so nothing to worry about just yet. But yes a solid replacement would be a good piece of news.

No TR1 yet which is good news (I think).

Is it any wonder brokers who hold the shares as the nominee are confused - they have benefited from the same information vacuum as all shareholders? I have never seen anything quite like this.

First based on what Looed has previously proved and it cost us money to do the search which I suspect the brokers won't pay - the Cayman companies were not struck off. But it also confirmed Zaza was no longer a director of the main entity. So as of today the company has not cancelled its shares. It has no registrar running a registry which is why nobody can get a paper cert and everything is frozen. The US companies status also changed shortly after the Cayman one.

So where does that leave us. The company is pretty much insolvent by just about any definition - the main one being ability to pay bills as they fall due! However, as of today it has not entered bankruptcy which is what they would do if it was dead.
The arbitration is over - we lost 99% of the Block 12 but the company still has retained 1% including the producing fields. The share of costs of the arbitration I suspect are the final bit unresolved. Georgia have not yet got round to re-marketing the 99%. So theoretically FRR could join the bid to get some or all of them back.
Ukraine seems dead for now - the Dolphin block has gone to Naftogaz (a long time FRR association) - the onshore has been silent. I believe we still have Moldova on a very long lease - but doubt anything beyond desk work has been done on that.
But the company continues 2 major trains of litigation (amongst others) .
1. Outrider - The fiduciary case and its related Mortgage default. The mortgage default and the potential loss of block 12 as it was the security seems moot. FTI went to New York and since then we have heard nothing. The transfer to FRR Us however we can see in Georgia was not approved (and I believe the arbitration confirmed that). However, Outrider have not got possession either as evidenced by their note to the Georgians. FTI will represent all debtors not just Outrider. So if Outrider can't get the asset then a compromise seems the most likely outcome.
FRR attempted to transfer and farm out. That 50% farm out and 5% royalty to FTI must surely have been frozen. FTI seem to be sat waiting the main fiduciary litigation to be resolved.
2. YA seem to want their $2m and that is now being contested.
Nothing has changed since 2018. The way out is to beat or accommodate Outrider. Once that is resolved the company recapitalises and it is that restructure that could require shareholder contact. All shareholders not some random replies to contacts. The likely structure and cost on us to recapitalise are unknown.
Quite what the company are doing in this new selective email lucky dip initiative I leave to everyone to draw their own conclusion. A simple communication to all (on website?!) or tweet would have achieved a more favourable reception.

Trellis the orderly disposal agreement was for 1 year and has now passed that milestone. Hence why the intentions of the LOG administrators always interest me given they have 30% of the company. They have sold nothing since the original return of cash and a bit of book balancing of their holding to get to the 30% at conversion.

One of the features of this share over past 2 years is the almost non existent volume for the shares. They are normally tightly held so a sudden nip up in the price to 15p to support a sell of 5m or 10m is unusual and hence worthy of some comment while we await further news on the operations.

It becomes more interesting if it is followed up by a series of similar transactions. So far there have not been any and normal quiet trade is resumed having clipped 10% off the share price. ven that has not really attracted much buying.

Like most here I'm interested in what the bigger beasts are doing here while being content to try and enjoy the ride. The one thing I would say is that it is frustrating having clipped up a bit on nothing to be back at 13p which is really where we have been for 2 years. I have used the time to get to my target holding - I am unlikely to go beyond that now and will instead spread risk elsewhere.

On execution only order Trellis you are absolutely correct. But this doesn't look like that. There are may reasons for transactions that is nothing to do with the underlying company fortunes. Its pattern and direction of trades that matters and IOG has been pretty much range bound in this area for quite a while. Matter of time hopefully before we are out of the doldrums and back under way again in 2021. We have the Brexit event to contend with so timing wise first gas in H2 2021 it good timing especially if there is also a post covid bounce.

Plenty to go if its LOG! Correct my previous post I think the shares are equivalent 8p when they converted not 13p - got 13p on my mind after the trade I think!

1 LONDON OIL AND GAS LIMITED (IN ADMINISTRATION) 143,011,359 29.78%
2 LOMBARD ODIER ASSET MANAGEMENT (EUROPE) LIMITED 123,980,066 25.81%
3 RICHARD GRIFFITHS AND CONTROLLED UNDERTAKINGS 29,997,380 6.25%
4 AZVALOR ASSET MANAGEMENT S.G.I.I.C., S.A. 25,037,785 5.21%

So the only other one that sticks out is Richard Griffiths - he is another good candidate to me he used derivatives didn't he to buy as well?

Any of these would need a TR1. I agree it looks to have gone through a broker as a placed trade between parties.

Like I say interesting but has an amplified effect in the thin volume. Did they pump it up to 15 to try and clear it I wonder.

Seems like a forced/quick sale at that price could be two 5m or an arranged sell- we have no real news due unless something has gone wrong with the piping and we have not been told! In which case it would be inside information. So it likely to be one of the institutions in at 10p or LOG admin - I see the FSCS has been paying out on that so maybe they needed to pitch some cash into that. At 13p even they are making a small profit (and they already has interest lumped in). Have to see if a TR1 arises but the issue as discussed with these large holders is that they can wreak havoc with holding their size. There is no volume to drip feed so if you want to shift volume you have to under bid.

Took while to get my head around! Normally if its complicated its probably wrong solution.
The issue is whatever is in our interests is unlikely to be a reason for LOG, CalE or Lombard to do anything.
What was required was for LOG to get less shares originally. But to do that the bond issue would need to have been bigger or CalE take a bigger % of the pie or institutions paid a fairer price when they bought in. It was that low ball placing at 10p that has pinned us down when combined with LOG.
Where are where we are now and can't see any of those stakeholders budging.
I do hope the LOG admin guys have an unwritten agreement to an orderly disposal now we are out of the lock in. They chose to stay in mainly because share price has not exceeded their 13 to 19p baselines and they need a bigger return to pay the bondholders.
We are safe at this level to get a return but everything is out of PI investor hands these days - we are passengers at best!

Trellis I share your nervousness with them. My gut feeling tells me they are following the money - in this case CalE. But having already done well they have no loyalty to the company. That is why I think its always disappointing when the seed capital (which generally does care about the company) gets its upside creamed off by the likes of Lombard. The board were quite brazen in their view of the advantages of having institutions (over I read it a heavy PI interest but maybe LOG were the real issue and I'm over sensitive!) in the online media presentation from Q1. There is no doubt we can be picked off at a price but whether that leaves enough upside for Kistos I'm not sure and they will probably look for someone in distress or wanting to exit an asset.

I think we all agree that we are on a trajectory to a better share price in 2021. Any offer this close to first gas would get no traction under the 30p range. It apples and oranges now post dilution - pre dillution 20p was very opportunistic. But we are vulnerable to a takeover now as a result of the dilutions since 2018 placing shares in both the LOG administrators who are no longer locked in to orderly disposal terms and Lombard and a couple of other institutions with very large positions showing good profit already. As ever it has been the PI investors who supported the early growth who have had their gains trimmed back as the institutions come in at the lower risk sage of the story.
Its hard to guage CalE here and what their objective is. They didn't really go and try and grab much in the last license round and have waited out of any commitment to Harvey. They do of course have the option of selling their own 50% stake but that is probably a bit pricey for the K team budget!
Either way I'm comfortable that we either get to first gas and beyond and move towards a higher price organically or get there a bit quicker in an offer a bit under. Nothing we can do other than let it play out .

Thanks for posting that news. Well I thought FRR had a MOU and working agreement with Naftogaz from years ago.

FRR activities on that block is what of the more unusual events of last 2 years. Combined with Steve N role in Us chamber of Commerce for the area it was always odd FRR who have no offshore expertise front ran the tender process only to get pipped at the post by Trident. All this was going on while FRR were skirmishing with GG on the arbitration and Outrider on the debt in 2019.
On the face of it FRR future involvement in Ukraine (and we have no idea what has happened in Moldova) is over offshore and we have heard nothing also about onshore on the areas close to the Moldovan assets.
Dolphin bid and the Ukraine has been a very unusual episode in the Frontera story. Originally it was a Mou we thought to ship block 12 gas to Ukraine maybe via LNG and that was years before UD2 was re-entered. But the wider black sea strategy just never progressed. However, FRR did kick the process of the Dolphin tender into life which has landed with their former MOU (and maybe still current) partner...Naftogaz.

There is a risk here of the PI holders from before LOG and the institutions were able to gain underserved and heavily discounted positions. But that was the price of using LOG in the first place.
They are all in good profit north of 20p. Realistically any attempt at a takeover would need to be nearer the nav with under 1 year to first gas. So say 25 to 30p.
So still a good return if you have a low average like the institutions of which Lombard have want 25%. So between lombard and LOG they have over 50% of the equity.
CalE might move to block a move by taking the LOG 30% but not sure that is their preferred modus of operation.
Nothing we can do but let the board carry on and hope they leave us alone.

Big double it's not about not wanting to get hands dirty. First the group was not constituted as a shareholder action group. It was set up in good faith in the not unreasonable expectation given the experience of the previous 18 months the company intended to communicate. company had changed. That has proved to not be the case and the company has returned to its previous habits as the volume and gravity of litigation has spiralled.
This is all about treading a fine line between trying to get the company to engage and stepping into the middle of a fight between the company, Georgian government, outrider and YA and a host of other creditors which could well expedite tearing down the company. Whilst I fundamentally disagree with the course the company have taken now it's been started it has to be finished. Rightly or wrongly the company represents us in this mess.

Make your case for who precisely you want to target and with what objective. And if you want to set up another action group then off you go. Stop jabbering and do it.

But Frontera I think you will find is nothing like Solo. You will be entering a totally different set of dynamics here with a very litigious company teetering on insolvency.
If your target is not the company but others like the auditors for instance then firstly they and their insurance is not going anywhere.
If your objective is to force the company to communicate then fine but what exactly you expect them to say or do may depend on your perception of the issues here.
If your objective is to personally target the board at this stage then fine but the consequences of that on all shareholders in a company with US connections is not something I personally would join in without a very clear understanding of the extent of personal liability and costs and exactly what was the objective.
If you think there has been a crime then draft your complaint and present it to the authorities. Again I'd measure that several times before cutting as with all this you may find your sat on the end of the branch you are sawing.

On that I think we all agree. The gap will close here. The shares are all tucked away in tight hands so it's a waiting game unless the board do something not priced in.
Near term maybe the reworked numbers post Harvey will help once they land in next month or two.

Well there has been no comment since the orderly lock-in period expired and they didn't sell any. So might be interesting to see if the administrators have sad anything last comments got a corresponding RNS so I guess not.
They will not sell under 20p certainly not in volume. I would guess they will sell in chunks to institutions as on open market MM would crash the price unless there was demand. The size of holding also means existing holders can't easily take them without risking a threshold of an offer! So I think they are here for the ride to first gas but would sell some if they needed some cash to fund their expenses or an urgent distribution. I think they are relying on a good result here so won't do anything to damage the share price.
That's the dynamic LOG really damaged the small shareholders here we lost alot having to bring institutions in at a discount to accommodate the mess they created. That's why we are looking at a more modest return than what could have been.

Peak this share seems very unusual. There is simply no trade volume. I think personally it's a safe bet at this level and should move closer to it's NAV as the year progresses. But there is nothing to move it at the moment it needs volume.
I suspect this will actually rerate on very little volume possibly in steps but there simply are no shares in free float and it's not going to fly to a silly number like other aim shares as I think the range is set by the NAV. It's an investing share not a speculative investment. That's the difference with say DELT.
I think that explains what we see here. Bottom is 10p where the institutions entered, LOG admin need north of 19p for 30% of the equity and PNG term PI I suspect are either at break even or up to 30p. With the NAV in the 30p to 40p range that suggests a doubling is a very good probability but it's not going to fly away like say DELT could where there is a bigger gap to its conservative NAV.
I see this as a safe way to increase my capital which is why I've built and been patient and looking forward to progression.
I do find holding shares very informative so looking forward to all the stages now of the implementation and hope we get a good flow of info in RNS, media and the website

Peak I think firstly because we are so near to first gas for phase 1 here its not an immediate issue for IOG! I think its companies sitting on unproven/undeveloped assets or those whose assets are difficult to get at that are at greater risk. Change seems to be coming - the impact has already been felt to a degree because investors and lenders are already looking head making it harder to fund long tail carbon based projects.

Long term IOG is not going to be part of this industrial revolution but the transition will take a bit of time and so there should be time to get the returns they need but reasonably long term it has no future like other carbon based industries. Personally I have invested alongside my oil and gas in alt energy shares for over 15 years now - some I find fascinating technically and I do think a tipping point is now approaching. They have perked up quite a bit over past year from having been money pits and unloved! Personally I think hydrogen (and geo thermal) will ultimately play a major part.

Were they talking about blending more hydrogen into existing gas using wind to get the hydrogen? If so you would still be blending with gas. I would guess at the main distribution points you will find plants producing the hydrogen but if from wind farms or other tech (you already get hydrogen at chemical plants as by products). Would have to be a substantial volume industry to displace gas due to the calorific values (As hydrogen blending increases, the average calorific content of the blended gas falls, and thus an increased volume of blended gas must be consumed to meet the same energy needs. For instance, a 5% blending by volume of hydrogen would only displace 1.6% of natural gas demand.) So will be here for a while with all the the gas heating in UK!

I think being able to progress now to deliver gas over next 10 years with funding in place is the key for IOG. But about time we saw a bit of a move north in the shareprice for christmas - but can wait another year if need be!