Member Info for MrBWM

The strategy for the company going forward is based on the repeated statement 'The Board believes that the Group has a competitive advantage in the identification and acquisition of new projects in Kazakhstan'. Is there any evidence for this and are they going to tell us how they will use the $72m to exploit this advantage? So far it's all been a bit opaque (or I could say it's all been a bit 'Clive').

If you add the cashflows together they come to $72m, so that looks right.

Isn't Casp basically saying 'we're no good at oil operations'? In which case it doesn't make sense to keep the deeps (however much they may be flowing). There really doesn't seem to be much strategic sense in this.

The biggest change needed for Casp is for Clive to go - and soon.

Plural NEDs could just mean that more family members want to get their feet under the table.

I wasn't there, but I'm willing to bet that Clive didn't stand up at the AGM and say 'all is well'.

'Clive emphasised the delay in accounts was due to a 'non-commercial' issue. And he repeated that later.'

I think that's Carverspeak for 'the delay is due to a commercial issue.'!

But why does one shareholder get a seat at the table with Next and not the rest of us? Some of us might have been willing to join in a rescue attempt but were never given the opportunity. Questions for the receivers I think. And did we (the shareholders) ever get to appoint the receivers?

I wonder if the SFO should have a look at all this?

Typical Channel 4 News; only about 12 months behind the rest of us!

This could have been a great RNS except it was missing the sentence about Clive's departure.

Net zero is (a) an aspiration/target; how many Government's (never mind collections of governments) achieve their targets, and (b) contains the word 'net', which essentially means you can create as many carbon emissions as you want as long as you can find someone else to offset them (or claim that they are). Gas and oil are here for a while longer....

Surely the causation is the other way round. It is because the Board have taken an action that the market perceives as lacking in confidence/trust that you've lost money, and not that the reduction in the share price has led to less confidence.
FWIW I think there will be an upward correction over the next week or so as the market realises that the fundamentals have not changed, but future price growth will be more cautious than normal until the Board restore confidence/trust.

It's Clive's pie bill (for this month).

Or (and this is a reflection of how little trust I have in Pie-man) it could be encouragement for PI's to sell out cheaply before good news is announced in the near future.

Don't panic; it's just one of Clive's pies!

Your last five words sum it up;
the CEO could be improved !

If Clive's pies were stuck down there, he'd be a lot quicker about doing something positive about it!

Someone's having a nibble this morning. Have they heard of Clive?

No, it's just a further small dilution of PI's; death by a thousand cuts. And the Oraziman family holding in % terms drops (OK, only by 0.1%) so perhaps they've had enough and want Clive to take some of the risk himself.

Based on past experience it will be more like plop than pop.

Cashflow into next year is good news; it gives the time needed to make the best possible strategic decisions and to allow the court case to proceed without the threat of Samsung taking advantage of short-term liquidity issues.