Utilico Insights - Jacqueline Broers assesses why Vietnam could be the darling of Asia for investors. Watch the full video here.
Agree - good post.
An ignorant question I know, but is there much involved in getting GOI approval/consent, and will it help at all that Selan got GOI approval iro what looks to me to be a similar transaction just 2 months ago?
https://www.selanoil.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Disclosure-under-Regulation-30.pdf
well i got caught a little too because i use advfn l2 and they posted the wrong rns (it was a previous update rns) so i top sliced only to wonder why the price then rocketed! as it’s panned out i needn’t have been worried, but i was ****ed at the time!
I guess some have it in their head that a placing is coming tomorrow.
That seems daft to me.
If a raise was a condition of the deal, they wouldn’t have completed on it until at least after headroom had been given and most likely after a raise had been done.
Placings are always viewed negatively it seems.
But look at HE1. Raise undertaken at a massive discount to drill a well which then yielded fantastic results and a super uplift to the SP just a few weeks later.
I don’t think there will be an imminent raise here, but if there were and it was necessary to secure/progress a great JV resulting in an SP rise, then where’s the issue?
Placings to keep the lights on are one thing, but placings to significantly progress the business are quite another.
Just to be clear, I think the headroom resolution has been requested by the potential farminee so that it has comfort we have the ability to raise should that be necessary. I don’t think it means we will be raising imminently.
It is perfectly normal and routine for any company to ensure it has headroom, and indeed putting it in place each year is often a standing agenda item at AGM’s.
But that’s just my view!
“ partly through debt and partly through equity to be issued at a higher price than the current share price.”
Well I should blooming hope it would be above “current” share price because by then the consolidation will have been effected!
Last ditch efforts here by the company.
For anyone taking comfort from the various reassurances in the Chairman’s letter, be reminded that every reassurance he gave in his letter seeking a headroom raise last year proved false.
Just one other observation/clarification to add into the mix, which is that the incorporation docs were actually filed electronically with companies house on 19/1/24. So IF it has anything to do with us that would fit in time like this;
Monday 15/1 - notice of GM without the headroom request.
Friday 19/1 - Synergia Energy Limited incorporated in U.K.
Monday 22/1 - RNS update confirming meetings held the previous week
Thursday 25/1 - GM amendment to include headroom request.
Agree - often the case that a new entity is set up for a JV. But I’m not wholly convinced this has anything to do with us at all and certainly don’t want to be accused of intentionally initiating a P&D!
I still think the JV agreements will be executed shortly. I do think the headroom authority is linked to the JV, but I don’t think there will be an immediate raise.
I posted details of the new company because its name, the timing of incorporation, the Director residency, and its activities tweaked my interest, but to be honest I think the the evidence we’re seeing of a link between us and them is a little thin.
First, we don’t know that the F Koh in the LI profile is the same person as the Director of the new company. That said, there are indications. 1) They’re both in Singapore. 2). The Director was born in 1976, and the LI profile say they started O level studies in 1989, which would tie in.
Second, we don’t know they’re involved with us, but again there are indications. 1) what they do for a living, and the region they work in might support the theory. 2) if the person in the LI profile is the same as the Director, then the fact they incorporated the new U.K. entity, calling it Synergia Energy Ltd, slap bang in the final stages of our ZJV negotiations, would strongly suggest a link.
If they are involved then it bodes well for JV completion
But there are a lot of ifs, buts and maybes in the theory as it stands!
This may well be nothing linked to us at all, but I see that a company called Synergia Energy Limited was incorporated in the UK on 24/1/24, the only director and shareholder being a resident of Singapore - Ms Frances Ping Ping Koh. Timing is interesting, being a couple of days after our 22/1 update, so are its listed activities;
46711 - Wholesale of petroleum and petroleum products
71122 - Engineering related scientific and technical consulting activities
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/15431167
Any thoughts?
One side to a negotiation is never just going to roll over and agree to everything the other side wants. That’s just the nature of negotiations. Both sides will naturally be trying to get the best deal they can for them and their shareholders, and it’s often said that the right deal is one where neither side comes out perfectly happy. I think we must ultimately remember that both sides have already put a lot of time and energy into discussions and will want to complete a deal.
Well as far as I can see, these are the reasons it may fall.
1. Fear that this potential JV episode maybe a ruse to get new headroom authorised, and then a raise away. I don’t buy that. The new headroom request is normal, sensible, and routine, and would pass in any normal circumstances regardless of the potential JV. Given the timing of the GM amendment, I think it possible the headroom request is linked to negotiations, but I think it’s just so SYN can demonstrate an ability to raise, not that they will, or must raise, to get the JV over the line.
2. Fear that there’s some problem that may lead to the deal collapsing before execution. That is of course possible, but I don’t buy it. If there were problems then I doubt Roland would be issuing tweets/RNS indicating imminent execution of the paperwork.
I think the reason we’ve not seen execution yet is most likely the simplest and most obvious one - the parties are just hammering out details in documentation that will define their future relationship, and it’s taking a little longer than Roland thought. I think I’m right in saying that SYN, or Oilex as was, have been burned by aJV partner in the past and so it’s little wonder they want to make sure the deal agreements are clear and unambiguous. The perceived delay brings fear, however, and allows some to stoke that fear for their own reasons.
I think far too much is being attributed to the “delays” here.
In my experience hammering out the fine details in agreements after heads have been agreed takes time. Whichever side produced the first draft skew it for their benefit before sending it to the other. Lawyers for the other side will review, discuss with their clients, amend the draft, and send it back. This to and fro continues until you end up with an agreement. There is nothing nefarious about it, but it takes time, time which Roland appears to have mid-judged. That is his only error as far as I can see.
I also dont think the headroom request at the GM is something to be concerned about. The request is pretty standard and I just don’t think eyebrows would be raised at all if it was being done at an AGM. It’s just routine stuff.
Just seen yours Steward, and you maybe right. Issue for me there is that the easy to get diamonds have gone, and costs of digging down and getting more will be higher. Does that cost merit the generally low value of Marange diamonds?