Member Info for NewKOTB

LOL, how do you think the deal was completed otherwise. The deal was transformational and totally innovative in terms of a NS transaction. Once again NI you miss-represent the methodology against the BKR deal as the liabilities came out of the blue - Wrong, all details were presented within the BKR deal documentation. No massive up front cash settlement, but rather a PSA that is fluid as it reflects the production at the time of accounts, that is how the deal works. Fully covered by cash generated from revenues that are calculated daily on production figures.

You are just spouting rubbish in trying to hoodwink investors into thinking SQZ do not have sufficient cash to cover their obligations, where as both you and I know that will never be the case with the BKR deal as laid out in the BKR PSA.

Then again, you have clearly never read the BKR deal documentation, otherwise you would realise what a fool you have been all this time misleading PI's ..... or worse still, you have read it and know exactly what you are doing, which is it ?

Makes no difference, the PSA is as stated we take 50%, BP et al the other 50%, this 50% are the liabilities referenced on the balance sheet ...... end of ... period

Does your boss want to push the sp down further ?

aimo

imo, just a waiting game atm, although the RNS will need to land soon to allow months of due procedure before we get anywhere close to SD being online. Or we will get another pi** take of a reason for the delay.
My guess is the former as the Mcap is SOOOOOOO low that SDX may well gain unwanted attention from another suitor and that was never in the big plan
aimo

Never thought I would say that ...... oh to see the ones above close too !! ...... 72p would do for me before the summer is out.

The SP is being managed, there is no doubt about it imo.

Friday, only 4000 shares difference between buys/sells down 4%, yesterday 3x as many buys as sells, down 3%, today 20% more buys than sells and down 3% again.

J4444,

From the 21/11/17 until 30/11/17 if I recall correctly, mid week RNS too. None of this Monday morning 7am or Friday 4:30 malarkey.

Can not wait for the ultra transformational deal to land. It will be MEGA imo

SQZ have publicly stated their intention is, the next deal they land will DOUBLE the size of the company.

Imagine what that would do for the SP, into orbit, hence the reason why the likes of NI are here, to rip shares from the hands for PI's into the coffers of the Trading Houses. I feel a leak has recently occurred, to much downward pressure since 28/6 for it not to be imo.

Expect an 8am trading suspension on RNS announcement as per BKR deal, may be not tomorrow, but very soon.

aimo

Alessandro,

"Thanks NewKOBT you seem to have done a good research on Serica. Much appreciated..."

My pleasure.

atb

One off payment by BP et al that is accounted for differently as part of the BKR transition period.

Details are noted in the accounts and shown as bargain purchase gain of US$52.9 million on the BKR acquisitions
calculated in accordance with IFRS.

https://www.serica-energy.com/downloads/reports/annual/Serica-Annual-Report-2018.pdf

LOL, how do you think the deal was completed otherwise. The deal was transformational and totally innovative in terms of a NS transaction. Once again NI you miss-represent the methodology against the BKR deal as the liabilities came out of the blue - Wrong, all details were presented within the BKR deal documentation. No massive up front cash settlement, but rather a PSA that is fluid as it reflects the production at the time of accounts, that is how the deal works. Fully covered by cash generated from revenues that are calculated daily on production figures.

You are just spouting rubbish in trying to hoodwink investors into thinking SQZ do not have sufficient cash to cover their obligations, where as both you and I know that will never be the case with the BKR deal as laid out in the BKR PSA.

Then again, you have clearly never read the BKR deal documentation, otherwise you would realise what a fool you have been all this time misleading PI's ..... or worse still, you have read it and know exactly what you are doing, which is it ?

In the dark ... lol, makes no difference, the PSA is as stated we take 50%, BP et al the other 50%, this 50% are the liabilities referenced on the balance sheet ...... end of ... period

Does your boss want to push the sp down further ?

aimo

Could be but I doubt it ..... but I'm sure NI will put me right !!

The SP is being managed, there is no doubt about it imo.

Friday, only 4000 shares difference between buys/sells down 4%, yesterday 3x as many buys as sells, down 3%, today equal and down 3% atm

Oh, yes, so my estimate of +1000% increase in operating profit is now looking a little conservative..... looking at +$103m for 2019 and then also $124m for 2020 and set to be greater still in 2021.

That's on current production ONLY.

I'm starting to get the feeling we are being lined up for an hostile approach. !!!

The SP is and has been constantly managed with 'A' trades from a trading house, probably the same one NI works for. These trades makeup over 90% for the days trading

Just have to look at the quick fire 'A' trades, 6 or 7 within a second to control the SP.

Any rise, even with the exceptional EoY results the other month, is squashed instantly.

The reason behind such interest is SOMEONE WANTS IN ....

aimo

NI, quoted ....
"In taking on BKR, Serica also took on liabilities - it didn't come for free......"

LOL, how do you think the deal was completed otherwise. The deal was transformational and totally innovative in terms of a NS transaction. Once again NI you miss-represent the methodology against the BKR deal as the liabilities came out of the blue - Wrong, all details were presented within the BKR deal documentation. No massive up front cash settlement, but rather a PSA that is fluid as it reflects the production at the time of accounts, that is how the deal works. Fully covered by cash generated from revenues that are calculated daily on production figures.

You are just spouting rubbish in trying to hoodwink investors into thinking SQZ do not have sufficient cash to cover their obligations, where as both you and I know that will never be the case with the BKR deal as laid out in the BKR PSA.

Then again, you have clearly never read the BKR deal documentation, otherwise you would realise what a fool you have been all this time misleading PI's ..... or worse still, you have read it and know exactly what you are doing, which is it ?

aimo

With NI's heightened activity on this bb, I would guess the deal is closer than many would think.

aimo

Can no wait for the ultra transformational deal to land.

SQZ have publicly stated their intention is the next deal they intend to land with DOUBLE the size of the company.

Imagine what that would do for the SP, hence the reason why the likes of NI are here, to rip shares from the hands for PI's into the coffers of the Trading Houses.

NI a few questions;
- when do these obligations have to be met?
- can these obligations be reduced / increased based on production levels ?
- is it possible that if production is low enough we will not have these obligation at all and BP will pay us ?
- are these obligations written in stone or are they just an estimate based on strong production volumes of what was set at the time of 24000 bopd ?

Or will you not answer these you misleading mischievous shorter

*** Re-posted from JAdam ***

Lets see if you every get any form of a direct answer from NI for any question, my guess is NO.

ATB

I have done several times !!

NI is clearly working for a broker / trading house and as such breaks LSE's T&C's that states "By using this website you are agreeing that at all times you will be acting as a Private Investor".

Just need to review his posting history, BIDS bb etc to build a clearer picture of NI's modus operandi

The correlation between SQZ SP movement and NI appearance is clear for all to see imo, yet LSE choose to ignore it imo

To end this charade, show me where these $430m are fixed amounts to be paid and are non-variable within the BKR transaction document ..... they aren't and you know this and no doubt will continue to peddle false idea that they are !!

You are just spouting rubbish in trying to hoodwink investors into thinking SQZ do not have sufficient cash to cover their obligations, where as both you and I know that will never be the case with the BKR deal as laid out in the BKR PSA

YOU ARE CLEARLY AVOIDING ANSWERING THE QUESTION ASKED OF YOU !!!

Non current are to be paid out of BKR future revenue and as such the higher the liabilities the higher the revenue and profits for SQZ. All current liabilities are FULLY covered with cash, otherwise SQZ would not be trading .

I would like to see over a billion in liabilities as this would mean massive profits being realized via our BKR assets. So the higher the liabilities (based on production), in turn , means higher revenues, means even higher profits, all the better for SQZ, SIMPLE is it not !!!!

NI , we DO NOT need to find any cash, as ALL liabilities(cash) ARE to be paid from Production Sharing Agreement (revenue received from sales) over the next 3 years, as per the very innovative deal that our board pulled off to turn SQZ into a multi billion dollar company. May be this is why NI is having trouble seeing that SQZ are an extremely positive cash generating company.

SQZ Operating profits are expected to be up +1000% for 2019 too.

NI a few questions;
- when do these obligations have to be met?
- can these obligations be reduced based on production levels
- is it possible that if production is low enough we will not have these obligation at all
- are these obligations written in stone or are they just an estimate based on strong production volumes of what was set at the time of 24000 bopd

Or will you not answer these you misleading mischievous shorter

*** Re-posted from JAdam ***

Lets see if you every get any form of a direct answer from NI for any question, my guess is NO.

ATB