Member Info for No1plasterer

people with three stupid price predictions

Good research

They are a long way off.
Mid Next year at the earliest.
There’s potential but there’s a long time between now and then. Fundraise possibly. Although they have said that they are fully funded for it.

I would have thought all this fracking news would of lifted the sp

Not been used for 4 years.

The spread on LSE is inaccurate, I bout in @ .26

A 6% share holder is pushing for new BOD.
The two in place now seem to pay them selves a fortune and screw share holders.

I think it would turn around with the right people in charge.

3 years while most importantly being on target to make substantial real profits for the first time in hVIVO’s history this year. A key pillar to this success has been a relentless focus on cost management, particularly minimising inefficient and ineffective C-suite executive packages. This is a principle I believe is crucial for any small cap public company to survive. Ends.

founders helped me establish Fastnet Oil and Gas plc which IPO’d on AIM in 2011. As with all my public company projects, I invested a very large part of my personal net worth to become Fastnet’s single largest investor. While running Fastnet, I was a very hands-on Executive Chairman and for the first two years that I ran it, I took a nominal £10,000 salary per annum. Throughout my three years as Executive Chairman of Fastnet, we completed a huge amount of activity including successfully raising c. $50 million and in turn we brought in key strategic players such as BP, Kosmos Energy and SK Energy to entirely fund our Moroccan offshore well and operations. We also discovered one of the larger onshore gas resources in Morocco and did extensive work in the Celtic Sea basin; When oil and gas prices collapsed from $120 a barrel to $30 in 2014, I immediately conserved all of the company’s cash, reduced its overheads by 95%, creating a substantial cash shell with c. $15 million and transformed Fastnet into Amryt Pharma plc which today is listed on Nasdaq with a market cap of c. $500 million; I have been a reasonably substantial investor in several other Oil & Gas companies, some of which have worked out well for me. I was an early investor in Rockrose Energy plc and stayed in until its successful trade sale. Likewise, I was a substantial, early investor in Touchstone Exploration plc, which also resulted in excellent returns on my initial investment. I have also invested in a range of other oil and gas companies, some of which have performed well and others of which have performed rather badly. As such, I believe I have a clear insight into how a successful AIM listed Oil & Gas management team should operate to deliver successful outcomes for its shareholders. I see striking similarities in the current situation with Reabold to what I faced when I first met with hVIVO plc’s Board in October 2019. hVIVO at that point in time also had a very expensive dual management team structure. This included a very expensive Executive Chairman and COO, both of whom claimed they were running the company and were extracting significant remuneration packages while the market cap of hVIVO was less than £10 million, the company was perennially loss making and moving towards the point of insolvency. I promptly replaced these very expensive executives and consolidated their dual role into a single position, on a modest package that was less than what either of the predecessors was on. I am a firm believer that the Board should reflect the values of the business while focusing on delivering sustainable returns for the company’s shareholders. As such, I am confident that the Requisition can be the catalyst to transform Reabold in a similar manner to how we transformed hVIVO, more than doubling revenues to c.£50 million in 3 years while most importantly being on target to make substantial real profits for the first time in hVIVO’s history this year. A key pillar to this success

economic valuation of Victory, based on an historical average gas price valuation of 50p/therm, had increased from £146 million to £193 million yet the sale price is just £32 million; The return for Reabold shareholders, even with the £32 million sale is vastly diluted by what the board are receiving and the payment of their incentive shares; The lacklustre results of UK onshore licence PEDL 183; The Board having failed to capitalise on the downtrend trend in oil prices last year to acquire producing assets to secure the future of the business. The parties supporting this requisition are long term shareholders of Reabold who have invested significant cash resources to cornerstone and support a number of Reabold’s placings. This is in stark contrast to the Board who collectively own just over 3%, and who’s compensation has minimal correlation to Reabold’s overall performance, specifically share price performance. The parties supporting this Requisition have a clear vision and plan on how to get Reabold performing properly in the UK Oil & Gas sector. Market conditions in 2021 and 2022 should have allowed any UK Oil & Gas focused company such as Reabold to significantly outperform their peers. Whereas the reality is, Reabold has completely underperformed. I lay the blame for this mismanagement at the foot of the Board. This assessment is clearly reciprocated by the market through the significant decline in the share price. As with any company which has disappointed and whose Board has been in place for 4-5 years, it is my view that a fresh start is necessary. A fresh set of eyes and a more hands-on approach from seasoned veterans such as myself and John McGoldrick is required. We both have considerably more experience operating and turning around struggling public companies than Reabold’s existing Board, and we are relishing the opportunity to implement significant improvements to Reabold. These improvements are under the following areas: Return cash to shareholders; Appoint an appropriate and experienced CEO; we are in discussions with two appropriate candidates; Realise substantially higher value from existing projects; and Capitalise on several new asset deals, which will involve no dilution of equity for the shareholders. It is very important to note that although my more recent experience has been focused on life sciences, I have considerable experience in the Oil & Gas space, both operating and investing in publicly listed companies: I had a ringside seat with Cove Energy plc, from its formation in 2009 when it had an initial market cap of less than £1 million through to its ultimate trade sale 3 years later in 2012 for c. £1.7 billion. I shared a small office in Dublin with the founders and I became quite close to the management team as it evolved very rapidly, providing support to them as they became one of the most successful AIM oil and gas investments in many years; As a result, the Cove Energy founders helped me establish Fastnet Oil and

the purpose of expediency. A 5% holding is the minimum requirement under company law to requisition a meeting and we brought together a close, small group of initial shareholders for this purpose. Notwithstanding this, please be aware that we have significant support amongst the shareholder base, which we estimate currently accounts for more than 25% of the total voting rights. When it comes to the voting process, the requisitioning shareholders are optimistic in being able to persuade and convince most of the other shareholders to support the Requisition. Reabold was marketed as an innovative company taking a fresh approach to how AIM listed Oil & Gas companies should operate. As someone with extensive experience managing and investing in AIM listed companies, I was attracted by their purported fresh approach. However, I am really struggling to see how the existing team is implementing this fresh approach when you consider the following: How can a small cap publicly quoted company such as Reabold justify having a dual CEO function? In 2021, both CEOs received a base salary of £231,000, representing a combined salary for the CEO function of £462,000. This is significantly out of line with the AIM market for a company with such a small market cap; In addition to their base salary, both CEOs received a bonus of £50,000 and share based payments worth £66,000 during 2021, bringing their total remuneration package, including pension contributions, to £358,000 each despite the share price dropping significantly from 0.64p to 0.17p (a decline of over 70%) in the calendar year of 2021; Both CEOs, Sachin Oza and Stephen Williams, have significant conflicts of interest, holding board positions in associated companies and drawing an income from these roles in addition to the substantial packages they are currently drawing from Reabold. Both are non-executive directors of Rathlin Energy Limited. Stephen is also a non-executive director at Europa Oil and Gas plc. Sachin Oza is also a non-executive director of Corallian Energy; Additionally, given the recent sale process, the Corallian directors will be issued significant incentive bonuses. This significantly reduces the size of the cash that will be distributed to the Reabold shareholders. This incentive structure brings about inherent conflicts of interest questions, most notably the potential for the Directors to be more focussed on maximising their bonuses rather than representing the best interests of shareholders. In my opinion, across several recent deals and transactions involving Reabold, a more experienced, seasoned and hands-on Board would have produced a much better result for shareholders. Clear examples of the inability of the Board to maximise shareholder value include: The conditional sale of Corallian Energy is significantly lower than expected and guided by the management team. It was previously stated by that Corallian's updated 2C economic valuation of Victory, based on an historical averag

I thought this was a good read posted on another BB

Reposted, with law's permission, from the UJO board: For those who don’t subscribe to toms blog The full article it looks spot on. Reabold Resources (RBD) now faces a sack the board resolution spearheaded by Donegal’s finest Cathal Friel. Friel has, in various share issuances, poured vast amounts of Euro into the company. He has skin in the game and he and fellow shareholders owning 6.93% collectively want change. They have had enough of failure being rewarded. As you can see HERE, we have exposed the charlatans who run this company before. And in response to the resolution, the charlatans are playing fast and lose with the truth once more. They say: This is an ”opportunistic attempt to gain control without paying a control premium”. That is just a lie. All that the requisitioners wish to do is replace a failed board that has destroyed both shareholder value and the share price with a new board, including Cathal, with new ideas to, we hope, deliver better outcomes. Cathal has a track record as a value creator. The current board has a track record as a value destroyer. So it is simple we back Cathal, sack the board. So how does Cathal see it. He has been in touch and explains what is going on thus: “I have personally invested a number of times in Reabold through Kamran Sattar of Portillion Capital. Since 2020, Kamran has been very actively involved with the management team of Reabold and in January 2021, he both corner-stoned and underwrote the placing of £7.5 million. This ensured that the placing was completed at a premium to the then market price of 0.55p avoiding shareholder dilution. Subsequently, Kamran has had significant engagement with the company including when Reabold’s share price was tumbling in Q3 2021, Kamran introduced Hannam & Partners to Reabold as he has previously worked with them, and in turn launched a strategic review of the assets with a view to monetising some of the assets. Kamran was also part of the group named as strategic investors in Corallion Energy and the party that facilitated the Day Break transaction. Kamran, myself and a number of other shareholders have become very frustrated by the really poor performance of the Reabold team despite Kamran’s best efforts and therefore, we have decided that most of the Board needs to be replaced including both co-CEOs. As mentioned, I hold a reasonable investment in Reabold, where I am nursing a substantial loss. I am fully aware that the markets are currently difficult with most stocks down in 2022. Despite this, I have joined this Requisition because I feel quite strongly that Reabold should have been able to perform vastly better than many of its peers in the Oil & Gas sector. Furthermore, whilst the requisitioning shareholders calling the general meeting account for 6.93% of the voting rights in Reabold, this is simply for the purpose of expediency. A 5% holding is the minimum requirement under company law to requis

Dai

What do you think to Reabold resources ? Good potential at. low SP

https://reabold.com/our-projects/

@ Dorsal

Thanks for that i did look and had a buy order in @ 9.7p but it wasn't filled unfortunately

IOG is one to watch they have 35 million in the bank and there SP dipped to 7.5p yesterday It’s almost 13p today

Along with a number of other things

Covid is a worry

I remember similar posts when we where high 50’s

What is your target on QFI

Dai ??

Yeh boo is good to trade. Iv done it many times and I’m pretty sure muscles does too.

Eog has been disastrous for me.
I bought more yesterday @1.15. Down again.

I cant understand why the sp has dropped so much.
I realise the drill cost them 5million which can be offset. It seems unrealistic for a company to put 50% of its worth on the unknown outcome of one drill. They need give news on there financial position etc.

My average is 3.4
I agree, I think it’ll linger at the 3-3.5p range until results.
I think the news of spud will give an initial lift in sp