Member Info for oilmagnet477

So, the rift is exposed. I guess the answer to where you vote is simple? 1. Do you want MAGP to continue plugging away in low risk oil, where it effectively has a solid platform on which to develop further production, in the hands of a COO, who it now appears has delivered much of what has been achieved over the last 18 months, without the support of the CEO. Do you think oil has a future and prices will rise going forward. 30% year on year overhead reduction is pretty impressive in anyone's book (although it begs the question why it wasn't don earlier??). 2. Do you want SS to take control and move into the technology sector, using MAGP as a shell? What does anyone know of his Son or his capabilities as an IT whiz? How much funding would be needed to develop this. Would a fire sale of MAGP 'assets' be enough to clear debts and other financial commitments (Would Rita sue for compensation??). Good to finally have some understanding of how MAGP got to where it is today but FM, this has all the makings of a Shakespearian Tragedy/Comedy with a few historical elements thrown in for good measure: Et tu Brute! Agreed, SS's side would be interesting but as likely to help the outcome here as the 2 sides in the Brexit debate - and look where that's got us. GLA

"What would Baldrick have to say to that ;-( " "I've got a thingy shaped just like a turnip" .......

Hi all, If and when resolutions are published voting can be easily done with whichever broker holds your shares. Just voted on resolutions for KRS and it was an easy call to HL (in my case). GLA

Directorate changes and change in directorships - yes, the same. However, you said "request directorships" which to me is fundamentally different. We will see soon enough I guess. GL

Sorry Disco, but that isn't what it says - it is to consider resolutions in respect of directorate changes. That could mean anything at this stage - unless you have seen the resolutions of course? if so, where? Thanks "Magnolia Petroleum plc, the AIM quoted US focused oil and gas exploration and production company, announces that it has received a requisition notice for a general meeting to consider resolutions in respect of directorate changes. The Company is currently seeking the advice of its legal advisers as to the validity of this requisition and will update the market in due course."

Disco - the point I am trying (maybe unsuccessfully!) to ge across is that Maggie have invested a % in each of the many wells that now, theoretically deliver an income. Each well cost a known amount and have been generally promoted on initial production rates, with sometimes impressive payback on the cost of the wells (in months at times). What we are never party to (it seems) is, when decline rates are taken into account, is how each well has performed over the years, against initial predictions. Of the 158 producing wells, I would appreciate information on how much revenue has been generated from each well, how many have repaid the initial investment and the projected time for each to become 'free production'. The more of this type of well we have, the more scope there is for growth. I appreciate that to some extent, the cost of wells has been paid for out of placings and revenue, but as Maggie are yet to be profitable, the only growth we are delivering is funded by dilution or debt and therein lies the biggest issue. Much has been made over the years the that Mags is less about production and more about proving up acreage - all very laudable but if production from each well isn't profitable, then the reserves held within are worthless, at least until the price of oil increases. The significant recent change for me is a shift to infill wells - surely this is all about production from proven acreage rather than extending proven reserves from previously undeveloped acreage. This is terrific, if it produces profit that we can then reinvest but at the same time, it is surely slowly chipping away at our reserves. Forgive a simpleton's view. I have a very long standing interest in the fortunes of this company, as well as wishing all LTHs some much needed luck and a return to the good times but every step the BoD have taken seems to make little or no difference. I wonder if my reasoning has any merit? GLA

Unfortunately, although the Boss, Rita has a pretty small number of shares so has very little control of where this now goes. Unless she has friends and shareholders enough to support her, then SOS may yet be back, tied in with NTOG and Rita out of the door. More evidence I fear of a serious rift between RW and SOS. It makes more sense now that SOS would give away his holding at such a low price - he appears to be doing it to take back control and remove RW IMHO. I have very mixed feelings about RW and SOS if I'm honest - whilst it is true to say that Maggie are still here and there should be some recognition of that, without any evidence to the contrary, we have little proof that the direction taken by the BoD has delivered anything for SHs. Significant investments were made in Montana which has come to nothing. We have no idea of the ROI of any of the wells that we generate an income from - with so many on the books, personally that information would provide a really good barometer of the company's performance. If it were me, and the figures made good reading, I'd be shouting them from the roof tops as evidence of the success of the strategic approach taken by the company over the last 5 years - if the model works, let's do more. I appreciate that many wells were developed against the backdrop of much higher returns but it is the lack of clarity which speaks volumes here. Whatever the result of this action, I fear that it will leave Maggie in a worse position, not a better one.

Disco, my feelings too. Much has been made of the cost reductions and it again crystalizes the 'best leave the 90% in the dark'approach that has done little to maintain SH value over the last couple of years or more. Neither RW or SOS can be held responsible for the downturn in the industry but I felt for some time that the failure to rake in cash when oil was $100/barrel was indicative of something less than helpful. I actually think that they have done well to still be here by now and instinctively feel that RW is moving in the right direction with much lower risk infill wells. Gaining lease acreage was the main focus of the business at the start. This has all but gone into reverse. The massive loss last year caused by the right off of big chunks of acreage has clouded the true picture. Of the wells we have left in production, is anyone actually clear on RTI and how many have actually delivered the claimed pay back in months'. Some clarity about performance and again, the strategic direction of the company would go a long way to settle nerves here. Just a shame it only seemed to matter to the BoD when they were on the roadshow circuit seeking funding back in the day. Today's RNS is undoubtedly a positive step forward but as it raises more questions that it answers, unfortunately the rumour mill and plain anxiety will I fear, take its toll until someone decides to rip aside the curtains of mystique that Miss Maggie has become.

Okenia - humble apologies - you are quite correct. I assume that the other former directors may be Thomas whatshisname and Gavin thingamabob?? If that's the case then how receptive is the remaining original Director likely to be to the 'outside help' from NTOG.

ML claims that the investment in MAGP is to expand their exposure to O+G in the US. They were approached by the company and brokers to bring their expertise to fix problems of excessive overhead and debt. £125k for 11%. Make of that what you will. Given the long held faith in SOS and RW, that doesn't sound like a ringing endorsement of past performance tbh. Hopefully NTOG 'do have the skills to turn things around' although what 'reduction of excessive overhead' looks like is anyone's guess. Did SOS jump before he was pushed?

Let's not forget, there have been massive trades historically (over 3%) which have resulted in diddly sqwat

Any company under AIM rules has to declare who holds shares over 3%. Therefore, irrespective of the price, an RNS stating SOS now owns 0 shares would have to be issued, followed by one declaring NTOG ownership. However, that assumes the rules are followed and NTOG maintain their holding. Equally, as okenia states, if the deal doesn't conclude until the end of June, maybe an announcement will be made then - but on that score, why didn't NTOG wait as well........... Curiouser and curiouser

Did you have to mention 'Elephant Oil' Only recently watched 'Grimsby' - that's put me off my breakfast!

Hi Robsky, The tell for me is the continued silence from Rita. I know she isn't renowned for her comms of late but even by her standards, the silence is deafening. If it were simply SOS bailing out then I'm sure she would have mentioned it - even in passing in today's RNS. The fact that nothing has been said means that there is defo more to come IMO.........

SOS 'selling' his shares to NTOG was a way for him to get on the BoD at NTOG - then investing in magp as per farm-ins....... Interesting times ahead me thinks

Rita continuing to do what she does best.... Some $620k spend max. The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if NTOG will farm in - causing a jump in the SP, allowing them to dispose of their 10% holding at a significant premium, effectively funding there participation in these wells. Is that a 'win win' for both Magp and NTOG?

All this does is add fuel to a fire that Magp didnt need. There could have been many reasons for SOS to leave that wouldn't necessarily have spelt bad news - indeed, it was initially indicated that he would remain a shareholder. For him to have sold his holding at such a massive discount (although I totally agree that such a big chunk would have been difficult to shift at any higher price than 0.06p) for me smells bad. I'm truly sorry to say that it exposes a rift within the BoD that must have lead to his departure. If not, surely to God, Rita and co would have done what they could to buy him out at a modest premium to the relatively paltry sum of £125k. To not have arrived at a deal, or if Rita was blind sided, not even sought one, has to indicate a major breakdown in the relationship. I sincerely hope that this is a mere blip and given the freedom to move in the direction that she sees fit, Rita can now take the company forward. I have said before that she is long overdue releasing a strategic statement about the future of the company. Like never before, that time has come. I sincerely wish everyone here all the best. Investing is difficult enough on AIM without this kind of crap. GLA

DG, if you are offering lessons about shorts, can I start with a double whisky. Cheers ;)

Trust you to be in a wine share - lol

I've been in KRS (and formerly FRX) for over 3 years, I've built up a decent relationship with the CEO and will be attending the event on the 9th. Far from launching on you, I find your questions entirely legit and will try my best to answer your specific queries. You are correct that KRS do not own the assets, however, for the land that they are currently producing from, they have a 5 year deal. This was picked up cheaply, with 2 of the Directors from Chaffers (who owned the mining right) coming on board. The declared short term target is for the Company to produce £7m gross profit from production this year, based on 20-30k oz. Australia is somewhat unique at the moment and we are making the most of higher than $650 AUD/oz margins on $900 AUD costs. Next year, the target is 30-40k oz with an ultimate goal of 50k oz. This shift in focus for KRS is ALL about short to medium term cash generation to then be used to develop other (already owned) prospects in Mn and iron ore. The upturn in gold prices has just meant that KRS are in a sweet spot for now. Personally, I have real faith in Dave Reeves, but in spite of this there have been times when the lack of delivery on other projects has been very challenging. KRS have got to production within 4 months, which I figure must be some kind of industry record. The capex and Opex of this operation are very low, all permits were already in place and all kit is hired in. I have now taken a position in NMG, which although risk laden, is free as far as I'm concerned as I've taken a small profit from KRS and put in here, purely speculatively. However, I will be grilling GK on the 9th as to how he is going to change justified perceptions based on previous experience. At the moment, I'm prepared to give him a large piece of benefit of the doubt - if he follows a similar model to KRS into short term cash production to fund wider ranging projects then these prices are for nowt. I would agree that the shorter term upside on KRS would probably pay easier dividends with lower risk (and there is always risk) but for a buy and forget share - this one has massive potential. Best wishes.