Member Info for okenia

1.45p is basically the cash position - perfect buy op (I hope having just done that!)

And followed by me mopping up 400k shares as a buy.

"I always sense it's the same handful of buyers." Other than pure guesswork and a desire to spin negativity, do you have any shred of evidence to support that statement Zumore? Straws, clutching at ...

RGM have 17.3m 1.55p UKOG shares worth £1.3 million That's a bit more than £10 and still retain the bulk of their HHDL stake. It's also nearly a ten-bagger on RGM's initial buy price for those HHDL shares

RGM have 17.3m 1.55p UKOG shares worth £1.3 million

19 HHDL shares bringing in ~ £1.3m 31 HHDL shares still held (value = ??) Plus selection of additional assets Mcap < £4m Transformational deal for such a tiny company

RGM have 17.3m 1.55p UKOG shares worth £1.3 million

lol There's an interesting point here though about paying fair value, and being able to add value. One could just invest in a well-run mine and then let it ride a forthcoming bull market in that commodity (i.e. a beta play). That's fine but it's hard to see where you can add value (i.e. alpha in that terminology). You might as well just invest in a diversified low-cost fund / ETF in that sector (which I do btw, e.g. the big Blackrock gold fund). With PERE they want to add value (I think Spencer referred to this as 'transformational value' in an interview). That means taking something worth X now, improving it, and then selling it for X-plus-a-bit down the line to make a net profit. By definition then you're looking for assets that are not perfect, where there is something missing that you can rectify. It might be lack of cash, or it might be lack of technical / management skill. I'm thus expecting the acquisitions PERE make to be of this style - a decent asset (stuff in the ground) BUT with some issue that means it can be acquired on the cheap and then worked over to release that value. So maybe bythesea is being serious given you think AAU has problems (ones that could be fixed?)?!?

I very much doubt it - for a technical reason. In the pathfinder document they state that they haven't identified an asset yet nor entered into discussions. [If they had, they would have had to disclose that as part of the admission and it would have been a "remain suspended until RTO is complete" scenario]. They've clearly been looking at various assets but none are sufficiently advanced in the DD to mean we'll get an acquisition next week. Instead I predict [lol - it's what the pathfinder says!!] a brief period where, having got the money, they do more DD and start tangible negotiations (which they couldn't without a confirmed listing and cash, after all) and then the first deal a little way down the line. These things have to be done in the right order. Ro quote from p4 of the pathfinder doc: "Although a number of potential acquisition opportunities have been identified, the Company does not have any specific acquisition under consideration and does not expect to engage in substantive negotiations with any target company or business in this sector until after Admission." DL doesn't start to get paid until the first acquisition has been made so there will be plenty of urgency to get this done ASAP from his perspective :)

Given where the board have been based and operating in the last few years, i.e. where they have the networks and contacts, I'd say N America is the obvious destination. DL and the board have just spent 10 days in Canada visiting potential assets as part of their DD (so I've been told). Why on earth would you bother with an asset in a difficult jurisdiction at this point in the cycle when you can pick up good assets in excellent locations (e.g. Canada) for good prices? You only wander into difficult locations in W Africa and the like when the bull market is in full flood and you can't pick up decent assets in better places for decent prices. Also remember that they want to take a controlling stake in an asset, not take over a struggling AIM company! [Ignoring the fact that PERE don't have the cash to buy-out Ariana even if they want to].

Art - the company are relaxed (I was about to say "chilled" in true WRN BB fashion!) about being on the standard list. It's a worthwhile place to be compared to AIM, because they want to take controlling stakes in the assets so they can do their "turn around" stuff. On AIM, the class tests would mean each acquisition would be viewed as a RTO and you'd have to suspend, whereas on the Standard List the class tests are different. [There's a quirk about the first acquisition being automatically viewed as a RTO due to the transfer from a cash shell to a operating co, but after that it's purely "don't eat anything bigger than your head" RTO rules.] Re funding: the plan is to use debt and co-investment SIVs to take stakes in assets, as opposed to significant levels of PLC-level cash. It's the private equity approach DL is used to from his previous life. In some cases what the asset might be lacking isn't cash, or a decent asset, but rather the expertise to get it working (e.g. a family owned mine where they don't have the scoobies how to many money from). That's where the board and advisory panel expertise come in - parachute-in expertise in return for a stake in the asset. Essentially you're buying assets with intellectual property as opposed to cash (important as in an efficient market you can only buy an asset at fair price, so begs the question how you add value and thus shareholder value to is). This anyway is the grand plan - as per the investor roadshow - and what you do have is a team with the track record and expertise to deliver. Whether they can or not remains to be seen - there is execution risk until they show they can do it, in this vehicle. DL's last vehicle started with £3m and was sold for £500m to RAB Capital, so it's not new to him. As for opening price ... with many placements there's bit of a lag before the SP gets going. In some cases (e.g. IRON recently) that reflects the fact that the broker underwrote the placing but didn't place it all out, so have stock on their hands to feed into the market. [They get their 5% fee so this is no hardship]. Sometimes people wag a finger at "flippers" whereas in reality the underwriting process means that the placing in effect continues after the actual date. The upside of that is that you can generally pick up stock on the secondary market in that window, at about the placing price, and thus you can buy stock in your ISA at the placing price (whereas the placing stock all goes into non-ISA accounts because of the rules). That happened with ARS the other week, there was a lot of ISA churn and volume immediately after the placing as people (like myself) shifted stock into the tax wrapper.

Lotto, I think you're spot on with WTI. The debt position via Orion is too onerous for WTI, it's beyond the point of no return. Unless a total miracle happens (e.g. copper going to $6/lb) then the equity in WTI is worthless. (Worthless as an investment but clearly not as a casino chip, which it is being actively used as at the moment I see). In fact, if copper does surge and the project looks like it could be attractive then Orion might just call in the debt and take the company over. Either way you don't want to be a shareholder. I'd not want WTI equity and I don't think for a second PERE do - as Lotto says, far more likely will be a distancing between the two companies imo.

"How likely is it that AB would actually sell those shares? Not at all likely imo." Is that because you think there's even more upside in UKOG from here?

Why is it taking so long? One obvious source of an admin bottleneck would be any need for the other HHDL shareholders to approve the transfer and registration of the transfer of the HHDL shares from RGM to UKOG. That's several corporate cats that need herding together and paperwork circulated and signed. And it's summer and everyone is on the beach. Once that's done I don't imagine the issue of the UKOG shares will take long, as that's a purely within-UKOG matter that they can action alone. What nice is that (much to my amazement it has to be said) the UKOG SP has kept itself at this very high level despite the delays, it doesn't look like it was a temp artefact of market imbalance or whatever. It would have been annoying for the UKOG share issuance to have been delayed so long the UKOG SP had re-set to 2p or whatever (which it could have). As it happens, if RGM get the shares now they'll be able to sell them and make off with a massive wad of ££££ like total heroes. Yes, every now and again luck goes their way! You may faint if you wish. At 7p that chunk of UKOG shares is worth over £1.4m (£323,000 * 7 / 1.55 in case you've left your pocket calculator churning over the Tshipi numbers). £1.4m in cash will be utterly transformative for RGM if it comes through - that's hard to argue against I would say. Questions obviously remain as to if/when it will come through, how much the UKOG shares can be sold for (I am assuming RGM won't be as daft as to look this particular gift horse in the mouth), and then what the proceeds can be spent on. Top of my list would be at least a partial pay down of the YA convertible (something no-one likes), which would do wonders for sentiment. Whatever, news of that issue of UKOG shares is likely to unleash a small wall of news as that cash is then deployed. Def not one to be out of over the weekend ...

The disclosure responsibility is on the holder, not the issuer. RGM don't police the register. If a shareholder buys or sells and goes one way or the other over a notifiable threshold, then for AIM they are required to inform the company of that change. [As a slight aside, if the holder has taken no action but breaches a threshold, they don't have to inform - e.g. if they have decreased their percent by way of a dilutive event, they don't have to say anything as they took no actions themselves] One they have been informed, the issuer (RGM) then issues an RNS. (Eg "the company has been informed that as of 1st April 2018 Harry Enfield holds 6.1% of the shares in Regency Mines" etc etc). Thus, if SM has made a change in his holding, it's SM's responsibility to inform RGM. Only once they have been informed does RGM inform the market. (I'll be waiting for Harry's RNS tomorrow buy the way!)

Yes all the references (except one that wasn't caught) are to the 21st. The GM is on the 18th and resumption of trading on the 21st.

What's that got to do with Regency Ken?

It's re-listing on the 21st after the GM on the 18th.

A quick look at the M&A tells us what we already know, which is directors of HHDL can block share transfers. There's nothing about going over 50%, but logically thinking the other shareholders wouldn't want UKOG to go over 50% and thus have total controlling power. That alone is probably enough for UKOG to not try to go above that number (don't ask for more than 19 shares as a refusal often offends...)

I am reading between the lines here (because I can't be bothered to read the HHDL M&A!) HHDL has 1,000 shares total. As per the Dec 2016 confirmation statement and list of shareholders, UKOG have 480 shares. Taking 19 shares from RGM gives them 499 shares and thus a whisper under 50%. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08808553/filing-history The fact that UKOG took this weird number of 19 shares, I'd interpret that as reflecting some issue in UKOG going 50% or more. That's a supposition I could check by looking at the M&As but I cannot be a*****d :) The valuation of HHDL shares are what someone wants to pay for them. UKOG are not the only potential buyers - there are the other HHDL shareholders (look at the register) who might want to increase their exposure given recent HH success. Or it could be a new person coming in (since RGM has clearly put a "for sale" sign on their stake). These French SCDM lot are an obvious candidate especially given the daft (in my view) price they paid for their recent increase in UKOG. They're not short of a bob or two and clearly positive towards HH, so maybe they'd like to pay heftily for a parallel direct stake in HHDL?