Member Info for Ovets

Agreed, but somehow I'd like t weave into all this TD's confident statement on 23/8/18 that FID would be announced in the next 6 months (i.e. by Feb 2019) and now he's saying to Malcy thaqt it might be by the "turn of the year", although he didn't say which year.
Presumably awaiting the outcome of the Argentine elections, amongst other things?

However, statements like these have a direct bearing on RKH, so if TD is going to make such important statements, which fail to materialise, why aren't we hearing something from our BoD?
We all know we're passengers of PMO, but that doesn't mean TD can say whatever he likes and our BoD says nothing, does it?

Also, just for the record, I was the one who suggested everyone stop bickering and, assuming we ARE all shareholders with much the same interest, agree some challenging questions for the AGM.

I've been disappointed by the lack of sensible suggestions and continued sniping, which doesn't really help anyone, but makes me wonder who, out of this lot, really IS a shareholder.

Carrot, if the idea is to work together to agree some sort of resolution, I didn't find that posting very helpful and it's unlikely to garner the support of others.

After yesterday's performance by TD, regarding the development of SL, If I were Sam, I'd be looking for buyers for RKH and all its FI licences/interests, to be effected as soon as the ECT award is known, leaving it up to the new owner to collect the ECT money and get on with exploiting the NFB without further delay.

Also, if you remember, someone posted here that Standard Chartered were having problems organising funding for SL phase 1 and that without the EC funding component, the project might struggle.
So what TD said in his interview with Malcy makes a lot of sense: PMO have got to reduce their indebtedness and EC funding will make a considerable difference.

Regarding Zama-1, the rumour that PMO will probably "monetise" it has been doing the rounds for yonks and TD seemed to confirm that - I got the impression that he said a bit more to Malcy about this than he intended.

Surfit, I've said for a while that EC funding is critical to this project, giving other would-be participants confidence to make their commitment.
However, I agree that this has been a bit more than just keeping cards close to their chest, with misleading announcements having been made and then important information being withheld.
Maybe, if that info had been disclosed, it would have spooked everyone connected with PMO & RKH. However, it does seem as though we mere shareholders are being kept in the dark, after having been misled and I'd like some answers at the AGM.

We can only guess at all the causes of the delay in announcing FID from Feb 2019, but one was the sudden and unexpected collapse in the PoO at the end of 2018, which has only recovered because of OPEC+ cut-backs, the Venezuelan crisis and other problems for some producers.

While the PMO team continues to "mitigate the risks of new production in a new area" and sort out the funding arrangements, I suspect they're also pausing to see if the recovery in the PoO is sustained and not just a flash in the pan - hence the delays.

For those who can only see the downside, while one should always try to see all aspects of an investment (up and down), TD seemed careful not to get over-excited about SL, but my read was generally +ve, apart from the same old grey clouds that I've mentioned many times:
- the PoO, which is a bit down at the moment;
- the political situation in the region and especially Argentina with elections at the end of the year - could it be that the final SL decisions will be held until it's known who's won (Macri, or the Peronists)?

Anyway, for Pollie Parrot, Ralphy, etc. in particular, who only seem to have one bird call, a very good bit of advice in a recent finance programme, which the likes of Pollie Parrot, Ralph, etc. clearly didn't consider, which is when investing in anything: "What is your capacity for loss?". If you'd thought about that when placing your best, you'd probably have another bird call, instead of the same old boring one.

In TD's interview, when Malcy asked him about PMO selling Zama, he said: "..but over time I would expect US companies to move into Mexico, so I do think there'll be some interest in our Zama asset", which supports the rumour that PMO might "monetise" Zama and concentrate on SL.
And if you disagree about that, he went on to say, looking beyond SL phase 1: "...but if you look out further, I think there'll be multiple phases of development in the NFB". He went on to say that inevitably there's a lot to do to get to first oil in a new basin to mitigate the risks of new production in a new area, which is what they've been/are doing.

I agree that the AGM is unlikely to produce fireworks, but it's the opportunity to buttonhole those making decisions.

There's been so much anger/criticism/insult directed towards our BoD on this BB (including Sam's hair), that I'm astonished that those holding such views now say they can't even be bothered to turn up.

FFS, the one opportunity people have to meet and speak to these "villains" and some just shrug and walk in the opposite direction.

They can't possibly be shareholders, or at least significant shareholders, otherwise they'd be queuing at the door right now to be the first to get in on 15th May.

NH, in that case your second point is a very good reason for EC funding to be approved ASAP.
Why?
Because EC funding will only be approved if the FI oil fields are virtually guaranteed to deliver and that delivery will not only repay the EC funding loan (with interest), but also provide FIG & HMG considerable additional revenue currently unavailable.
So if HMG is looking for potential new revenue streams and prepared to offend some environmentalists, EC funding will happen sooner rather than later.

I've certainly wondered about this, but even the most environmental environmentalists realise that we're going to be burning fossil fuels for a while yet, even if we don't like it.

As you say, the biggest issue could be HMG appearing to sponsor something that has the potential of trashing of a pristine natural area.

If there's as much oil and gas there as anticipated (i.e. beyond SL) and it's of the very high quality we're told, then someone's going to try and get it and I suspect FIG/HMG would prefer to have that done under their control, rather than, say, a big oil company with deep pockets.
It could be argued that PMO's indebtedness has its advantages, if it means they have to submit to any EC funding conditions.

Nothing new here - that's been one of the grey clouds I've been referring to since Macri was elected - if he makes a pig's ear of their economy, the Peronists would be back, even if only to stand for election.

If they're successful, what it might do for the FI would ensure that not much trust is given to the Argies, which was never a good idea as their government can change at any time, probably increase FI defence expenditure, which probably isn't a bad thing and very likely deprive the FI of various resources that a friendly neighbour might share/provide, which would have been useful.

In all, not the best news, but not unexpected and probably not a deal breaker.

In any case, although Macri hasn't achieved the miracles hoped for 4 years ago, some of their neighbours are in a terrible economic state, so by comparison with them, the electorate may well decide to give him another 4 years as the alternatives aren't much/any better.

AGM 15/5/19

Don't think it's PMO dragging their feet, so much as having no freedom to act as they please, 'cos they're skint, so everyone else involved is telling them what to do

BTW Ollie, if you're going to try and post in English, it's "None of them IS going to happen".

"None" is the abbreviation of "not one".

Ollie, you've just proved our point - someone asks a reasonable question and you can't even provide a polite and civil answer, but instead, trying to be clever, which we all know you're not.

FID is Final Investment Decision - i.e. the project is fully costed, the capital funding is in place and the BoD can sanction the project - i.e. the race is ready to go and all the drivers and cars are at the racing track, but the race hasn't started yet.
Project Sanction is the final go-ahead - (i.e. the red lights on the grid start line have just gone out) and now the race has started.

redon, it's Bank Holiday W/E and the carrot's run out of medication, gone into a bit of a depression and this is the result!

Cheers!

Will you be going?
Hope so.

Because of the short notice, I probably won't be able to attend, which is annoying.

However, as things (e.g. finance/funding, timings, World reduced need for fossil fuels) are getting critical, we need to agree some really challenging questions, and also agree that those attending aren't fobbed-off with waffle and smooth words.

Also, during the nattering sessions, those attending the AGM, collar the BoD and make sure they don't wriggle free without answering properly (e.g. like when Fiona tried to convince me that Eirik Raude had been a great success).

You've said all this 100 times, like a scratched record, but you never go on to develop this miraculous revelation.

And so, Ralphy, we're all agog to hear your wisdom?

Just re-read this and perhaps didn't make it clear enough:
Once you've sold your non-ISA shares, let's say on a T+2 settlement, you'll get your money 2 days later.
Only then can you transfer it into your ISA (you're not allowed to trade in an ISA on credit).
Then you can use that money to buy your shares as soon as the ISA is in credit, without having to wait 30 days, BUT you will have to wait the 2 settlement days, during which anything can happen - FID announced, for example!