Member Info for Ovets

No markap, it isn't a "Court case", in the usual sense and that's what the paper is saying, but from the opposite perspective to ours and they are complaining that it's weighted in RKH's favour.

Again, read it (all of it) and then you can comment again!
Cheers

https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/attachments/one_treaty_to_rule_them_all.pdf

Like I said last night, markap, have you read this?

https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/attachments/one_treaty_to_rule_them_all.pdf

This paper has been referred to before, but here it is again, as it's written by anti-ECT organisations:
https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/attachments/one_treaty_to_rule_them_all.pdf

They use RKH as the main example and appear to concede that their case is very strong.
If you read this, it answers a lot of questions, as viewed from the other side.

I think the discussion was prompted by someone asking if an ECT Italian award is reflected in the current sp, which is a reasonable question, and the answer is: NO.
So I don't think any harm was done in discussing the matter, which will become an important issue next year, and then, how long after that it takes to work through the inevitable appeal.
After all, if this was about your personal finances, you'd want to know all about every aspect of your assets, liabilities and any court actions currently pending, wouldn't you? so don't think it is "crap".

Isn't that just the normal legal process?
I don't see anything good, bad or indifferent about it - it's just normal, as one would expect.

Sorry about the multiple postings, but last night the site was displaying error messages saying that it couldn't cope any more, which is more-or-less how I felt!

Try working your way through this lot:
https://energycharter.org/what-we-do/dispute-settlement/all-investment-dispute-settlement-cases/

Some of the awards are astronomical, but the larger the award, the more likely that a lengthy appeal will follow, so don't assume an end to it all next year, which is another reason why it isn't and can't be reflected in the sp.

Try working your way through this lot:
https://energycharter.org/what-we-do/dispute-settlement/all-investment-dispute-settlement-cases/

Some of the awards are astronomical, but the larger the award, the more likely that a lengthy appeal will follow, so don't assume an end to it all next year, which is another reason why it isn't and can't be reflected in the sp.

Try working your way through this lot:
https://energycharter.org/what-we-do/dispute-settlement/all-investment-dispute-settlement-cases/

Some of the awards are astronomical, but the larger the award, the more likely that a lengthy appeal will follow, so don't assume an end to it all next year, which is another reason why it isn't and can't be reflected in the sp.

Try working your way through this lot:
https://energycharter.org/what-we-do/dispute-settlement/all-investment-dispute-settlement-cases/

Some of the awards are astronomical, but the larger the award, the more likely that a lengthy appeal will follow, so don't assume an end to it all next year, which is another reason why it isn't and can't be reflected in the sp.

You're clearly better informed about this one than most.
Wouldn't the lawyers acting for RKH (who are known to be experienced in this sort of thing) have been aware of which company to name as the claimant/plaintiff?
Maybe the ECT rules require RKH to be named as the claimant?

Otherwise, from what you're saying, that could appear to have been a bit of a cock-up, which one wouldn't have expected.

PMO have a bit of a dilemma - they'd like to be producing NOW, if that was at all possible, with POO pretty strong and profits from SL paying down debt.

But they can't, for a whole load of reasons, starting with their still substantial debt pile, which makes any would-be partner nervous.
How would you feel about going into business on what looks like a pretty sound business plan, but your partner is already up to their neck in massive debt and the business plan is reliant on a fluctuating commodity? I reckon many here (particularly those who moan about everyone/everything) would simply walk away and do something a bit less risky, especially if they'd already been bitten during the POO collapse from 2015.

To succeed in obtaining that additional funding, PMO have got to be able to show nervous partners that this time there'll be no repeats of the last catastrophe and with that, they'll have to show they're 100% on the ball.
That's where Catcher is helpful, demonstrating the technology right now and very profitably.

But there'll be all the other things that must be sorted - no one will want to be associated with another Deepwater Horizon in such a pristine area, so while the prize is enormous, so are the risks and any potential partner/funder will demand that these are managed to the absolute minimum, otherwise it'll be: sorry, no money.

In normal circumstances you wouldn't, but you might need to call upon its presence if circumstances change, as the oil fields could stretch over a vast area.

Anyway, I'm just reporting what someone else said, so, if it bothers you that much, you'd better ask him.

In that case, as you're obviously a bit of an expert, you'd better tell Theresa (when she has a spare minute) to scrap HMS QE, before we waste any more money on it
I mean, as an historically naval country, why would we need any boats?

Was chatting with an old chum, retired from the RN and asked him what the hell we're doing building a ridiculously expensive white elephant of an aircraft carrier, equipped with even more ridiculous F35 aircraft - $100million each aren't they?

While allegedly a multi-role ship, he asked me, if there turns out to be as much oil in the FI region as those in the know believe, how the hell do you defend those remote oils fields, so far away?

If, as Murunam says, this thing's going to fly anyway (which I agree with), then HMG is going to want to benefit, bearing in mind what it's cost so far to get here.
Defence costs, which were/are absolutely crucial and considerable, have been borne by the UK tax-payer, so that will be pretty high on the list for Export Credit approval, regardless of the environmental issues. I don't believe HMG is going to sit back and watch someone else provide that element of the funding for a project that's going ahead whatever.

I'm pretty sure Export Credit finance will form a part of the funding package, because HMG has a real interest in recovering £billions in FI defence costs over decades, BUT (and it's only a little "BUT"), after the IPCC climate change announcement last week, HMG might feel a tiny bit hypocritical when publicly supporting the IPCC, while at the same time helping to fund a major new fossil fuel resource in a pristine natural region.

Being invested in RKH early certainly wasn't "incompetent" - I bought my first lot in 2006, but when oil was found in 2010, I sold in October 2010, then bought back in when the sp had dropped.

I don't believe even a genius in 2010 would have predicted the fall to sub-20p in late 2017, but it did and I took advantage of it instead of bleating, as I believed in the future prospects, while many others panicked..

I repeat, the bitter and twisted bleating by Ralphybabes/Kurgy/Ollie, who claim to be invested in this complete dog (as they say they see it) to me is absolute proof that they cocked-up, but can't bring themselves to admit it.
For them, it's everybody else's fault, from Sam to me and Muchabout.
Well I don't mind, because even at this sp, I'm in profit and that's what really matters.

As for if it matters whether the fall in POO was from $86, or $85, maybe it's a small difference, but the point I was making is that if you wish to make a credible point, then try to get the figures right, otherwise I'm thinking, well if he got that wrong, then what else is wrong with his posts? You make yourself more believable if you admit you got it wrong, rather than steadfastly arguing you were right - well almost right!

If you remember, we endured similar rubbish when the sp was struggling to maintain just above 20p and MS was telling us all that next stop would be 12p.
The timid believed it, some bailing-out in fright, which is when I bought as many as I could afford.

Of course, you have to believe in this, otherwise just bugger off.
If they really are invested in RKH, why are they posting this stuff? I don't understand why they're still hanging around, spouting their drivel.
Only explanation is they must be a bit simple, have lost an absolute fortune through their own incompetence, haven't told the Missus yet and instead of chastising themselves for their idiocy, they come here and post rubbish.
Well, for the record, the anti-postings of people like MS may have helped me buy RKH shares at absolute bargain prices, so to Ralphybabes/Kurgy/Ollie, keep it up chaps, 'coz you're helping to make me even richer.

I would say that any £/$US impact on RKH sp would manifest itself once market uncertainty about Sea Lion is lifted, although, if before that, RKH finds itself sitting on significant new Egyptian assets, then I can't see how the £/$US exchange rate wouldn't translate into an additional rise in sp.