Member Info for Ovets

Interesting how we can read the same thing and interpret it differently.
Demichles doesn't refer to the project being "beleaguered" and failing to meet a deadline, with the associated problems implied by the writer.

OK, progress IS slow, but that's to be expected and if the negotiations/actions are moving in the right direction, a delay is not only quite normal, but acceptable, rather than doing things in a rush, which then go wrong.

If you read the PMO shareholder circular:
http://www.premier-oil.com/sites/default/files/agm/shareholder-circular-30-may-2017.pdf
just about every deadline in it has slipped, so why would this one be any different?

Regarding Export Credit funding, surely we never expected this to cover the entire project financing?
My understanding is that Export Credit funding would show a commitment to the project on the part of HMG and thereby reassurance to other would-be lenders.
The way this article is written implies that by not funding the entire project, this somehow creates a bit of a problem, rather than my understanding, as explained above, which is how it was explained to me at the RKH AGM this year.

The article doesn't actually say that the named sources are the same ones who "have warned that Premier’s slow progress means the beleaguered project is unlikely to meet a pressing financial deadline".

The names sources only say what we already know and that the situation with Argentina is no longer an issue, which I don't necessarily agree with, especially after Macri, if things in Argentina start to deteriorate.

I'm not sure you're right about Zama, which is a long way behind Sea lion,chronologically.

I'd love to know who the "City sources" were!!

and ongoing relations with Argentina is the one thing the Telegraph article writer more-or-less discounts, which I'd say could be a bit careless.

On balance, I think the Telegraph article is poor and poorly researched - maybe the writer wants to buy-in tomorrow morning, so just having a bit of a "tickle".

Anyway, there's absolutely no doubt this project is going ahead and PMO makes quite good sense, if it can get the funding, which I believe it will.

Still slightly bothered about Macri and what happens after him.

You can read into the article whatever happens to suit your own thoughts.
My reading is that it's strange that PMO is about to announce a $2.5Bn debt, when Durrant has quite recently been saying that production has exceeded original expectations and with a higher PoO, debt repayment has been better than expected, so on that one, we'll just have to wait and see, as always.

It also makes it clear that this is not a "once-in-a-lifetime" opportunity for the FI, but "once-in eternity", so they're going to want it to go ahead and if PMO doesn't get its act together PDQ, then it'll be someone else.
Also, HMG wants it to go ahead to recoup all the money spent on defending the FI and perhaps provide the UK with much needed alternative source of energy from suppliers like Russia,Qatar and the rest of the Middle East.

In the mean time, much of the behind the scenes preparatory work has been progressing well, making it a lot easier for that "someone else" to jump in if PMO fail to get the funding.

And then there are those on this BB who have moaned for years about being shackled to PMO - well if this article is correct and PMO can't get the funding quickly, we might see PMO kicked into the long grass, so the moaners can't now moan about that, surely?

There are a couple of possible "issues", the first is uncertainty about Macri getting re-elected next year and what happens if he doesn't and the second could be that RKH is taken out, if PMO fail to get funded quickly enough.

Thoughts anyone?

AND NFB too.

As previously stated, some readers must have skimmed through my postings rather than read them thoroughly. Not good, if you're dealing with financial matters, where attention to detail is fundamental, as I'm sure Muchabout would agree.
For a start, there's more than one of us eligible for an ISA in this house. Second, we've been invested in PEPs since they started and unlike some, I made sure I read the rules and understood them - attention to detail again. At that time you could have a general PEP AND a SCPEP at the same time with annual allowances for each (even if then they were relatively small - initially they totalled £9k) and I was particularly lucky to bet in both on my employer, which was taken over TWICE, plus taking out company SAYE schemes, where one saved cash, but, at the end of 5 years, could use that cash to buy company shares at the price pegged at the start. At the beginning the company looked very dodgy, with a corresponding sp (bit like RKH now), but recovered and was then taken over.
I also ALWAYS made sure I saved any available annual cash PEP/ISA allowances, even if interest rates weren't brilliant, because all of that was in a tax-free shelter (and, like now, you couldn't carry-over annual allowances) and which can now be moved to an equity ISA (or vice versa).

And I never said I bought ALL my RKH shares sub-20p, but while the likes of MS were going on about a 12p sp, I was cheering him on, waiting for the moment to buy-in when everyone else was taking fright.
The sp remained around 20 - 22p for ages, giving plenty of opportunity for buying more and also, the sp fluctuated enough for a bit of trading too.

I initially bet on RKH in 2006 at around 24p. I was abroad in Sept 2010, so didn't get the absolute peak, but sold the lot when I got home for around £3.50, so was pretty happy with that.

So it's a combination of things, old bean, but not as one clown on the ii board accused me of "tax evasion" - the tit!

Is there a risk analyst in the house?
If we're mainly waiting for "the money", then I would expect the biggest inhibitor would be an adverse risk assessment.
But surely the risk now must be considerably reduced, even with the acknowledged outstanding issues?

Plenty of oil exploration campaigns are launched, committing vast sums, where the risks are far greater than in the FI now.
Apparently, driving on Italian autostradas is now considered very risky, so a pretty sure investment in a nice quiet place like the FI, with friendly neighbours, must be a sure-fire bet, mustn't it?

Certainly not, if the coffee & biscuits served-up at AGMs are anything to go by!

I reckon Ralphybabes can buy US all a drink, in which case I'd be happy to show up and shake him by the throat!
Anyway, in the mean time, of course no one should be leaking anything until there's something to announce, so no announcement is what we should all expect until there's something worthwhile to be said.

P.S. - you're good at these ecclesiastical misquotes!

Agreed Comertoes and someone has to do the "boring" jobs, and for some, banking is probably very exciting.

Anyway, if Ollie & Ralphybabes are to be believed, right now it's the bankers we're waiting for more than anyone else, so Ollie, please don't frighten them away, at least not just yet!

Not sure - it's a different style and, while I hate to admit it, MS did show some signs of intelligence!

Cheers smogg - some last words on this one:
Unlike Wancos, I don't give a flying Eff about Sam's hair, or his emoluments - I'm here to make some money, which is exactly what I'm doing.

If you were around, you'll remember I said I was buying at sub-20p (I didn't tell others to do the same, i just said what I was doing), when the likes of Master Shanus were saying that it was bound to fall to 12p - well, i suppose it still could if all goes wrong.
But in the mean time, those sub-20p shares are now worth more than double and that's not including any trading I may have done as the sp fluctuates and let me also remind you that all of this is in tax-free ISAs.

If it all goes tits-up, then you can all have a good laugh, as I'm not asking anyone reading this to bail me out if it goes wrong, so I don't see why some are getting so aerated.
However, if it goes right, I'll be moving to that nice new house, while the rest are kicking themselves for listening to MS and not buying sub-20p when I said I was.

Smog, I never said that I gain £10,000 for every penny rise in the RKH sp. What I said was that I gain NEARLY £10,000 and just how "near", I didn't say. So that's a very different thing altogether from what you're quoting.

Then some oik misinterpreted me to have said that must have AT LEAST 1M RKH shares, which of course has to be wrong and again shows how much attention these people pay to the detail.

And so it went on and goes on, where those who don't like my posts misquote me and/or simply don't pay adequate attention to what I've said, and/or just make stuff up to suit their argument.

And then we're supposed to give credibility to the drivel from these people, who don't read/understand what's been written, misquote what's been written, can't spell, etc., etc.
The deficiency is not my maths, but in you (and others) not paying attention to the detail.

I've been studying the whole FI thing since the 1980s, long before committing a penny betting on it, reading and listening to the real experts and not the oiks who make stuff up, and post their drivel without any facts to support it.
I'm not going to repeat myself again now and IT'S NOT A ONE-WAY BET, for those with a weak constitution, but just about EVERYTHING now points to this going ahead, unless there's some terrible catastrophe.
Some catastrophes might even make it necessary to accelerate FI region oil production, if, say, World oil production is disrupted in some way.

So take it or leave it mate - I've been 100% consistent, saying it's going to fly and have put my money where my mouth is. Tell me where's the fault in that.

What I'd say to that, Kurgy, old chap, is that while you may have read my posts, you clearly didn't pay attention to the detail, so have got it wrong yet again.

That's the problem with you, Wancos and ralphybabes, you don't read the exam questions properly, so you give the wrong answers. Presumably, that's how you "research" the material for your comments here.
None of you support any of your silly comments with any reasoned arguments, or facts, but just take pleasure in being controversial, and to cap it all, some of you can't even spell, or string a sentence together.

So, why should the rest of us pay any attention to those who just enjoy being disruptive?

Ollie, that silly response only helps to make my point - thanks!

Nice try Ollie, but this one's been discussed till the cows came home, were slaughtered and turned into burgers and the "expert" opinion is that a takeover is VERY unlikely.
However, if anyone were to sniff around, and perhaps even make a bid, the RKH sp would go bananas (even if only briefly) as there's just too much oil and gas in the region..
The trick then would be when to jump ship, taking your winnings, or to stay on for more.
Sorry, but your sub-£1 bid proposition is risible and the rest of us know it.