Member Info for Ovets

Thanks for that.

Regarding the other comments, while it would be great if the stay is lifted, it doesn't really matter too much, at least for the moment. Far more important is the progress being made by Navitas, who are clearly very focused and with the right people to do it. And I agree about Navitas getting on with the job, rather than making empty promises

and you call yourself 'Long Term Thinker' !
Something gone wrong with the wiring and/or like the rest of us, desperate for someone to say something meaningful?

I think we've gone off-piste, I don't think there's a snowflake in Hell's chance of FIG pulling out, so the ECT thing is a total distraction.

I'm sure the FIG is completely aware of the parlous state of their finances, despite some speaking publicly about the magnitude of their reserves.

If FIG pull the plug on SL, so it doesn't go ahead:
- Navitas will have wasted quite a bit of time and money, they'll probably get Shenandoah going before too long, but they'll never find another opportunity like this;
- RKH will have to rely on its OM award + interest and that'll be all;
- The FI will start its inevitable decline to oblivion and it's very likely that one day the Argies will move-in, rename it 'Las Malvinas' and then grab all the abundant oil & gas, which we know is there.

None of the participants can afford to let that happen.

Absolutely, MDP, and that's exactly what eventually could happen if SL isn't developed by RKH/Navitas, more islanders begin to drift away as the economy falters and the islands become a remote and undefended outpost, inviting the Argies to have another go.

Apparently, FIG are in the process of burning through about half their reserves on their new port facility (already running late and over-budget), which the FI optimists believed would be their economic salvation. Then along came COVID and reminded them that they can't just rely on cruise liners and tourists as an economic model.
Fish and squid revenue is OK, but not guaranteed, especially as some species are starting to move to more agreeable waters.

The FI standard of living is OK for those (mainly older islanders) who prefer to live in a nostalgic time warp, but most of those will be gone before long. In the mean time, they complain about their frozen state pensions, because the FIG can't afford to pay them any more. Many younger islanders leave for a variety of reasons, not to return.
But even for those who enjoy FI life, the exisiting infrastructure still needs to be maintained and there just isn't enough money for that, let alone for 21st century improvements, especially once the new port has been paid for.

Most Islanders know that without a serious injection of cash, they're going the same way as some of the more remote Scottish islands. They refuse to borrow and HM Treasury won't help. If SL doesn't happen, even more will leave, as the only reason they've been hanging on will have been switched-off, so they'd better try and make a more secure life somewhere else, with a future.

To put it bluntly, Jeremy Cresswell's comments are un-informed rubbish.

I'd add: What alternative revenue stream has the FIG got in mind to pay for everything they need to survive?

FPSO stands for Floating Production Storage & Offloading.
Note, it doesn’t say anything about drilling.

If you want to make a hole, to get the oil out, then you need a rig.

No doubt I've got my sums wrong, but assuming all the warrants are taken up, won't that provide just under an additional £5.5M for RKH, at best?

I wouldn't mind being given £5.5M, but with OM interest being added at about £1.25 - £1.5M per month, that far exceeds any income from the warrants and with no dilution.
I realise the interest depends on there being no annulment and that the award remains largely intact, but I think that's an assumption I'm prepared to make.

In any case, RKH will only need a significant additional funding if things are progressing to FID, then Sanction, etc., in which case, there'd be absolutely no problem in raising what by then will be a relatively trivial sum.

I find it rather confusing, but it only refers to what happens if the day of the announcement is a 'Saturday, a Sunday, a public holiday', not the Saturdays, Sundays or public holidays in between.
I think I'm going to wait and see, just like with everything else associated with RKH, OM and SL's progress.

Is that the best you can do?

On 9/3/23 you posted: "Ovets … for once I can’t disagree with anything you have said"
So, what you come here to do is disagree rather than discuss and in the process, you continue to make an ass of yourself, by making false assumptions.
Why not try to be constructive, at least occasionally.

Strange how you’re not so quick to comment when the sp rises.
I wonder why.

Mr Market doesn't what?
Anyway, who is Mr Market? The herd?

Your Mr Market gets it wrong a lot of the time.
Just because the herd runs off in a particular direction doesn't make it right.
One of the most famous contrarians of all time is Warren Buffett, and he's hardly an idiot, is he?

"Low volumes, the big holders will want warrants to expire worthless so that there is no further dilution. They will keep the prices low".

Not at all sure about this statement - there's a lot of misunderstanding and misinformation about companies raising cash and share dilution. Sometimes it's good news and sometimes it's not.
Companies issue new shares for many reasons, including:
- to raise cash to prevent insolvency;
- to acquire a business, as part of corporate expansion;
- to buy a new factory, site, building, as part of corporate expansion;
- to buy tools and equipment, for increased production and/or improved quality;

In most of the above cases, the market views the 'dilution' as a benefit and, for a well-managed company with a bright future, the share price will rise, as existing shareholders scramble to get as many new shares as possible.

Even the example to prevent insolvency could be viewed as a benefit, if the company is well-managed and, apart from running out of cash, everything else looks positive.

The one that shareholders hate is parting with even more money to keep what is probably a lost cause afloat - the classic 'throwing good money after bad', with shareholders unwilling to accept that this one's going to the wall, so cut your losses and spend that money on something better.
At the end of 2021, beginning 2022, that's how RKH was looking, with COP26 telling everyone that fossil fuels (especially coal) are finished. RKH had a pile of problems about to swallow what little cash was left (e.g. TDF decommissioning costs, Italy decommissioning costs, etc.). If that wasn't bad enough, Harbour/PMO walking away, no sign of that OM award, with most shareholders stating that an award of, say, £50M would be pretty good. To finish things off, SL licences were to expire soon and the RKH coffers more-or-less empty.

A year later and things couldn't look much more different. I really don't know what people were expecting from Navitas, but as they used to say: "What more do you want, jam on it?".

and don't forget, the OM ICSID award almost certainly paid-out + accrued interest - any tax due on the lost profits component.

I also don't agree with the time-scale. Navitas are showing every sign of great urgency about this, which is more than just a bit of impatience.

Agreed Kong.
What were people expecting? Gideon to stand up and say: "to save wasting time, this announcement is the FID. I've asked my dad and he's going to pay for everything. So now, I'm off to the pub - see you there and the drinks are one me"

LTT, I suspect you were tongue in cheek, but does the Ad Hoc Panel have the authority to increase the award?

Perhaps they do, if they have the authority to reduce it.

Agreed, and if loss of 'future profits' is part of the award calculation, then the current oil price would also make the award somewhat 'modest'.

It would be interesting to see the details from these 19 cases, to be able to compare the strength of the arguments, which resulted in annulment / partial-annulment, with the strength of the arguments that the Italian State has submitted on this occasion.

It's a good thing Rogue Trader didn't repeat himself, otherwise we'd have been listening to him all day!!!

Agree with SH - it's only one guys opinion, even if quite a worthwhile opinion, and there seem to be quite a few holes in his knowledge / understanding of the actual situation.

I wouldn't want SL to be dependent on other income, as that dependency could bugger the project's progress. If it is Navitas' intention to fund SL independently of everything else, then if there are any problems with, say, Shenandoah, then SL can continue unaffected.

Ralph - a proper ray of sunshine aren't you:
- Navitas' got no money and they'll pull out
- The World banking sector is collapsing
- Navitas are junk just like PMO, 3 piles of $hite together now !
- NAVITAS: wouldn't surprise me if they pulled out
- Navitas - Another partner with no money !
For anyone to fund SL (and beyond), they're going to want to see not only the scale and quality of SL, but that experienced and competent people are managing and delivering the project.

Of course funding is absolutely fundamental - I think we all get that, but there's much to do before getting that funding.

Navitas started recruiting before signing their SL agreement with RKH last year. Ian Ramsay was already working on the project before the deal was signed. That took some commitment on the part of Navitas, also showing how urgently they wanted to get on with it.
Then those, like Ian Ramsay giving up secure jobs for this "junk" (as you called it). That also showed great commitment from those who really know what they're doing.
But on the Ralph-Scale, that counts for nothing - only having the funding counts for anything.

As I've already said, no one was / is going to provide that much funding to a project that looked as though it was going to be a repeat of PMO, with its team of 60, burning away £Millions without actually delivering anything.

Ralph, I suggest you swap your horse and cart around, with the horse at the front. As some are saying here, the funding is probably already more-or-less guaranteed, as long as a strong project team is demonstrating it knows what it's doing and is engaging with FIG to ensure everything is organised there too.