Member Info for pauldrayton

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/5-Billion-In-Upstream-Assets-Is-Up-For-Grabs-In-Southeast-Asia.html

I don’t disagree with your comments or analysis DEM.

I was merely pointing out what I think Italy’s case might include for an extension of the Stay.

Pure guesswork and we will soon find out what the committee decide anyway.

I might be reading too much into it but Rockhopper stated yesterday that the “decision on whether to continue or lift the provisional Stay of Enforcement is unrelated to the merits of Italy's annulment request”.

This is, of course, a simple statement of fact so it might just be to allay shareholder concern if the committee does extend the Stay. But perhaps they feel Italy have a good chance of getting it extended, hence the inclusion. Rockhopper themselves admitted last year that they now owe money to the lawyers for a successful arbitration outcome, and they do have limited funds despite the placing last year. So Italy could theoretically argue that their money would be at risk if the award was enforced prior to the annulment case being heard.

I’m probably overthinking it but it’s likely to be the only material news now for a while!

Don’t tempt fate SH!

Good question - I doubt it but don’t know the answer.

It would sort of make sense for ICSID to ask any party requesting annulment to lodge the full amount of the award plus interest into a neutral account, ready to be paid out if the annulment effort is unsuccessful or refunded if successful.

Weirdly with an interest rate of 7.4% (currently), it might be better financially for the stay to be extended! But I suspect Rockhopper will want to get payment quicker rather than wait for more.

The decision expected over the next couple of weeks on Ombrina Mare is whether or not the committee extend the stay of enforcement or not.

If they do then there may be some conditionality or there may not.

If they don’t extend the stay of enforcement then Rockhopper can take steps immediately to enforce payment. Italy would still have the right to continue with the annulment proceedings, but Rockhopper have the right to enforce payment immediately.

Italy might argue that Rockhopper don’t have the funds to continue as a going concern and they would then be at risk of not getting the money back if they are successful in their annulment effort should enforcement take place now. The placing last year probably helps Rockhopper with that particular argument but this really could go either way.

Somebody mentioned 50/50 yesterday and that just about sums it up imo.

Either way Q1/Q2 2024 should be interesting. Rockhopper shareholders have had to be very patient for a long time, but finally there are signs of progress.

Sea Lion update out.

Looks promising. Good work Navitas.

Thanks Mogger. This is quite interesting although it all seems a bit woolly and down to the discretion of individual committees who may see things differently from others:

https://jusmundi.com/en/document/publication/en-stay-of-enforcement-of-icsid-awards

5th April at the latest for the decision on stay of enforcement, assuming 30 days from 6th March.

Does anybody have any stats on how often the request to stay is accepted or refused?

Is the board going to go into meltdown if the stay is extended and assume that means the committee is on the side of ROI?

Should we read anything into the annulment case if the request to stay is refused?

I have no idea what to expect - I think I remember Sam Moody saying that a partial stay is fairly common although I might be making that up.

I’m firmly of the view of that Navitas have had funding lined up for some time, subject to an acceptable FDP & agreements with FIG.

Once the FDP is complete and approved I think funding and FID will follow fairly swiftly thereafter.

Sanction by the end of the year? Wouldn’t that be nice!

Probably because Hunt is tweeting about how great the windfall tax is this morning and how it’s helping people with their energy bills, so it doesn’t sound like an imminent change is being made in the budget.

I wouldn’t take it personally jocko, I guess most shareholders have learned to treat everything they read on bulletin boards with a pinch of salt until officially confirmed - once bitten and all that.

Market Trader (Garbled) also has a long history on these boards of posting nonsense so people are bound to question it even when he might end up saying something truthful. Like I said at the time I was prepared to believe the content of what he wrote but he wasn’t there so it was second hand info at best. That’s why it was treated with caution by some.

Anyway it looks like it was a positive trip and good to get some official comments, all of which sound promising. No word on an MOU yet although that may come later.

Now let’s see the latest FDP from Navitas and get funding sorted so the whole project can be considered for FID.

It’s a Ministry of Defence role. They don’t need choppers for the oil industry until they have a platform to land them on! Another few years yet….

It looks like Fin moved the market with his 750k order this morning!

Hope it will soon be in profit for him.

Does anybody know why these haven’t started yet and when they are due to start?

Who is suggesting that development might take place with “no regard or respect for the environment and law and order”.

I think most investors would have assumed, expected and wanted the complete opposite.

Good luck with it Fin. Did you sell your previous holding after the award announcement last summer?

It’s going to be a smaller initial development, and we await the details. Sam Moody has insinuated that we might get an update within a month.

Any rig that is capable of drilling development wells in the NFB is also capable of drilling exploration wells in the NFB.

They would just need a deep water rig for the SFB if they want to go back at some point.

If they do get this show on the road then I would expect almost continuous drilling in the NFB for a decade or longer.

videodawn used to say that Phipps leaked the heavy oil rumour that caused the flash crash, having been really annoyed at Pierre Jungels who answered Danny Fortson’s call about Liz and his subsequent article led to that weekend of mayhem.

No idea if it’s true or not! I was just amazed to get through to Sam Moody in the midst of it all. Pierre Jungels would always answer his mobile and speak to anybody though so it wouldn’t surprise me.

Before the oil-to-water result Offshore Hero was ringing around everyone on the Friday saying Rachel was massive and to buy as many Desire shares as possible. I remember then getting a call on the Sunday night saying the samples had been tested and it was all water. Not the best night’s sleep I’ve ever had! OH was gutted that he’d cost people money - not his fault of course.