Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Well that exceeded all expectations didn't it?
940 bopde across the license and US$920,000 per month coming into the company. This is a game changer for Block, an absolute game changer. How many other small-cap oil companies are making that kind of money? Almost none.
Chuck Valceschini could be an interesting appointment. Alongside Jonathan Bedford, who is also a very experienced oil man, we look like we are significantly strengthening our core technical and strategic teams.
gkb you are talking nonsense again. Of course it is all about SFB but any sensible company would look for th enext project while they are working on the current one.
Having seen the quality of the research you have done on Angus I don't expect you to understand this. You don't even understand how debt finance works as your embarrassing comments on Wednesday made painfully clear to everybody.
"Just because people don't agree with you, doesn't make them ill informed or stupid".
No Jaytee it doesn't but a discussion forum is designed to discuss shares with sensible facts to back up your argument. Everybody has an opinion and contrary to what schools may teach nowadays some definitely ARE more valuable than others.
You cannot really tell me that the guy who said on November 16th that "£1.00 per share in the future if things go half well. Why sell at 3.5 pence ?" and then barely two weeks later on December 3rd after the company have raised £5m "I shall wait for my target exit price at 7 pence and then go quietely" should really be taken seriously - either for his ridiculous initial ramp or his subsequent overreaction?
Everybody has an opinion and there are many people I strongly disagree with whose opinions I nonetheless completely respect. However, respect has to be earned through sensible comment. If people post garbage on this or any other forum I am going to call them out on it and challenge them to defend it - particularly if their unsubstantiated opinions can have the affect of damaging an investment and costing me money. If they end up being upset because their opinions are challenged then that is their problem not mine.
V111JAS, I wholly agree with your post. There was a degree of handwringing on this board yesterday that was wholly disproportionate to what had actually gone on. I know that there have been issues with them in the past but the block board have been delivering exactly what they have said they were going to in the second half of this year and the company is progressing as a grown-up and sensibly run company should.
Exactly one month ago on November 4th, the share price closed at 2.5p. In the month since then the company have:
1. Confirmed that the completion of the gathering to the EPF - putting them in a position to sell gas as soon as Bago finish their work.
2. Completed the acquisition of the Schlumberger acreage thus massively increasing the prospective resources.
3. Raised £5.28 million in order to fund production drills in Q1 2021.
So 4 weeks ago we had no ability to sell our gas; a much smaller asset base and no money and the share price was 2.5p. Today we have: our side of the gas sales pipeline completed, a massive increase in prospective resources; are fully funded for a drill program early next year and a share price of 3.5p.
But this is just the beginning. Now Block are funded to do the work in Georgia we can expect the share price to rise on the back of that. The gas sales mean an income coming in and successful drills mean more income. Income means that further work can potential be funded out of debt avoiding further dilution and this in turn means that the share price will further increase.
Everything is looking so much more in place for future profits for all of us today than it did even on Monday let alone back in November and yet some are still moaning. How did they think that we were going to carry out work with no money? I know that some thought that we should farm-out the licenses (which is a fair enough comment) but any farm-out would take significant time to carry out and is also just dilutive in a different way. Would people have been more happy if we spent the next 6 months doing nothing but working on a farm-out deal and then gave away 50% of the license on that?
Most of the people who post here are sensible and well informed and it was not really a surprise to see that some of the biggest critics of yesterday's news appeared to be ramping traders who were talking about £1 a share on Wednesday and then selling out completely because the company was destroyed on Thursday! It is totally illogical and these people clearly do not know what they are talking about. Their arguments simply make no sense unless they are trying to manipulate this board for short term gain.
We are in a fantastic position today. We are in control of our own destiny and we have an experienced oil-man at the helm in Jonathan Bedford as our technical manager and he has put together a very high quality team underneath him, so we are fully funded and ready to drill as soon as we can. The future is brighter than it has ever
The raise isn't too small. Including the oil money from Schlumberger they now have approx $8.5 million in new money cash which is more than enough to drill the new well and perform the re-entry. They will also have whatever remains of the $2,258,000 that was in the company account on June 30th and this, alongside the expected $120k per month from the gas revenue. This should be more than enough to cover all of the day to day operating expenses until Q4 next year. However, given that they are expecting to be generating 1,000boepd from the new wells then there should be a lot lot more cash coming in at the end of Q1 2021 than any of us have predicted on here.
The company is not well funded for the next stage of development. To claim otherwise is just scaremongering.
Big boffer - you are obviously entitled to you opinion but to suggest that the drop in the share price is due to people having no confidence in Haywood is ridiculous. The share price has dropped to the placing price because that is what share prices do once there has been a placing. Even the greenest of investors know this so to pretend it is for any other reason is just nonsense.
From my point of view the placing is pretty clearly good news. Block got a massive fund raise away this morning and the share price is now the same as it was at closing on Monday, yet we now have £5 .28 million in the bank. Small cap companies HAVE to raise money, that is just a fact of life and in order to monetise the Schlumberger acreage we need cash which on Monday we didn't have and today we do. It is that simple. Go back less than a month and the share price was 2.5p. Now we have the Schlumbgerer acreage and the money to develop it and the share price is 3.5p and rising.
The placing is clearly a good move designed to push the company forwards as quickly as possible and it was absolutely necessary in order to deliver the money Block needed to carry out the drills.
Whatever price do you need to get to in order to get out? I am sure that it will come in Q1 2021 and this will be as a direct consequence of the funds that have been brought in via the placing.
I think that news will keep coming. Judging from Haywood's comments at the end of this morning's RNS we can assume that most of the current big investors in the company have participated in the placing.
This means that it is in their interest to vote the issue of the new shares through and they are also holding for the long term as they understand the potential that should start to be unlocked as early as Q1 2021.
jaytee, unless you have a need to sell out urgently you are not actually sitting on a loss. The company is in a far better position for a long term massive sustained price rise today than it was last week as there are no longer any questions of how it is going to fund the development (and consequent monetisation) of the Schlumberger assets.
Paulo123 no offence ,but some of us have been here for a long time and im in @8p for 500k+ of shares
so how is masterfull raise.
Pretty simple really Fuse. The company needed money and it raised a lot of it very quickly at a cost of simply taking the price back to Monday's close.
The fact that you bought your shares at 8p has nothing to do with the fact that the raising this morning was a good idea and carried out very effectively.
In fact, with £5.28 million now in the bank to develop the Schlumberger acreage I think that we are rather more likely to hit 10p in Q1 2021 than we were on Monday. Time will tell, but I think that you are more likely to get your 8p back quickernow Block have raised money than you were before they did.
There are some people here who think that all money raising is bad. Well how do you think that we are going to monetise the Schlumberger acreage without having the money to do so. This raising with the Schlumbreger oil gives Block about $8.5 million in the kitty and with the gas revenue coming in January means that we are in a position to make this whole project fly in Q1 2021.
You can't criticise Haywood for raising money in the best interest of the company. Block got a massive fund raise away this monring and the share price is now the same as it was at closing on Monday, yet we now have £5 .28 million in the bank.
Small cap companies HAVE to raise money, that is just a fact of life. In order to monetise the Schlumberger acreage we need cash to do this and now we have that cash. It is that simple.
Go back less than a month and the share price was 2.5p. Now we have the Schlumbgerer acreage and the money to develop it and the share price is 3.5p and rising. Whats's not to like?
exactly Bobbyrash - "we have the funds".
bigboffer - what a stupid comment. We have done a fund raise and gotten all of the money that we need to both drill and operate for the next year and the share price at the end of it all is only a tiny bit lower than it was on Monday.
It was a masterful fundraise and fully in the long-term interest of all shareholders.
Looks like we are planning on drilling some wells on the Schlumberger acreage pretty soon.
Actually, did I say Schlumberger acreage? I meant to say our additional acreage!
jaytee - I wrote up a transcript of that interview on Monday if you check my post history. It is amazing what you miss when you are listening compared to reading.
SEA7 - I agree with what Jaytee said - thank you very much for sharing those documents today, they were an incredible find.
" whereas they could never even have begun a conversation about debt funding for one of Vonks’s red or black gambles. "
They clearly did begin a conversation about debt funding under Vonk.
--------------------------------------------
Once again you are wrong gkp, they did not begin a conversation about debt funding as that is when you talk to the people whoa re going to lend you the money. In fact Angus explicitly said "PLEASE NOTE THAT TODAY THE GROUP IS SIMPLY MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO TRADING AND IS NOT LISTING OR BORROWIING ANY FUNDS AT THIS STAGE."
There was no conversation to be had, they just booked a room when they could have a conversation when they are ready.
Once again you are wrong, and this poor research is why you lose money on your investments.
Yes they are the same - or at least some of them are.
gkb47 has made the claim earlier today that Angus under Paul Vonk were always able to raise money via debt and so the achievement of George Lucan in getting Angus so close to the finishing line in raising £12million finance having put together the Saltfleetby project which will generate instant and guaranteed revenue.
However, the slightest bit of research into the subject shows that this was never the case. Yes, Angus under Vonk did apply to have their bonds admitted to the NEX exchange but they were never actually in a position to list those bonds or borrow any money against them. In fact in the first RNS issued about it they explicitly stated that they were not borrowing money yet – see capital letters below.:
16th Feb 2017 Jonathan Tidswell-Pretorius, Angus Energy's Chairman, commented: "We are pleased to announce today that we have made an application for the NEX Bonds to be admitted to trading on the NEX Exchange, such admission to take place on the date when we issue the first tranche of NEX Bonds. PLEASE NOTE THAT TODAY THE GROUP IS SIMPLY MAKING AN APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO TRADING AND IS NOT LISTING OR BORROWIING ANY FUNDS AT THIS STAGE.
For the next 6 months, every month Angus issued the statement: “The expected admission date for the first tranche of NEX Bonds is now on or around 27 April 2017”.
Until eventually on 29th September 2017 they said: “The expected admission date for the first tranche of NEX Bonds is now postponed and we'll update the market when a decision on a revised expected admission date has been set.”
In the 2017 annual report the company said about the bond that “No monies have been raised under this Bond to date and the Board will only raise debt when it is confident it has sufficient production capacity to service any debt raised.”
Since the company does not have the production capacity to service the debt then the bond cannot be used. Once Saltfleetby is up and running then it may well be able to be brought back to life but of course, at that point Angus would no longer need it.
It’s really not complicated.
Sorry got cut off early there.
The new loan is different as it is based on revenue that will incur from Saltfleetby with the loan made up front. It will take into account the time required to develop SFB and not start the repayments until SFB is generating the revenue to do this.
The £12 million that is being loaned is also the amount required to continue the project. Even if the NEX Bonds still existed (which they don't) since they are no longer mentioned in the annual report the £3.5 million that they could deliver would not be enough.
Simple.