Member Info for pijoe1212

ijwt

cheers...well worth reading both as further indication of hur values on de-risk (and for the direct comments on nambia drilling). i can not make my mind up on the valuation basis - but i assume in effect for cpr'ed 2C (any drill success other than by a major one would expect a cpr), but it could be as you say simply on a company statement basis?

i think you have missed my point

sipp posted a drop box link..in response to Ricfle request...for the same reason i found it useful.

i could now say wind in your neck..i will not..

thks for the link ...ricfle is not the only one who works on the "JIT" investment basis..

i am not deramping...i have made my views clear..(i will not buy in at any price until the mcap (buy in adjusted) makes it worthwhile..

i just wish savp had implemented the niger drills and not get side tracked by the "AK .. we will be a £1bn market cap co" vision...

clearly i remain out for the reasons i posted back then. now the question is what is happening now? the volume (buys plus sells so half it for sales volumes) is not large but over 3 months it is 1.2M per day, over 1 month it is 1.5m and over 1 week it is 2.6M..not high volumes but increasing (over a year it is 0.9m but not sure if that includes the time in suspension - i think it does).

i know the bond holders should not be selling (12 month lockin i recall?) but i think some are. some will have obtained temporary risk committee clearance to hold equity for say 6 or 9 or 12 months based on the companies timelines. these have of course slipped. no ii is going to be buying (in my view) due to the risks outlined below as in effect it is possible the only assets of the co is the remaining cash and the niger discoveries. i hate to say it but i could see this decline to the value of the niger assets before it stabilises..

the 24th december posts are statements from the prospectus....i.e. warnings given by the company not me! i do not know where the legals have got to wrt 1.11 but perhaps a shareholder could ask the specific question..the rest remain as risks i would suggest.

in response to your question earlier about lack of warnings. i posted:

24th december 2017:

"
1.5 Once the SSN element of the Capital Restructuring is effected, the Acquisition may
subsequently not complete, resulting in the Company having issued shares and cash to the
holders of the SSNs without ownership of the Seven Assets.

or this bit:

1.9 There is a risk that the Exchange Offer and/or schemes of arrangement will not become
effective.

1.11 There is a risk that the English courts will not agree with the determination that SEIL’s centre
of main interest is in England.

1.17 There is a risk that the Liquidity Facility may be utilised by the Seven Group without the
Transaction being implemented."

20th december 2017:
"
this is a bag-o-crap deal in my view...disgraceful. Value acreative my *rse to existing holders.."

20th december 2017:

"After afren (then 7e) which Il’s had any desire for Nigerian oily assets? Not many regardless of price is clearly the answer. And a great chunk of equity in the hands of bond holders would (Who) did not want equity in the first place.

FAB value accretive deal by a FAB bod...you could not make it up"

i post this not to rub anyones nose in the dirt, but to illustrate i was warning loud and clear on the 7E deal.......

mandrilll..given your earlier statements, you must hold shedloads of BP (£5.53)..and a massive short on RDS (£25.38) as both produce much the same quant of oil and gas........

seadoc

i think you are looking at things the wrong way.

ukog have just bought 7% of HHDL for £1.925M (as stated in the RNS). that means the sellers valued HHDL at £1.925M divided by 0.07 - i.e. £27.5M .

Ukog slice of HHDL is 56.9%, which is £15.65M at that valuation. one can only accept the sellers believe they obtained full value (they would be acting in contravention of the companies act if they did not).

ukog Mcap is £102M.......is the rest of Ukog worth £86M???

evening wizard...i was indeed part of the drilling team in the weald basin for BP in the '80's..

i am happy to be proved wrong...(but i think BP was correct to drill through the portland and kimm shallow prospects).

meanwhile i am sat next to a chem eng from imperial discussing the likelyhood of HH success... will be further consulting a chem eng from imperial who is better informed than the first shortly...

will post views later

are you rather ****ed?.. you had 9 pints?

lol..message left...LOL

SBP arrives here...

having come across this poster on the nuog bb (or newdogger) not to be confused with ukog bb (ukdogger)..i would recommend placement in the bancos style of posters...

SBP..go back to newdogger where they love your "new believer in the minty" posts..

where are you?

you called me all sorts: ...shorter.. *osser.. deramper..

as you insulted sooo (very) much ..i wish you well but poor..sorry but you have earned that

next time ...read i would suggest?

(i do understand your eye issue..would you like to type your insults in caps? so i can respond ....)

I think you would be mad to go against the recommendations of the BoD and Kerogen in such a situation.

----------------------------------------------------------------

given kero % of the shares ..could you explain just how a class 1 transaction could be passed by an EGM?

i would accept it is mathematically possible ...but in all reality? kero control the show in my view . good also in my view..(wonch of bankers from the start...?!!!!)

aduk and ricfle.

please BOTH of you stop the childish posts trying to knock edges off each other here. i have great respect for both of your posts. for different reasons. you both have much to contribute to this BB and in turn will be invaluable to the rest of us. you have BOTH proven that to me as the HUR storey (very profitable to us all) has played out over the last 3 years...

i do not want any tickups to this post or response. actions (posts) will i am sure confirm acceptance going forward.

now tell me to *uck off if you wish - i care not.

i do not believe Noeasy or me or any PI knows as fact what is happening. it must be clear to all that i have respect for Noeasy's posts (and a few others also) and vicversa. it is now all about what the co put in the prospectus..i am sure they monitor this BB (despite any comments etc to the contrary)..they know i have put down a marker with ref to UKLA..same as i did with morgan stanley some year back...you do not *uck about with the FCA.

i have found your posts (and jiving) very informed and reasonable and worth reading..

you should have read this BB when Aderdeenman and panamabob tried to bully me and others off the BB..cost many far too much...of course i could not be *rsed after a while..so sorry to all for not being here for some months.

some time back i became interested in am aim listed oiler...they issued RNS's which were not correct in fact..so i engaged. not via the directors..but via UKLA / Aim regulation...RNS's resulted (and then to cap it all, an RNS to correct a correction RNS!!!). dont think the chairman put me on his xmass card list, as he had this to say just before xmass:

"Secondly; I am forced to comment about the activities of bloggers.

The Board spends considerable time and effort managing the Company and in particular complying with the many regulations under which it is governed. Directors make themselves available to answer enquiries both by email and phone where appropriate to do so. The Board does not regularly read blogs and does not communicate via blogging or bulletin board sites. Shareholders with questions are recommended to contact us directly and, subject to regulatory and commercial constraints, we will endeavour to answer them. For the many bloggers that have some interest in XYZ plc, I do recommend that they consider the jurisdictions and environment that XYZ plc operates in and make some effort to actually understand the basic framework. It is simply not possible at certain times to answer detailed questions without breaching regulatory requirements and guidelines around the disclosure of information such as the Market Abuse Regulation. I also recommend that shareholders read RNS's in their entirety. XYZ plc does recognise that it does not always get everything correct; but we do make every effort to do so."

LOL..note that last sentence..is "correct" not missspeaking? (i used to call that wrong..lies..rollocks)..now i make every effort to become the prime minister...of course i do!

part 2:

Q3. Copl's cash burn has been stupidly high for ages...why?

You:
We don't know if money has been wasted but it appeared we were on the cusp of finding out. Throughout the CEO's many utterances there has always been the mantra of leveraging his teams technical expertise to punch above their weight when looking to secure oil and gas licences . Does this mean that he keeps paying the wages when they are not overly employed? Who knows. But if his leverage is the team and its ability to do the right thing at the right time in respect of off-shore drilling and field development it would be a misstep on many levels to disincentivise them when viewed against what they are worth to us shareholders in getting this project pumping oil.

Me:
Ideas above copl capability or is it perhaps having to pay for staff as copls part of the 50% funding of shorecan? Um…I think both .

Q4. How much cash is needed for costs, fund Shorecan and pay lawyers for the Essar farmout legal battle.

You:

We know the costs for point 1 and 2 as they have been fairly consistent. Point 3 ... There is no battle and more likely than not neither will there be one even if the other sides lawyer does for once decide to turn up. Worth noting also that the NNPC and DPR have asked Shorecan's lawyers to represent them in dismissing what they call an ill-founded action. So not all payment from Shorecan and as an aside also a good sign of the relationship between the government agencies and Shorecan.

Me:

Well at current burn rate and the timescales to first oil (when the post first oil funding kicks in)..it is more than raised in my view…