Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video here.
Lemming - I believe that Ferrier was telling Investors that GKP had over 300m in cash recently. Payment is overdue and backcosts should exceed 300m. Why not buy all shares back for £3 and make a Divi payout to lth that supported gkp through restructuring?
Stray - too true. Seen the ChrisOil story on Union Jack Oil. What a farce. Dumping huge # stock wiv no TR1 until out. Herr. How's the lowly PI supposed to invest?!?!
One day here we'll go super blue and those out will be in blue ruin. Worra larf.
Two yes back Trevanian said:
I just want to pencil in a possible ongoing scenario that you might or might not already have in your scope.
Facts:
GKP have made a major restructuring effectively putting the former holders of bonds and notes in control of the company.
Agreement with holders of bonds and notes was reached in July 2016.
DNO bid for 300 MUSD was rebuffed by GKP board.
Restructuring completed in October 2016.
DNO lowers their valuation of GKP after the restructuring.
After the restructuring everything is practically in a stand still, except that the asset is producing, oil is delivered and money is coming in. No decisions on investments or route forward.
Former holders of bonds and notes are still clinging on to their shares, which on surface is quite surprising, since they invested in bonds and notes, not in shares.
Rumour in Dec 2016 of Sinopec being interested. Have not been substantiated yet.
GKP Share is traded within a narrow window of valuation since beginning of 2017.
PSC amendment is still not signed although agreement was reached more than a year ago.
Tony Peart has left GKP
Anastasia Vvedenskaya has left GKP
John Stafford has left GKP
Stuart Catterall was announced as new COO in January.
Conclusion:
There is another step, currently not disclosed, in the restructuring deal to be expected. The step is likely to either relate to a take over of GKP as a whole or a farm out of some of GKPs share of Shaikan.
August 12, 2018
Chraxan Rafiq, the wife of Ashti Hawrami, the Kurdistan Regional Government’s Minister of Natural Resources (MNR), who was sentenced by an Erbil court in 2016 over corruption allegations involving oil deals and selling bank cheques, has praised KDP leader Massoud Barzani and attacked King Mahmod Al-Hafid in a tweet.
In her tweet Chraxan Rafiq who is known as oil business woman, has criticized the way King Mahmod Al-Hafid treated the British rulers in early 20th century and hailed Barzani’s way of dealing with countries.
Rafiq’s praise for Barzani came after the KDP leader pardoned her from all the corruption charges.
In January 2016 Kurdish authorities, reportedly seized $250 million belonging to Chra Rafiq, the Wusha newspaper reported.
Barzani ordered detention of Rafiq back in 2016 over corruption charges but he later freed her from all the charges. The oil minister’s wife recently appeared on KDP affiliated media doing charity works.
Cockeye- are you suggesting that someone has created the Trevanian account on LSE by mimicking the real one from the GKP proboards? That's preposterous and something only low life scoundrels would do. And PR firms.
Such a game it all is.
OJ - yeah..fully funded. ALso what was it Ferrier said on Thursday evening about the Chinese study, doesn’t make much sense to me.
He admitted it related to Shaikan...SH (didn't realise that was SHaikan ;0 ). So CNPC and CNOOC in a Chinese lab looked at rock samples from the SH-1 & 6 Mid Triassic, and recommended an untested tight zone in same region at SH-4 be done. Tthe Chinese report says it achieved an industrial flow of oil- showing that the ERCE 4.5% Porosity cutoff assumption was too conservative.
But SH-4 testing originally started in December 2011 with the Triassic and was complete with the Cretaceous in April 2012! It’s in an RNS. So have GKP gone back to SH-4 at some later date, following the Chinese study, and done a new test and no RNS given??
Chinese were studying the cutoff assumed by ERCE (“our predecessors”) but that assumption was not published until the CPR was released in March 2014. The funding for the Chinese study carries 2016 and 2017 reference numbers. How can the Chinese study be of “old data” as Ferrier told his audience two days ago? It cannot, and 225 million-year-old rocks are not “data”. The PR spin from the CCC avatar, refers to some old Report “to which the Chinese put their name” – is this another crock in the story?! It is bizarre to suggest that CNPC and CNOOC would put their name to someone else’s old work. Anyway, what they did was surely protected by NDAs and they shouldn’t have presented the “SH” study…lol..couldn’t even say SHaikan. Surely it would have if it were old??
I also wonder why - since Ferrier now claims to know all about this Chinese work – Celicourt COmms failed to explain it to the WSJ before Xmas. Why decline to comment? Has this account been constructed subsequent to the WSJ article? And where is the RNS of the industrial flow test - is this not material information about the “SH” Triassic and must be released to the market? What a laugh it all is.
I note the avatar chocolate chip cookie in GKP Investor Proboards has the username 'pumpies'
Yet this avatar exists on ADVFN as one of the many non posters..
https://uk.advfn.com/forum/profile/pumpies
Reg Nov 2009
There are so many non posting watchers on these boards it's quite noticeable.
Just imagine if your job was being paid to bash on LSE. Probably mid-20s, tried and failed to get in finance or journalism, you've ended up in some BO-ridden boilerroom or crappy financial PR armpit being paid per post - and when your auntie asks you what you do for a living, having to cough and look out the window. SAD.
OJ - maybe Trevanian could comment on that? If he went...Or answer his message on GKP investor proboards...
So if JG said 13bn moveable oil in Jurassic, then if that's only 25% of the oil, as it's the stuff in the fractures, we could have some "upside"?