Levelup just made the first sensible point I've seen in all this negative sentiment. I did actually believe the "£1.50 per TCF to Sound", which would have underpinned us at 57p for 355 Bcf recoverable. But when I think about it, I probably got that idea from this board not the company. I do remember at some point they moved to clarify it was 57p multiplied by SOU's 47% interest, i.e. 27p per share. Did someone deliberately mislead? Probably not, although it's worth asking the question. All the other stuff about selling golden tickets is without merit. We took a high risk, it didn't work out. There is still plenty of actual discovered gas. In fact, it's worth a lot more when it's actually produced than the NAV calculation used earlier. So even when we only retain 14% it's still worth about 30p per share (but over 16 years or so) plus a shot at further improvement.
Apart from all that, there is absolutely no merit in griping about Marco's conflict of interest -- director's loans are completely legitimate -- or payments to JP et al. which (afaik) are entirely within the directors' remit to set. It's not exactly Disney where Michael Eisner famously drafted in a new president who left after 14 months with $38m in cash and $100m in shares. Even then, after a ten year shareholder lawsuit, the court:
'despite describing Eisner's behavior as falling "far short of what shareholders expect and demand from those entrusted with a fiduciary position..." found in favor of Eisner and the rest of the Disney board because they had not violated the duty of care owed by a corporation's officers and board to its shareholders.'
I've no objection to trellis barking up this tree, he's doing it for no recompense. But I just don't see it going anywhere. My assumption is the company is working hard to get a decent deal over the line, and I look forward to it happening.
Jez, I will say three things to you. First, I am down WAY more money on this dog than the overwhelming majority of people here. Second, the day I start taking lessons from you about distasteful behaviour will be a cold day in hell -- you're the twat who crowed about getting all his money back on another share and then came back here for no good reason other than to berate people for not being as clever as himself. And third ... well the third thing would definitely get me banned, and you're definitely not worth it.
Depends on his circumstances. There's always an outside chance everything goes **** up and he is left out of pocket for his tax bill as well as his remuneration. Let's face it, if he has to sell half of them to pay his tax and he doesn't do it, it implies he thinks buying 3m shares out of his pocket is a good idea. Akaik, he hasn't done it so far, so wouldn't necessarily expect him to start now. If I was him I'd take the punt (in fact, I HAVE), but I'm not him.
Cash is king when you are in a rut. (Let's not forget SOU paid off a creditor with shares for a measly $15k a year or two back when they were much less needy than now). But if you can afford to speculate, there are certain times when you would be mad not to. That's the view I've taken myself but, unlike Brian, I have to pay to accumulate. As I said, if I was him I'd bite their hands off for such a good deal. Heck, I'd bite my OWN hands off for 6m free shares.
>>> "I wonder why he has been given his shares well before his leaving date?"
Seems pretty clear it's because of the potential to make an absolute packet. No use after the deal is done. The fact that he is prepared to take them is telling, and no, I don't believe it was because it was an ultimatum to take shares or nothing. Sound own a billion dollars worth of gas in the ground. I refuse to believe they couldn't find a buyer for 10c per share if the absolute worst came to the worst. If I was Brian I'd bite their hands off for that number of shares.
Seems almost rude not to go for another top up at the current price. I swore I wouldn't but ... would take me up near a third of a percent of what's gonna be a very valuable company. (That's not investment advice, nor even a prediction, just a gratuitous poke in the eye to all the doom mongering on here).
You can see how the Tendrara gas could be the lifeblood of Morocco. They produced 3.1 bcf in 2018 and only project to produce 3.4 bcf (96m cu.mtr) in 2020. Without any additional discoveries the TE-5 horst alone could produce 20 bcf annually starting in 2021 -- closer to a half than a third of current national consumption. Morocco needs this like nothing else and, apart from maybe some haggles over price after the first 10 bcf, must be enormously in favour of getting the current deal over the line. Let's hope that SOU have chosen a reputable partner to do business with. If so, I am cautiously optimistic about its prospects.
trellis >>> "PS- lets look at it the other way- if your pensions/share advisor had come to you talking about guaranteed 4 figures and golden tickets backed by the CEO of that listed company and a supposedly respected market commentator in Malcy- what would you have said?"
A pension adviser -- other than a crooked one -- would never do such a thing. I will bet you there is not one single investor who has lost life-changing money here who did it on the advice of a reputable advisor.
>>> "you, as an experienced investor have chosen to take a big position in Sound( which without divulging details I can confirm); How about an inexperienced investor trusting the company to look after your pension for not just you but also your family How would you feel at the moment? perhaps they cant even look in the mirror because they have had to have pawned it?"
I wouldn't call myself an experienced investor. But I had the good sense to use only money I could afford to lose. I worked thirty years to build up a cash pile. Betting it all on SOU would have been bat**** insane. As it is, I've averaged down using money which leaves me at the outer limits of what I can afford to lose. I can empathise with those who pushed the boat out too far, but at the same time they have to look at their own motivations.
Yes Jez, that's true ... although you don't even feature on the "Blah Blah's" anymore. (Don't bore me by asking how I'm seeing you now, I explained it to Jonesy before). But I DO see quotes from Filterland every so often, such as when Partridge quoted you and Pontcanna just now. And so I can see how the board is still in the Slough of Despond, and that the cast of Moaning Minnies is hard at it, including your rancid self. It's tragic that you have no mission in life other than to talk down a share you don't even own. But each to his own, I guess.
Here's a few thoughts. Actually, I prefer to call them facts.
SOU currently owns 40% of circa $2.4 billion worth of gas. It is not certain to ever get it out of the ground but to say it is guaranteed to fail is nonsense.
Likewise, to say it is guaranteed to succeed is nonsense. It is a high risk venture. That's why those b*tching about Parsons need to take a look at themselves. Let me ask this: if you had gone to a pensions adviser and told them you were considering investing a life changing amount of money in a single Moroccan-focused exploration venture, what exactly do you think they would have said?
The only Chinese-related business we need to worry about now is that the oil price has dropped over ten dollars this month, most of it in the last ten days since the coronavirus news entered the public consciousness.
The is absolutely zero point in fretting about happened to the APEC money and what TO'R did or didn't know. The whole thing was a fiasco. The 95% probability is that APEC's backers couldn't pass anti-money-laundering checks. China is very corrupt and was even more so in the past. So a lot of established money is the proceeds of corrupt business and a lot of Chinese are anxious to spread some of their assets into overseas enterprises from which they might reemerge smelling of roses.
HSBC has previously been fined $2 billion for money laundering, so you can bet they are anxious to ensure that anything they transfer is squeaky clean. Stinky money and squeaky cleanliness are a round peg and a square hole. That's all we need to know. The question of what paper trail was seen by TO'R is just boring minutiae.
That's my question. What conditions are they fulfilling by applying for this survey permit? The conditions are generally set out in a work programme agreed with the minister that would be specific to each license. Providence already have an extension of the Barryroe license allowing for two phases ending in July 2019 and July 2021 respectively:
The appraisal wells for which they already had site survey permission fulfill the conditions of assessing the Jurassic and Triassic afaik. Not sure what this new application adds. They need to finish the survey already planned and ultimately have to drill the appraisal wells or they will lose the license.
It wouldn't be unusual for PVR to be getting ahead of themselves, though. They made announcements about Barryroe drilling before they had APEC signed up. I wouldn't take the new survey application as any sort of indicator of a new deal. Anyway, I expect we will see an RNS in the morning. At the very least I presume they will tell us which part of the prospect the new well location would be planning to appraise. That will be interesting. If it's one of the lower strata then it would -- rather unbelievably -- imply that they thought they could still drill multiple appraisal wells and sidetracks, which would imply a partner with very deep pockets.
They didn't have the money last time, so they definitely don't have it this time. I would say this news is either to support an upcoming raise -- although at the current share price they would struggle -- or it is contingent on finding a new paying partner.
They certainly don't lack ambition. It's a new survey area in addition to the four permitted by the previous approval. They only did two of those due to lack of funds but the previous permission extends to November of this year. So my guess is they are proposing to complete the previous two plus this new site. It would hardly make sense to abandon two and undertake a different one, unless some upstart in the company has decided to diss John O'Sullivan's choices now that he has left.
The wheels certainly grind slowly with Providence, ably abetted by DCCAE. The first site survey application was in September 2018. The latest date for completion in the current application is November 2021. I'm beginning to feel like an old timer here, and I've only been around since 2014 unlike the *real* oldies.