Member Info for ps200306

Brent at $67 on NYMEX. Bank of America and Goldman Sachs forecasting Brent above $70 in Q2. Morgan Stanley says $70 in Q3, while the Vampire Squid sees it above $75 by then. Linn reckons Barryroe oil will fetch a $2-3 premium to Brent. It'll be a long road before any of it sees the light of day, but at the top end it would make double the margin on which the field economics were based.

Uh, what? You were suggesting doing an equity raise. The amount of dilution involved depends on our market cap.

My guess is that client list includes anyone they ever got a postcard from.

The bond is nearly twice our market cap. This talk of dilution is pie in the sky. We either pay our liabilities from revenue *after* first gas, or existing PIs are toast.

daveyboy, agreed.

Doesn't make any sense to me. The money needed for LNG development and the tax bill are EACH of the same order as our market cap. To cover both you'd have to take a 75% dilution (with the bond still not sorted). And who in their right mind is going to fund that if they believe that the Moroccan government is actively trying to sabotage the project?

Not sure what any of that has to do with Barryroe JapaneseJohn? As long as Tony O'R and his pals stay well away from it, I don't care what they do. Their flashy brochure site stinks of hype and marketing schmooze. If they think they can make money mining hot water on the continental margin, I say let them at it.

If the loan from the gas purchaser comes through, and the tax bill and bond can be deferred, Graham doesn't need to go back to shareholders. If those things *don't* happen, there's no *point* going back to shareholders. Have you seen our market cap? He can't possibly get enough through an equity raise for any one of those things. Not that anyone in their right mind would pay money up front to sort out SOU's tax bill without no guarantee of reaching first gas. Nope, our course is set. Cap'n Graham either steers us around the reefs or we're all going down with the ship. And personally I think there's a good chance yer gonna need yer shark repellant.

By the way, you are both a damn sight better off than me. Average 16p but it cost me an arm and a leg to average down to that, to the extent that I now own about a third of a percent of the company (for which I paid well over 3% of the current market cap).

Whatever the bondholders are thinking about seizing the asset, they have every right to be incensed at Graham's most recent "offer". The gas purchaser was offered an 11% rate on a loan toward LNG plant costs, while the bondholders were offered to have their coupon slashed from 5% to 2%. If that was me, I'd be thinking that "eaten bread is soon forgotten", and wondering why my money was worth less than the next guy's. Why *wouldn't* they be concerned about Graham's bona fides under the circumstances? I've no idea what he was smokin' when he came up with that masterplan. It's one of several things that make me suspect he doesn't have a firm grasp of the reins here.

I too found the Covid slowdown excuse utterly unconvincing. Particularly since the prediction of FID in H2 2020 was made in June when Covid was already in full swing. Instead we had zero substantive news (other than the tax bill) in H2. At the last possible moment, two days before Christmas, we had the trumpeting of the ItalFluid arrangement as if this was the announcement we had all been waiting for. News alert for Graham: it wasn't.

Last time I said this the more optimistic on here were quick to point out to me that we were only three weeks overdue. Yeah, well now it's more like six weeks. Do I need to reiterate that when we get to 12 weeks the company will be on its last gasp? The fact of the matter is that we are nearly two years into trying to monetise these assets. The first arrangment was all massively positive up to where suddenly our prospective partner didn't have any money. All we've had in a subsequent year of Graham is two statements to the effect that "we are talking to people" and no mention of him missing his own deadlines.

I would put it to people that we have absolutely no information on which to assess the seriousness of the current negotiations. The only thing we know is that if it doesn't go 100% right from here, this sad sorry saga will be over for good. Based on past performance of this clusterfruit of a company, I am resigned to that eventuality, but it doesn't make me any less riled that we are being treated like morons.

Missed a few zeros there ROCKLAWN. It's 900,000,000 ... at 100 kbpd it lasts around 25 years.

Yep, that PragerU video is still rubbish. Perhaps not surprising coming from a body that styles itself as a university despite being no such thing. Even the first sixty seconds is completely dishonest, setting up a strawman about the conversion efficiencies of wind and solar. Those technologies have plenty of limitations without needing American conservative zealots to make stuff up about them.

Thanks zephra, so it looks like there could be a CDI option for brokers using CREST to continue to be custodians of shares cleared through the new system. Whether they want to, I presume will depend on the brokers themselves.

Blackdogtaff, I imagine the LNG plant has been specced pretty close to the 4 bcf/yr capacity to meet the offtake agreement. The offtake agreement is on a "take or pay" basis, so SOU gets paid for what they produce up to the amount specified. Also the purchaser is helping pay the capital cost of the plant. No point having capacity above what you can sell, as the plant cost would go up for no gain. Purchasers would need to have regasification facilities so there isn't an automatic market for spare capacity. Above some limit the economics would favour the pipeline option anyway, which is the plan for Phase 2.

My broker is online only and has sh1yte email support. If I could easily ask the question of them, I would. I thought that maybe someone here could answer the question or, you know, even have first hand experience of the same situation. But no, instead I get some pedantic twat bellyaching about why I asked the question.

Ta Blackdogtaff. I'd done an order of magnitude mental calc, then forgot I'd done it. Yep, $13m which, over five years plus $7m up front, equates very closely to a capacity cost of $500/gal/day.

Very useful. Anyone *know* the answer?

Anyone know the implications of the Migration Act for an Irish citizen holding Providence shares on Euronext Dublin via a UK brokerage?

"I ran through some cslcs last night, Mohamed said we are looking at 80,0000 tons of LNG per anum for phase 1, that equates to 3.9 bcf at $9 scuff so $35 million cash flow, if someone could verify my calculations."

I did the same. That's about right. The gas offtake agreement (to be concluded) is for 4 bcf/yr. Cash flow around $32m at $8/mcf. Ongoing LNG plant lease cost around $10m/yr, on top of $7m up front. I compared it to an estimate for small micro LNG plant in the US of about $500 per gal/day of LNG capacity and it works out reasonable by comparison. 4 bcf /yr is about 142k gal/day LNG.