Member Info for PYUECK

I wonder if management took the small window yesterday to hedge significant amounts of the next two years production. If they didn’t I suspect they will live to regret it.

Of course nobody will time the market perfectly with hedges. However what I am saying is that they should not avoid the current opportunity to lock in significant hedges now to secure the next few years cash flow. They didn’t do this when prices last peaked in 2022 and it hurt a lot when prices fell but we were left with the levy on oil producers.

One of the most annoying things about enquest is that all their hedges seemed to be done at the worst time. Now clearly oil may rise further, but it could also fall fast. Hope they are hedging a good 30-50% of next 3 years production now.

If they are going to do a buy back be nice if they could do this in the next week or two to give people enough time to reinvest in a VCT before the end of the tax year. If they wait until next year investors will only get a 20% rather than 30% tax break... Time is ticking.

Firstly Harbour has a terrible record with acquisitions, so market is right to be sceptical, especially with the very high valuation compared with UK assets.

However comparing production in UK with elsewhere is pretty meaningless. The North Sea is one of the most expensive place to extract oil, full stop, add into the equation one of the most punative tax regimes and low oil prices and even the largest producer will do well not to make a whopping loss.

I am assuming everybody is now just selling their shares before the 23rd. If you hold in a nominee account I suspect they wont even hold these shares for you in a private company so effectively they will be lost. Even if you keep, assuming the company survives any future fundraising is going to almost completely wipe out existing shareholders anyway. Even if this company has a rosey future, which I doubt, existing shareholders wont be part of it.

The vote will sail though, no way they would have done this without knowing enough large shareholders onside. Unfortunately again proves AIM is investable for small shareholders, at any time you can just get a notice that the company is being taken private.

That’s it. There is sometimes a relief when all hope gone.

The SFO played a significant part in destroying what was once a very decent company. Management didn’t help either but the SFO investigation probably hindered recruitment a lot. Of course the disastrous taxation rules on O&G in the UK haven’t helped either.

As the US gets stronger and stronger our companies, especially smaller ones are going to the wall.

If they don’t raise more money they will be out of business. They may struggle to raise more money as any investor will soon see that this company needs to increase sales 40x just to break even assuming it’s cost base stays the same. Unfortunately there is just not demand for the product. Only chance is a sale to somebody who thinks that they can better commercialise the product. I have always said that there is one thing having a glossy brochure or even an impressive product. Whether people buy it is another thing.

Oh please…

AIM shareholders will yet again be totally shafted. If they are looking at delisting, and of course the current situation is untenable, the route they should be going down is a sale process. That’s what they should have done before the previous rounds of fundraising. Yes AIM has many flaws but it’s not the biggest one here. The biggest one is that management have spent tons of shareholders cash on a product that doesn’t sell. The proof is in the pudding.

Well there you have it. ‘ These routes include those which may result in no residual value being retained by existing shareholders. The implementation route will be determined on the basis of input from funding parties and key creditors, such that it is not within the Company’s sole discretion.’

I think no commentary needs to be provided.

As I have been saying for years, the purpose of a company is to make enough revenue and profit to return money for shareholders. This company seems to operate in a parallel universe where the purpose of a company is to raise money from shareholders to pay management. The company would need to increase revenue by multiple fold just to break even assuming no increase in costs. I have seen nothing to demonstrate that there is anywhere near enough demand for the product to demonstrate a path to increase revenue anything like this. I can't see why any investor would sink a penny more into this, seems like a money pit.

The EPL is now about nothing more than ideology and keeping Labours ignorant supporters quiet. If it was reduced or cut the immediate response would be ‘tax cuts for oil companies and benefit cuts for the poor.’ That’s as complicated as it is.

I meant Maven not Amati.

I have no objection to a tender offer and am clearly not impressed by Amati. What is crazy is Amati making private investments. It literally makes no sense.

Not really sure why, investing new money in unquoted companies is a daft idea. Not saying I had any love for Amati, but why invest any new money not just let the fund be wound down. The strategy to invest in private companies should be done via a new VCT with those who want to invest via new offers with the necessary tax relief able to do so.

Personally not convinced by either candidate. But I will support Paul Jourdan's proposals as this includes returning as much cash to shareholders as possible and recognising that under VCT rules if investors want to invest in private companies they are best doing this through a new VCT. It makes no sense for investors to stay in a VCT longer than 5 years.

Never a good sign when the updates talk about things being in the interest of stakeholders rather than shareholders.

I have been invested in this one for a long time. Back in 2021 it was hailed as a stand out VCT performer and its new share issues were sold out in literally minutes. How things change. Since then this has dropped consistently month after month, quite incredibly how consistently really. Many previously high flying investments like Polarean and Future Developments sit at a fraction of what they were. The companies best performing investment has been the pile of cash they were sitting on, and to be fair they have paid out some of that in dividends.

Will aim ever recover, probably not. But to change strategy to invest in illiquid unquoted companies seems crazy. First of all things like this are a recipe for higher fees. Secondly it makes the fund very hard to value and liquidate should that be the choice. I think Maven are ok, I have other of their VCTs and they have been ok’ish. However what is not ok was for the directors to sign up to a new agreement with them, sack the current investment management and resulting increase fees for shareholders with no vote on this. I may have actually voted yes but would have nice to be asked. I also think the company should seriously consider just winding itself up and returning money to shareholders. Otherwise we could go years of investors money just going on fees.