Member Info for QuintusCurtius

Gareth - looks like the Iranians lobbed their shares in Rhum into a trust so they formally would not have any input on decision making on the asset. This was likely a part of the original BKR deal and how it was pitched to US to obtain the original OFAC license thus old news that hasn’t come to light until now. It’s a tempest in a tea cup in my opinion.

DYOR and in my opinion only

Guys,

Well done to whomever spotted the reference to IOC no longer owning their stake in Rhum in the Herald article but there is no way the Iranians are selling. Firstly, if they did they would never in a million years receive the waiver to remit the funds to Iran where they are sorely needed so the cash would remain in the Jersey Trust until the point in time in which the political situation changes. So what is the point in selling?

I’d love us to have full ownership of Rhum but in my view this is old news and a red herring.

Do you own research and on my opinion only

You are (deliberately?) misinterpreting him as the intention of his tweet was not to cast doubt on R3 but to suggest an unlikely outcome would be the only reason why the share price would dip to £1.

Legache,
The only rhetoric is misquoting GaryNTrader for your ends as you did a few days ago. Gary's quote, which you suggest casts doubt on the success of R3, responds to an earlier poster who indicated they were waiting for SQZ to dip to £1 before buying. Gary responded with 'I think your only chance of that is if R3 proves to be a failure and they can’t get it flowing'. It is not a good look to misquote sources to talk down a stock you just exited.

Do your own research and all in my opinion only.

Dick - I think Jasehem’s comment about reserves relates R3’s ability to reduce overall cost (Assuming that the cost overruns don’t continue) and thus extend the COP which in turn results in higher 2P’s. That is part of the strategy.

Do your own research and all in my opinion only

The problem with SQZ has always been that they are not proficient financial engineers and could never in a million years pull off a deal like AA did at KIST. As an aside, there is some great analysis of the KIST transaction by Javier Accion on Twitter which is well worth a read.

As mentioned before SQZ management are great operationally but appear not to be great financial market operators. The company’s balance sheet is hugely inefficient (what’s the point of all the cash and no debt if you don’t do a deal??) I had hoped this would change with the addition of Kiosk Kate but she has had her feet under the desk for a good while now and has nothing to show for it. To me this looks like a company that is probably best taken private where they can continue to make incremental operational improvements and not need to focus on landing another transformative deal that the public markets expect and that is also needed for the company’s continued survival as an independent.

Really hoping that we are able to pull a rabbit out of the hat with Shearwater/Andrew. We should hear about this shortly I imagine.

What would really be interesting, and I think this has been already mentioned by others on this board, would be a takeover/merger with KIST with AA taking over. That would certainly wake up this slightly sleepy company.

Happy weekend all. All in my opinion only and do your own research.

Recently I have come around to this view as well. Going forward hydrocarbon businesses with have a discount applied them similar to tobacco companies. Huge headwinds for the industry

100% agree on sharePs.

Legache - pls share where Gary mentioned this. I've checked his recent Tweets and can't find anything but may have missed it.

Legache,
Really not cool mate. Just a matter of days after exiting your position. If you have actual evidence please share it with all otherwise pls refrain from fear mongering.

Totally agree. Presumably the 125K figure (1.5 mln p.a.) is largely salaries.

According to today’s results they hold 7 mln cash (700k receivable) and they burn 1.5 mln p.a. or 20% per year of their total balance of cash and receivables. How can they pay themselves at that level when they’ve done nothing but look at a few deals?

Directors also have very little skin in the game - they collectively own just over 6% so the success of LBE is not vital to their livelihood especially since most if not all of the Directors earn more in compensation from LBE p.a. than the value of their respective equity positions in the company. For whose benefit is the company being run for?

All in my opinion only and do your own research

I agree NewKOTB that on the surface Shearwater does not appear to be a perfect fit however it is strategic vis-a-vis Columbus (Columbus production is processed on the Shearwater platform) and it is relatively close to Erskine. Perhaps, as you mention, Shell could be convinced to part with their stake.

Do your own research and all in my opinion

Chatter on Twitter that BP is “accepting final offers for North Sea energy assets”. Presumably this is with reference to Andrew/Shearwater.

Also that “Ithaca Energy in late stage talks for the Andrew asset”

Am very interested to see what level a deal gets done at. Can’t see the recently suggested USD 80 mln is accurate given the current market environment.

In my opinion only. Do your own research

Agreed NewKOTB but regardless it’s not a good look and there must have been a point during his tenure as COO and later CEO where he could have.

It’s concerning that many posters on here have much more of their own wealth tied up in SQZ than the CEO. I find it strange because usually most incoming CEOs who join a company with great prospects the first thing they want is an opportunity to get equity.

All in my opinion and due your own research

Precisely. This has always been a concern of mine that the only shares that MF owns are those he has received via SQZ’s long-term incentive program and none by spending his own cash.

MF - If you believe SQZ’s prospects are as good as you continually remind us/the market they are then why do you only hold 184,445 shares (as per 2019 annual report)? ACW has at least reached into his pocket at various points and bought shares and has serious skin in the game.

Agreed on IOG, OilMan1984. AA had his eye on them at RRE and tried to buy them on the cheap. I thought IOG would be first on the list for KIST.

Absolutely. Change will come ... it’s just a question of whether they will be its agents or whether they will be on the receiving end.

Also was seriously impressed that AA put together a deal of this size with only 30odd mln of cash in the bank. I was thinking the first one would be well under 100 mln

Exactly and this is exactly my concern about our management team - they are operationally excellent but not astute navigators of capital markets like AA.

I’m (sadly) not convinced we will even be competitive for Andrew/Shearwater ...

Well spotted NewKOTB.

Very interesting. BlackRock has also recently acquired a 5% stake in Gulf Keystone (see their TR-1 dated 11 Feb). Gulf Keystone is another takeover target.

All in my opinion only and do your own research

“ ... whilst our BoD put their slippers on and cover their knees with a nice fluffy, warming blanket and settle down in front of the fire for another year“

Lol Brilliant.

Couple of observations on the proposed KIST transaction:

-Debt/equity split is unknown and probably contingent on the appetite for the former. I would speculate (based only on my reading of the RNS) that Pareto is advising and thus some of the big Scandi institutions have already been sounded out.
- Big unknown is the size and pricing of the equity placement so it’s tough to know the impact on existing shareholders. I’m waiting to see that and other details before forming a view. Nevertheless, kudos to AA.

I agree with other posters that our BoD seems to lack the deal making verve and while operationally very very solid, we’re in danger of being taken out. I hope I’m wrong and that they are closing in on Andrew/Shearwater.

Thank you