Member Info for RNSTranslator

Mirasol
I think after last years placinggates that this has become a share simply for punters. Everyone wanting to make a quick return on speculation and wanting to avoid having anything other than free money on the outcome.
Seems there are no speculators left, as soon as there’s a sign of a result and a spike they’ll all be off. Question is who buys on a flow rate without the cpr and economic valuation? Add into that the Wressle prop squeeze and the stakes are even higher… the results of the prop squeeze will simply determine timing to the next placing … a good squeeze will delay it a bad one and it’s sooner rather than later…. The reason they won’t formally admit to the current rates on Wressle is they don’t want to start a discussion around the £2mm payment due on first “commercial” oil. It doesn’t help of course that Egdon are running in fumes and will be out rattling the tin as soon as the ps result is known ….they will of course need to pony up £400k if it works “commercially “ at current oil prices it’s commercial in that revenues are greater than opex… so they’re both faced with paying up £2.4mm pretty much regardless of the results of the prop squeeze…
Happy hear why anyone thinks this is not the case.

Womble
CA admit the debt cannot be repaid in July 22, and as such accepts that any solution requires bondholders consent.
Their plan is simply to remove the board and attempt to renegotiate and hope to do better than 5%.
The bondholders argument pretty much dismisses CA’s position, both legally and commercially, and calls out the shareholders who would rather have 0% than 5%…
“ Whilst many shareholders have expressed concern that they are ‘out of the money’ in the relevant alternative and that they will be retaining only 5% of the equity under the Plan, it is relevant to note that 7.66% of voting shareholders actually chose to vote in favour of the Plan [1256], presumably because they understand and accept that 5% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Even from the perspective of the existing shareholders, therefore, the Plan is one which an intelligent and honest shareholder, acting in respect of its interests, might reasonably approve.”

Womble
You don’t really understand.
The requirement to p&a the well is now a firm OGA requirement after being delayed. Most exploration wells are p&a’d as they are usually not suitable for production operations. The OGA will be aware of the financial state of HUR and will be insisting it’s properly abandoned now rather that risking that they go t*ts up. Suggesting this is the Board trying to kill off upside is just more delusional nonsense. Any development of this accumulation, if indeed it is economic will require a development well located to produce the maximum volumes at a commercial rate.
The debt situation simply stops any further activity and
Quite simply HUR do not have the money to drill another well on Lancaster let alone any other discovery. They took on debt to increase your returns, the downside is that they get the whip hand if it doesn’t work…this was understood from the day they signed the CBS…

Updated by Abbot at the community liaison mtg to mid July. These guys must be running in fumes by now, Wressle was supposed to be flowing at 500/day Late 2020 …it’s now mid 21… debts to pay… wells to drill, first commercial oil £400k to pay … they’ll be out with the begging bowl after the squeeze…

McNumby
From the Wressle community update meeting 1st June.
Mark Abbott said…
“Egdon would know during the operation if it has worked and within a week to know how it has worked. By mid-July therefore Egdon will be able to report if it has been successful and if the sidetrack is required. “
factual enough fckwit…??

The minute the company is under formal investigation they will have to release that information. It is both material and price sensitive, it cannot be delayed - fact.

If I were the Judge, I'd be asking why:
1/ No positivity about the PoO and forward financial projections EVER! (In any RNS I'm aware of). It is not any boards role to simply put out positivity, rather they are obliged to give out material information regardless of whether that is positive or negative.
2/ Remorselessly undermining of share holders position (via RNS too). What by telling you that your shares may become less valuable, which indeed was the case.
3/ Why the rush for the give away given PoO and current production numbers. (Bond isn't due yet). They cannot get a clean going concern statement from the auditors. The fact that the bond is due in 14 months is irrelevant they cannot repay that under the terms that were agreed…even CA accept this.
4/ Why not part pay back the Bond and renegotiate the remaining debt repayment, given high PoO. Because the bondholders want to be repaid in full on the date the company promised to do so…the bondholders are under no obligation to change the terms unless THEY wish to do so.
5/ Bond Holders even have a forward works program (speaks volumes). Read what they actually say not what you think they said… the bondholders May or may not sanction expenditure on further activity, they have not made any commitment either way.
6/ HUR BOD have called Wos assets 'valuable' themselves (I bet they regret that now). Yup they probably do, but this Board has been asleep at the wheel until recently, the fact is they do have a value and if the company didn’t have the debt obligation they would probably be worth more than they are now, but they do, that was their choice.
7/ 'oil production from the P6 well is expected to continue declining' .... Expected by our BOD (ha) but not all guaranteed to. All oil wells decline as the pressure in the formation falls and the water cut increases. To claim otherwise is simply stupidity.

Womble
Before you all go writing That youve been scammed to the FCA and telling the Judge that the FCA needs to be involved…
The FCA are already on the case, indeed the company has already told you this…
“ On 10 May 2021 the FCA’s Market Oversight Department requested that the Group provide information in relation to historic announcements and recent developments in relation to the proposed financial restructuring. The Group is not under formal investigation, and is responding to the FCA’s enquiries,”

Latest from Abbot was mid July for the PS results.

Selfish
How do you get to value Corallian at £40-50mm
Is that pre new money or post new money?

As you all wait for CA to come out with the plan that will, if indeed there is one, already be in front of the judge as submissions closed a few days ago. And in the absence of a plan or indeed any form of solution from Womble “that’s not industry standard, but can you tell me what is” Baker.
Here’s one I made earlier ( yes I used to watch Blue Peter, anyone remember the advent candle holder , 2 coat hangers and tinsel with candles stuck on)
Current market cap: $33mm
Raise $50mm (underwritten) at 50% discount, and give that to the bondholders and take the same extended terms they’re currently offering..
Point out that now they’re in exactly the same position as the restructure, but the dilution is less, and those shareholders who really believe in the story will have a chance to put their money in at a massive discount to their view of value. Much Less dilution and you can actually increase your stake if you feel that this is being stolen from you…tell the judge you can do this in 3 weeks and if you fail then he can approve the scheme.
So how many of you would follow your money or increase your exposure ?? …only cash/liquidity can solve this problem…
CA can’t underwrite this, but if they’re any good they will know someone who can (for a juicy fee and some upside).

Womble
You really are struggling here, you do seem to have anger issues when your found talking cr@p.
Oil companies use their own internal forward curve to set cash flow expectations and set budgets. ItS also used for internal asset valuations which is why it’s not published.
It is nearly always conservative wrt the market forward curve, sometimes it’s higher in the longer dated end.
That’s because the official market forward curve changes daily. It is used for hedging cash flow, where the company wants to guaranteed their income stream , say to ensure debt payment or avoid covenant breaches or to ensure development capital is available. There is a cost to buying downside protection the more it’s under the forward curve the cheaper the option, you can buy a call ahead of the curve but it will cost big time. When discussing asset sales and swaps both companies would use an independent price deck eg Woodmac to compare like for like.
The forward curve is a market based guess at forward prices…it’s never right in reality but there is no better assessment to use for expected cash flows for public consumption, internal estimates are often lower.
There does that help….?

So Womble, we’re in an interesting philosophical place.
You claim something is NOT an oil industry standard but then ask what it is. Mirasol described it, pretty well, you chose to not believe it claiming it was wrong…
Quite simply you are both illogical and way out of your depth in understanding what’s actually happening here in reality.

Obviously you lot don’t actually read the RNS’s (explains a lot!)
This is how you could have voted at the meeting as I’m sure many did.
2nd June:” The Shareholder Plan Meeting will be broadcast in video format. From the commencement of the meeting, shareholders will be able to listen to the proceedings of the meeting. Once the Shareholder Plan Meeting resolution has been proposed, the resolution will appear on the website along with the voting options available: "FOR", "AGAINST" or "WITHHELD". Shareholders should cast their vote by clicking on the relevant option on the screen. Once the vote has been made, the option will change colour and a confirmation message will indicate that the vote has been cast and received. There is no "submit" button. To correct a mistake or change the vote, simply select another voting option. To cancel a vote, select the "CANCEL" option. Shareholders can vote, or change their vote, at any time whilst the poll remains open and before the Chairman of the meeting announces its closure at the end of the meeting.”

Womble, if that is your view (as a self proclaimed amateur)then why did you post this ?
“ And it is definitely NOT the industry standard way of doing so”
So I ask again what is the industry standard…

Mirasol
Womble would use an excel spreadsheet which adds a number to the forward curve which gives him the outcome he wants…
He doesn’t know and he won’t answer.
He doesn’t actually know what the oil industry standard is (as explained by you) …

Just read the RNS that told you how to do it…
Jeez, you lot really don’t have a clue do you?

“ True but I would expect 95% of shareholders voted before today so they should have the numbers good to go”
You lot really are bonkers…. You can’t release results on the basis of counting 95% of the votes and say close enough.
If 10’s of shareholders voted at the meeting then each vote has to be verified and cross checked with the register…
This really is Amateur hour …

That’s because the bondholders all voted ahead of time.
The shareholder meeting allowed shareholders to vote at the meeting and so those votes need to be counted and verified… that takes time…you lot just seem to think everything’s a scam, Womble thinks the BoD are stuffing votes in the virtual ballot box… deluded.

Counting and validation will probably be by someone from the registrar.
If there’s been voting at the meeting then it can take longer
As they need to validate the holding.
CoSec usually informed .
Of course Womble, all these folks are paid for by the company… you know what I mean, nudge nudge..
(Also in on the scam)