Member Info for romaron

Hi epiphany - I like your realism but a couple of points qualified by the fact that almost everybody is better at reading balance sheets and results than me. You mention depreciation at c.$16 a barrel. The unexpected drop in production on the NS fields last year had a lot to do with having no money to do work overs or fresh drilling because basically, we didn't have any. Without looking it up I calculated some fields were down over 30 percent which is a result of flogging an almost dead horse or squeezing a stone. Kraken is a new field and to apply $16 to it would seem irrational and its decommissioning costs will mainly sail away at the end. The old fields will repay the investment that we now look likely to be able to afford so I suggest the $16 will be much lower. Realised prices on oil is also lower than the headline Brent price. As for EBITDA - it previously indicated how much trouble we were in so I see a massive improvement there. The analysts do like their crutches. I come as a friend and am a LTH here.

HIS - the reason I asked about the steerable beams is because it was said to me that Inmarsat would need to put 3 satellites up to get what we have up there with H4. I'm not sure I heard correctly but guessing here it refers to this off the AVN site Full Steering Rights � Gives you the ability to move the beam(s) at any time within the agreed term. Initial Pointing Rights � You can nominate a single location where the beam stays fixed for the duration of an agreed term. Guaranteed Capacity � You can request a location at a lower capacity; Avanti will place the beams in locations with the most requests. (Beam placement dictated by aggregated demand and is co-terminus dependant). Is it invention/exaggeration or is there something in it?

Interesting post GCCR - you wrote 'Where Avanti score is that they have a number of clever patented software tools to make that provisioning easier for their retailers.' Would steerable beams be one of their clever patents or are they fairly ubiquitous?

Interesting views and info HIS. I suppose I kinda worked in Sales (FX money broker) and revenue was everything. It was highly competitive and rules were there to be broken. What I would add is that it was usual to pay a salary which was made up of basic and bonus relating to revenue/sales; something not uncommon in sales. I really hope we have to pay the AVN sales team huge amounts and I am sure the incentives are in place. I cannot compete with you, shaken and WO regarding the satellite business but with the weight of experience now employed by Avanti and a Chairman who knows all about marketing and pricing; there are no more excuses left. Those closest to the action are the bond holders who are now shareholders and board appointed. They aren't usually stupid or delusional. However, you could make a case that the D/E swap was only accepting the inevitable and in a worse case scenario nothing really changed. Fresh money is the new commitment whilst the D/E swap is only an acceptance of reality and money lost? Time for some momentum I think. The share price is in stasis and the amounts traded are so laughably small it is impossible to read anything into them. The RNS from M&G now means there are 2bio shares out there with some probably happy to exit. If there is a future I would expect to see some significant BUYS. Be Lucky.

They are the crux of the problem. We need more than Bentley Walker based in that hub of satellite innovation, Hayling Island, (although they are handy if you need a new kettle or Hoover at the weekend). It reminded me of the Italian who was fanfared in at the beginning of 2016, Enrico Leonardi as Global Sales Director, and I checked that he was still with us. He is and so too is a certain Svante Stenbom who joined in 2015 and according to LinkedIn is still there. This means they either negotiated a copper bottomed contract or have built up potential sales subject to the company being a going concern and having the latest software up in space. These 2 conditions now seem likely to be met so we only have to worry if there isn't a tsunami of new contract wins. I doubt the bond holders would accept waffle as a reason for non-performance but you would have to accept (imo) that the well documented problems facing Avanti would prevent the closing of most deals other than (say) BH which is a just in case deal and rarely used or some poor sap in outer Cornwall or the like who can't watch Sky. As we are kept in the dark and commercial confidentiality is always a handy excuse the time has come for answers and because of the money and parties now involved, they should be forthcoming. I have a suspicion that one of the strategies is to sell Avanti now it has been valeted. It has been on the forecourt before.

A short and accurate reply WO. All I would add is that the customers get a different narrative to the one aimed at investors via RNS run past compliance, nomads, lawyers and the TO panel before being released. I'm confident that even a half decent salesperson would reply that even if the worst happened there are precedents and insurances to produce a seamless transfer. My energy supplier went bust & I never noticed the difference. Of course there are still risks but end users rarely worry about the company's future but are concerned about price and reliability. With the latest satellite that shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Typo - I hope Musk is having more success with SpaceX

https://twitter.com/endurojames I hope Tesla is having more success with SpaceX which just authorized a $507 million fundraising round. Perhaps it's not all about profit?. To be fair, in this article about Tesla https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018-tesla-burns-cash/ Musk mentions that 'that you�re not a real company unless you generate a profit' but qualified with 'meaning simply that revenue exceeds cost. It didn�t make sense to do that until reaching economies of scale, but now we are there. Going forward, we will be far more rigorous about expenditures.' He did concede that excessive automation at Tesla was overdone and that humans are underrated. That's nice of him. It's all getting a bit much for me - perhaps I should just buy bit-coins (I don't understand them either).

that have been bugging me. The DforE swap wasn't agreed by the bond holders out of altruism ( O/T I remember a champagne bar off Bow Lane called the Altruist many years ago) so something persuaded them to keep us on life support and it is usually self-interest. They are looking at reducing their loss so one argument could be to say that in their opinion this is the base and with H4 in space they can get a better price (reduce their loss). They don't have to share much as they grabbed the lions share and today's RNS shows what any holders percentages drop to. Not sure here but I'm guessing that if they'd taken 100 per cent they possibly limited their options and it would have been a fire-sale. So their bet is along the lines of increasing the share price & copping 92.50 percent or forcing a sale whilst H4 is still being set up. A bit like selling an uncompleted hotel and somebody saying room occupation is poor. Maybe H4 would have been cancelled? I also note that Chris McLaughlin a long time ISAT employee still describes himself [Linkedin] as Special Advisor to ISAT and NED at Avanti. I'm not reading too much into this but there is a certain incestuousness in a business with few large players. ISAT beneath the guff have a few problems (today's trading update) whilst the rebuff by Avanti to an opportunist Facebook approach (if true) shows some positives in that you would have to count your fingers after the handshake. I worked in an industry that as it matured companies merged or were acquired. I never always understood the motivation but it usually involves redundancies and cost cutting. Going forward I have mixed thoughts. The hiring of staff whose CV's are blown up could well be individuals who are past their sell by date and in a contracting (over supplied) industry have few options than to join a struggling company. Against that they now have an enhanced product to sell. I also feel that the company's financial future is now sound and some of the scary wording was the result of the OO and the T.O. Panel requirements; at least that is what I was told privately but then 'they would, wouldn't they'. Any thoughts?

Boys, boys, boys ..... You are 3 of the best posters here so don't fall out over minuteae that flies over the head of most of us here. The fact that it has a role to play in BH is enough for me and I imagine we're not a one trick pony. All I know is that I'd accept latency rather than have nothing.

ISAT could make good use of H4's steerable beams and was brought up in a recent conversation between the 2 CEO's. Maybe we'll hear something from ISAT's trading statement on Wednesday. My memory is dodgy but of the 8 customers invited to the launch from the jungle viewpoint - 2 were definitely Nigerian. Not gospel but I think 2 from South Africa and 2 from BT. Only throwing it out because people like you Xxshaken and WO can join the dots better than me when it comes to satellite performance.

Cassius 11.38 - I hold shares in more than one company and it is not unusual for directors to hold varying amounts, some even none at all, and there isn't always a direct correlation to the company's performance and the amount of shares held. It would be nice if they all bought the maximum and the company kept us updated by the hour but it ain't gonna happen and once you invest in a public company you pass on control to the directors and regulatory bodies. I'm happy that Paul Walsh is Chairman and believe that they are working to a schedule and we will be informed at the appropriate times. It is too early to say what kind of success the new CEO will have whilst Dave Bestwick probably doesn't appear to have the requisite skills to be a CFO or PR agent; I do hope he's better with the technicals of H4 . Isn't investing stressful and unpredictable.

HIS, I really don't know. Possibly to avoid claims of influencing private investors? In the scheme of things a kinda neutral stance is the safest. Paul Walsh said at the GM that this was the final part of The Trinity following the appointment of Kyle Whitehill and the launch of H4.

Hi WO, I'm guilty of skimming RNS detail but do usually get the gist of them because it's important so I appreciate both your and HIS skills and explanations. I would imagine that the Directors had little wriggle room with the closed period and regards Directors buying it is not unusual for them to only have a token share holding. If they'd bought more than their allocation it could have led to other claims if the share rises rapidly. Damned if you do and damned if you don't. I know an officer of the company who isn't restrained by RNS rules who bought sub 11p (as did several posters here). It is always good to see Director buying but unless it is share options many seem reluctant to put their hands in their pockets and it isn't only an Avanti phenomena. I suppose that if you're an executive you have quite a big commitment anyway. I once worked for a quoted company and we were doing OK whilst the share price struggled. I doubt many staff there were even up to date with its share price. It is also an easy target for those who wish to criticise whilst ignoring the impact it really has on the share price. I would imagine that the Directors could not have bought sub 11.225p.

DoubleU 10.37 - I lean towards your understanding of what is happening. The company is now in a closed period and Solus come under this too as they are on the board. For Solus and the other bond holders to have done what they did in one sense changes little in that the enterprise value (less expenses) has changed little as the debt and equity issues have been shuffled into different columns. I take your point that they have gone down the creditor rankings by doing this but equally you could say they see greater upside in equity going forward. Solus doesn't court publicity and this sums them up imo "The firm mainly invests in leveraged loans, high-yield bonds, and distressed securities to make its portfolio. Solus Alternative Asset Management is base in New York, New York." They know what they are doing and are proactive. I read that they are suing Blackstone owned hedge fund GSO on credit derivatives for example. The TO panel and obedient nomads are bending over backwards for compliance and fairness towards investors which oddly enough is more confusing. The sale by Caledonia has been unwelcome because it left an overhang on what is an illiquid stock with tiny turnover. The infrequently recurring pipeline revenue of $40 mio didn't seem to faze NF when I mentioned it at the GM and I have a suspicion that there is some arcane accountancy at work here and it's possible that there is some similarity between this and debt moving to equity. He hinted that it is not an existential threat. I think the current price is irrelevant and has been for some time. I expect that H4 is more valuable now it is in space and there are pipeline deals that encourage the bond holders to hang on in. I don't think for one minute that the bondholders worried about our fate but it just so happens that the equity for debt deal meant they could come out of it better than bankrupting the company. I'm no expert but I doubt Solus can now swap there equity back into debt so are aligned with the rest of us. Having Paul Walsh as Chairman has been our strength I believe. The Caledonia stake became too tiny for them is one excuse but surely the same applies now to M&G who I'm told remain supportive? It is confusing but the fat lady refuses to sing.

I'm off out so cannot reply but yesterday I attended the GM. As expected it was a rubber stamp affair and there were only 2 or 3 of us. In front of us were Paul Walsh, Dave Bestwick, Kyle Whitehill, Nigel Fox and Patrick Wilcocks. The audience (maybe 25) were a mix of proxies, employees and those who have to be at these things. I spoke to Kyle Whitehill and Inmarsat came up. It was wasted on me but apparently although we are not in direct competition with them our directional beams are very useful to them. They have a future launch and they have to have 3 satellites launched at once. If I misheard I apologise but the CEO of ISAT is under a lot of pressure and I have confidence that KW is quite capable of negotiating a decent deal if one is there. I only mention it because there are some technical guys who contribute here and they may be able to develop the benefits of our Ka satellite to ISAT. Off the record I heard KW has fired another rocket - straight up the jacksy of the sales team. Maybe we'll be part of the Uber of the seas? Be Lucky

...and possibly the TO Panel carries a big stick?

I telephoned Avanti around the 12th and spoke to one of their people that I've got to know through attending their AGMs. This is part of a iii post I made at the time; " The main reason for all this paperwork is nervous Nomads and the Takeover Panel. He also mentioned lawyers and advisers in addition but it is the TO panel and Nomads who are yes men to the TO panel that create this need for being whiter than white. Because Solus will end up with a large percentage of equity but don't wish to buy the company they need to get a Rule 9 waiver from the panel. This means that the paperwork works almost from a 'worst case' scenario which means that insolvency rears its ugly head. Yes there is a risk of insolvency but also a chance that I may get run over by a bus tomorrow or Russia will bomb Salisbury. The word 'paranoid' was used when Nomad was mentioned." I don't think I was lied to and there are no guarantees in life but it did make sense to me. Their are responsibilities when one becomes an executive or Director of a quoted company and penalties if you breach them. I doubt Paul Walsh and others with a significant industry reputation would want to be the subject of any negligence claim and we all know what happens when compliance get involved. In short we have had to read the disclaimer that accompanies almost everything we have to deal with nowadays. I'm sure a Sky or mobile contract has some scary wording (I wouldn't know for sure as I've never read them).

and another thing I remember from that AGM. The api of Kraken was mentioned and he replied that compared to what he was used to in Canada the Kraken oil was 'like champagne'. He also said that the centipoise was another important factor to take into consideration. I also spoke to another founder of Enquest and asked about the Bentley field. he replied that they had looked at it but passed.

I have watched this video many times: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdjTi-uhoqI It explains a lot of the thinking at Enquest. If you haven't the time the C5 comments are c. 6.00 and 18.50 I've always accepted that the likes of Jim Buckee know more than me but at the first AGM 2015 I attended he had a bet on with AB about the price of oil. They were not in agreement obviously. That is healthy and no, I cannot remember who won. The price was about reaching $80 and it was $60ish. It then collapsed. They may both be right - it's the timing that counts and I've never expected any company executives to be able to foretell the future.