Member Info for ronwoking

Nidgeyr. Your info needs to be updated to the December 31 2021 crystal Amber report and accounts.
At 31/12/2021they reported holding 29% of hur shares at an average cost of 6.7 pence

Mariog
If this company was listed in the USA there would have been a blizzard of shareholder lawsuits after the the financial reconstruction plans were tossed out by the courts

As posted, if crystal sell their holding to kerogen , then .kerogen would be obliged to initiate an offer for the whole company at the highest price that they have paid during the previous 12 months.
So we are very much in crystal’s hands . Crystal will be seeking a buyer for their 29% holding and whatever price they achieve is likely to be the base price for an offer to the rest of us shareholders.
Life is made much easier if any offer is recommended by the board,so that may explain the desire by Crystal to support the current BOD.

I have a fear (somewhat conspiracy driven) that a decision to drill a failed fractured basement well will use up all the cash reserves and collapse the SP allowing future institutional investors to buy up the company for peanuts and drill a successful sandstone well and cash in.
As to chartist analysis it is only works if people believe in it so it becomes self fulfilling.
The most successful investors and the Sage of Omaha springs to mind base their decisions on financial analysis and value based judgements.

As I noted in an earlier post I have never seen an AGM where the board apologised or even recognised past errors or even missed opportunities.In todays activist and litigious world such statements however worded would be very dangerous and would almost certainly invalidate the board’s directors liability insurance.
A clever chairman can easily control an A G M , so it is very difficult for an individual shareholder to influence the board let alone hold them to account.I would add that I am an experienced director.
Such power lies in the hands of the institutional shareholders who as we have seen from the voting percentages still support the board ( for the time being).
A generally more effective way to influence the board is to try and influence the institutional shareholders and ofcourse the media who love a good scandal.
Turning to the AGM proceedings,it was at least good to see a more positive approach even though it was of the “jam tomorrow” variety.
One concern that I do have is the proposed development of well 8 . I am admittedly not an O&G man but I am nervous about drilling a fractured basement well as opposed to a sandstone well.Given the relative failure of the fractured basement model,it would seem to me that accessing the sandstone reservoir offers a less costly and less risky approach. Ofcourse I defer to those more technically qualified than I.

Email sent
Many thanks to senseman for his superb contributions to this board and the fight for us HUR shareholders

Have the board any plans to drill for sandstone deposits vs fractured basement deposits.

Simples
Anyone that posts a positive message is either expressly or implicitly trying to influence other shareholders to buy or hold.Visa versa a negative post similarly will influence shareholders.That is inevitable on a forum where participants express views.
If A forum member chooses to reveal their shareholding or voting intentions,that is their privilege and by their choice is not confidential information.Revealing company confidential information is another matter altogether.
We should not attempt to obstruct freedom of speech in this forum except ofcourse abusive or discriminatory posts.

Hur is worth 9p on projected 2022 cash generation alone ignoring 2023 And future years as well as WOS acreage and tax credit value.
The current SP is very fishy.

Sense
I voted in favour of items
1:2 and 7 and voted against all the other agenda items
I should have voted in favour of the other CA director but could not recall who it is.

Voted my shares against the old. Bod but not against the annual report.I have yet to see an annual report that noted mistakes made and opportunities missed.
I hope that a large protest vote by non institutional shareholders will spur ca and kerogen to ditch the old board.In my opinion Hur is going nowhere with the old board at the helm.They have shown their colours over
the past year and deserve the order of the boot,following which a truly independent investigation needs to be
instituted to establish their relationships if any with the still secret bond holders group and their advisors to whom we paid and wasted so much money

Simples
You are ofcourse correct.Directors owe duties to many stakeholder of which the shareholders are only one.
However the directors are employed by and at the pleasure of the shareholders and in many if not all of the decisions that the directors take the interests of the shareholders and the company itself are aligned.
Regrettably in my opinion the directors have fallen short in that regard which is why they have to go.

Simples.It is not accurate to say that directors should have skin in the game in order to work for the benefit of the shareholders.
They are elected by the shareholders and owe a duty to act in their interests.It is what they are paid for.
I would add that in my opinion they have done the opposite over the past year and that proposal 9 is a naked money grab now that their tenancy on the board is coming to an end.
I am all in favour of incentives that tie remuneration to performance,but firstly the employee needs to do the job that they are paid for and the incentive needs to be tied to their contribution.The improvement in the company’s prospects and performance owes nothing to this board and is entirely due to events over which the board had no control.To reward them just because the price of oil has soared is obscene.
I do give the board credit however for the efficient technical management of the producing well.

Senseman I would agree ofcourse that CA will have a more detached view of the AGM vote than I do .
But I see no advantage to CA in voting for proposal 9.Golden parachutes diminish the attractiveness of the company to a potential buyer and thereby reduce the price.
Proposal 9 reveals the intent of the board to enrich themselves at our and CAs expense.
They have to go.

I suspect you are correct regarding the motive behind proposal 9 which is why I shall vote against it
I shall also vote against the re-election of who I consider to be rogue directors.
Most of the current board attempted to give the company away to a secret group of bond holders.A proposal that was firmly rejected by the high court.
Since that debacle the board has not offered one word of regret,no apology and has at every opportunity presented a negative view of the company and its prospects.
It escapes me how any shareholder can place any trust in these individuals to continue to run the company for the benefit of the shareholders.
It will take an earthquake of positive action from this board to change my mind.I suspect that with the prospect of a takeover the board are busy devising golden parachutes for themselves.

I would be grateful to understand the objective behind resolution 9
Since my trust in this bod is at zero,I wonder what game they are playing.
Failing an explanation I am minded to vote against the boards re-election,and resolution 9.
Perhaps a poster more knowledgable than I can respond

It is unlikely that the bod will put any serious efforts into fwd plans,when they must consider that they will be out of a job at the next AGM.
Another reason why we need a fresh bod.

Here is a another method of calculating the value of the company.
Assume a conservative production of 8500 barrels a day at $100 a barrel.
Assume 8% to blue water and $8mm a month in production costs.
The company will generate a cash flow of about $15mm a month.
The value of that is easily calculated using a standard a annuity formula.
The variables are 1) the cash flow. 2) the life of the cash flow 3) the discount rate.
On that basis the values at a 10% discount rate are
Field life
2 years $325mm. Sp 16p
3 years $464mm Sp 23p
4 years $591mm. Sp 29p
A lower discount rate increases the valuation as does higher production and higher poo
The above numbers do not take account of the current free cash level or the value of the tax credits.
The numbers merely state what a buyer of this cash flow might pay.
What the current SP tells you is that there remains a significant scepticism concerning the continuity of current production and the longevity of the well.

Hi Daltry
If you hold shares in an Isa you will get an advice of the AGM from your USA manager and you can instruct them to how to vote your shares.Such instructions can usually be found in the “corporate actions” section of the managers website.
If you hold your shares directly , advice and voting proxy forms will usually come by post to you and can sometimes be actioned online or by post.

I agree with senseman that it is likely and logical that C A will have plans to replace the old BOD which IMO has forfeited all credibility in running the company.
A vote of no confidence is however not enough.These individual must not be re-elected.
One note of caution however for those shareholders planning to attend the AGM whenever it is called. Tempers may run hot and it is important that no disruptive or intemperate behaviour occurs.Any such would provide a reason for the chairman to adjourn the meeting and schedule a fresh meeting perhaps as long as 3
months later.The company articles permit him to do so.