Member Info for rossannan

Starchild

It is not just far fetched, it is nonsense on stilts. In theory a £70M oil company can grow and grow and one day find itself with an MCAP 100 times what it once was (but not without issuing shares, so definitely not 100 times the original share price), but drill a couple of wells and get taken out next year for 100x the current share price? Pull the other one! Just look at the existing funding arrangements and the amount of dilution inherent in them. What about existing options? And the major acquiring BPC isn’t going to factor the massive costs of developing the field into the price that it pays? Honestly, you guys are doing the bull case no favours with stuff like this.

Ibiza28

“The figure i would settle for now is around £2-£2.5 per share”

In other words at least 100 times the current MCAP. Do you realise that the current MCAP is already around £70M? So your success case sees a major paying £7BN for BPC and you wouldn’t take a penny less?

Figures like that are just not credible and do not advance the discussion.

Linton78

How can anything happen until there is sufficient unconditional funding?

Something on funding is arguably the prerequisite to any countdown commencing and to anything operational. Firming up the existing facilities, unveiling alternative(s), selling some of the former CERP assets, whatever.

Tiburn

I filtered IreneKrapp a while ago and that works for me. When someone is more interested in other posters than in the company, just press that button and then you don’t have to waste your time reading their posts.

Tiburn

Exactly.

willec

I followed that link Starchild provided. It doesn’t say that an average offshore oil well produces 50,000b/day. It says that deepwater wells have the capacity to produce over 50,000b/day, which is something very different, you must admit.

GO

And if not now, when? Interims in a couple of weeks, the T&T Budget possibly as soon as 5th October and a Q3 update mid-October.

Noviceinv

Why do you assume that Harry is lying simply because he is saying something that doesn’t fit your narrative?

willec

No grudge - no position in CERP. I thought though that it was a real betrayal of the CERPers who had set so much store by what Koot had outlined to them. You call it a shrewd piece of business but is that not just making the best of a bad job? As I said before, imagine that someone had come on the CERP BB prior to the merger in an attempt to sell the BPC story to the CERPers and that the CERPers had then done their own BPC research. What would they have concluded? I think you know that “Thanks but no thanks, I am happy where I am” would have been the politer end of the typical responses. So is it a shrewd piece of business or just a throw of the dice by an oil company executive who was no longer willing to follow through on the original plan? BPC is not a radically different proposition because it has bolted on the former CERP assets - BPC was and is an essentially binary proposition. CERP was not a binary proposition, even if it sometimes felt like one because of the way Leo Koot ran it.

Looking at it from a CERPer’s POV, the rosy MCAP scenario is something that Koot based on a 3-5 year roadmap of growth by development and acquisitions. This roadmap was heavily revised over time but the “merger” (essentially the acquisition of a cash-strapped (well done Leo) CERP by BPC) effectively shredded it. “Take what’s left to the casino” perhaps sums up the replacement strategy.

limopeter

No idea, but PV could deliver Koot’s 0.5BN MCAP for BPC (was that £0.5BN or $0.5BN that he dangled in front of the CERPers back in the day?). That would, of course, be the equivalent of delivering a 0.125BN MCAP, give or take, for CERP.

Or PV could be duster with everyone diluted into near oblivion and BPC trudging along as a micro-cap, trying to make something of the CERP assets.

Or maybe PV will never happen and BPC’s funding will be diverted towards the CERP assets. There’s a thought.

Everyone’s return depends on the timing of their exit, of course. No one is obliged to wait for the endgame - particularly since Koot shredded the roadmap.

Tiburn

With one exception the CERP assets don’t exactly have readily realisable value and none of them are generating free cash - if anything they will still be burning it. There must be some CERP G&A savings but the CERP BoD still seem to be doing pretty well out of the merger, whether they deserve to or not. But the BPC asset base has expanded - that is significant from the point of view of a lender taking a floating charge - and the shares issued to the former CERPers have, as bigmj pointed out, helpfully increased liquidity.

The exception I was talking about was FRAM. Will PRD repeat their $1.75M offer? I am sure that if they did BPC would bite their hand off at the shoulder. That could be a small but very significant cash injection in the grand scheme of sorting out the funding here.

Starchild

Bit of a vain attempt then because if there is one thing that you learn from BBs is that most of the ramping and deramping quickly becomes white noise. The rampers aren’t going to shoot this north of 2p and the derampers aren’t going to submerge it below 2p. It is all down to the next RNS.

Starchild

But other opinions could clearly be formed on the basis of those same facts, including the opinion that they tell us nothing. You are choosing an interpretation that implies something positive for BPC shareholders. That does not mean that your interpretation is wrong, but that definitely makes it wishful thinking.

Starchild

Whales are routinely spotted on BBs. It is usually just wishful thinking. Some progress on funding might attract one though...

Chriskerr100

I suspect those two things are not really connected here. A clear run into a drill will generate pre drill excitement pretty much whatever the CoS. The inflection point for pre drill excitement has to be whatever clears the way to the drill. A Stena farm in or subscription would be one possibility, but is the inflection point not more likely to be the existing funding becoming unconditional? And is there much chance of Stena serving a commencement notice before that happens?

JBT2007

You say that my posts are not credible. So tell me where I have got my facts wrong. You suggest that I am here to make mischief. Hardly. I spent long enough on ADVFN defending the “fully funded” idea until another poster pointed out the breached 2p condition in the Family Office Facility, something that I had overlooked because I had taken at face value the references in the Annual Report to this Family Office Facility being “unconditional”.

jimtheknow

Most investors imagine that what is not in the public domain would push the share price higher. Often they are wrong. The business relationships here may well be such that in due course the terms and conditions of the funding will re-emerge from the kitchen, cooked to BPC’s order, but in the public domain, at least, we have a problem. You talk about standard prerequisites, but the breached 2p condition is hardly a standard prerequisite.

Jim1556

I cannot speak for anyone else, but I am here solely to kick the tyres of BPC. If you think that any of the points that I have been making are not well founded, let’s have your counter arguments.