Member Info for rossannan

Yes, they seem to care more about shareholder value than most.

Really thought the OFAC licence renewal would see us in the blue.

ralph2010

And the oil price - I think of my RKH as an out of the money oil price option that nowadays is not as far out of the money as it once was.

Mogger

Put it this way. The available evidence suggests that portraying the full headline figure as a realistic possibility is just rampy nonsense, in fact misleading rampy nonsense. But I will be deliriously happy to be proved wrong when the award is issued!

Ovets

I thought this was a discussion.

Comertoes

Yes, any figure would help the balance sheet going forward but it is best not to set much store by the arbitration - timing, quantum and the tendency of states to get away with their bad behaviour.

Ovets

Not helpful in what sense? Whether you like it or not, it is true. In fact I wish the data had been more limited and I had spent less time on it. Any suggestion that RKH will bag the full headline figure is just rampy nonsense when you take a closer look at it.

RobRoy007

“a LOT of people could make a LOT of money”

Yes, agreed, but which people? Not necessarily ARS shareholders. That is the risk.

Yes, this is what Sir Alex would call “squeaky bum time”.

More power to the moaners.

Mogger

All the available data and the articles that I have read about this suggest that almost every arbitration award is one third or less of the headline claim. Are you suggesting that the awards where we don’t have the data, e.g. where the claimant isn’t listed and keeps the figures under wraps, invalidate this conclusion? If so, on what basis, given that the figures aren’t available?

Mogger

It is: www.italaw.com

Auson

Yes, but am I wrong when I say that almost every arbitration award is one third or less of the headline claim?

It’s all about establishing a credible future for AAZ that will allow the market’s current “a few more good years then what?” valuation to be revisited. In the meantime I am a happy, patient, holder.

Where have they explained that?

Auson

What other awards did you see much more than one third of the headline claim in? Cairn aside, the best I ever saw was one half (once). Everything else was pretty much one third or less.

Auson

I’m afraid it is. A retrospective taxation case is a misleading precedent for an arbitration like RKH’s. Have a look at some other awards and you will see what I mean.

Update please.

Bit of a slow burner, perhaps. Cracking value play though.

Onwards and upwards.