Member Info for rossannan

when you consider the solid progress that WTI has made of late.

Bespoke

Have you heard back from BPC? Nothing here.

The bhoys

Not that everything is rosy in our garden either. At least we can look back on beating Colombia.

The bhoys

“the longer it goes on the more doom and gloom you get from people on here”

Or, to put it another way, the more shares the BoD issue (“fully funded”!), the less confidence folk have in them. More confidence than folk have in Neil Lennon, perhaps, but not much more. Yesterday’s RNS has left BPC’s funding looking somewhat opaque. There isn’t much more to be said until the next RNS hopefully clarifies a few things.

levistubbs

Fair play, though, with companies like PERE, predicting an unexpected raise is like shooting fish in a barrel! I am assuming that the pre-emption rights of other shareholders have somehow been disapplied (even though PERE is not on AIM).

1. Yes, but it does not make clear whether anything other than the BPC pay up date is extended.

2. No, because as today’s RNS makes clear BPC has secured a variation to the original agreements. We don’t know if that statement still holds good after that variation.

It’s a poor RNS.

Patoir

Who is surprised?

ShareScare

“the extension only applies if the put is placed and taken by Feb 20th”

An extension certainly applies in that case.

But is it an extension of both BPC’s payment deadline AND 1798 Volantis’ guarantee period?

And for the existing tranche as well as the new tranche or just for the new tranche?

The RNS is just not clear enough. I can almost guarantee you that they will issue a clarificatory RNS (again).

ShareScare

That really is not clear from today’s RNS. You may think it is all clear but it seems to me that they have made a hash of explaining the key points and need to have another go.

ShareScare

Wait, so you are saying that the guarantee period has also been extended for the first tranche?

ShareScare

But if you are correct that the guarantee period for any second tranche has been extended in this way well beyond the guarantee period for the first tranche and, crucially, beyond the results date, you must agree that today’s RNS is far from clear on the point.

ShareScare

"The same terms will apply for any funds that may subsequently be made available to BPC under the Funding Option Agreement."

Are we not now discussing whether those same terms still apply for any funds that may subsequently be made available to BPC under the Funding Option Agreement?

ShareScare

This part:

“the date on which BPC may be required to make a reconciling payment to the Investor”

Is that just the date on BPC may be required to make a payment to 1798 Volantis under the second tranche guarantee (a simple extension of the date for paying up under that guarantee) or is it also now the date before which any sales are covered by that guarantee (a substantial extension of the guarantee period)?

It’s getting hard to see how BPC can avoid having to issue a clarificatory RNS.

ShareScare

So you think that, to benefit from their guarantee, 1798 Volantis still have to dump what remains of their 375M shares pronto and that the extension of the guarantee period only applies to further shares that may be issued if BPC elect to go down that route again?

Bespoke

This is the email I sent:

“I am a little confused by today’s RNS.

Has the key provision of the agreement with the Investor that was highlighted in your 16/12 RNS (“No payment is required for any shares that the Investor continues to hold at the Relevant Assessment Date”) now been changed by amending the definition of the “Relevant Assessment Date” to 16th April 2021?

All the best

Ross”

Apologies in advance to you and PageofCups if BPC come back to me to confirm that this extension of the guarantee (and therefore your interpretation of today’s RNS) is correct. I genuinely didn’t believe that even the BPC BoD would do something like this to their LTHs.

Bespoke

“How do you think the SP would hold up with 8-10m shares getting dumped on the market daily?”

Before or after the drill result and in the latter case, on a commercial discovery or on a non-commercial discovery/duster?

Jdam - I have too.

It seems hard to believe that even the BPC BoD would do something like this though. Depriving traders of their fun is one thing but it is the LTHs holding on for the drill result who will, in the unlikely event of a commercial discovery, feel the pain of this.

Oultonmike

I think you have highlighted the root of the confusion on here. Otherwise I’m not seeing that much ambiguity - there has clearly been a significant time to pay extension for BPC with a much more limited extension of the deadline for BPC to exercise its option to place further shares with the Investor and, as far as I can tell, the deadline for the Investor to then exercise its “double up” option hasn’t changed that significantly - this is still something that it has to do ahead of the drill result.

However the wording “this extension allowing a considerably longer window for the determination of the need for a reconciliation payment” does seem a little strange. If the key provision that was highlighted in the 16/12 RNS and that you have highlighted (“No payment is required for any shares that the Investor continues to hold at the Relevant Assessment Date”) has not been changed significantly, the calculation of whether there is an amount due and what it is will be capable of being done long before 16/04. So has there been a significant change to this key provision (namely, as you suggest, by amending the definition of the “Relevant Assessment Date”)?

If there has been such a change, today’s RNS almost entirely glosses over this absolutely crucial point and we will now end up with a clarificatory RNS having to be issued, just like we did in December.

That will be a really poor show, to say the least. Really poor.