Member Info for Scrodingerscat

Gmaxwell, you've let it slip, posting very similar to slater606.

You know the answer, regardless to the reason of why individuals or institutions are short. If even half of them (your made up figure for hedged) needed to get out (70 Million shares or so) it could take weeks to unwind that volume of buys just to maintain the current SP and not risk a rise, based on even high volume days. That's not even taking into account prospective buyers entering on good news or anticipation of good news.

I'm not saying good news is imminent but really if you are short and it's not for hedging bonds, then you'd have to be pretty certain Kenya is a dead duck.

TLW has been a FTSE constituent for a number of years and any big news could very well see individuals who sold up in the past notice and consider re-investing. A short squeeze and a phoenix rise coalescing would be nice to see but this is TLW after all, so probably shorts will be able to do as they please if the last 4 years are anything to go by.

Pang which if you read my post I already highlighted.

I wouldn't align yourself with Tambo though, he was punting they'd give the licenses to China to pay off debt. Seems more like a flat earther conspiracy nut than a reasoned individual. People can question the binding nature of the contract that TLW has with the Kenyan government, but it does exist and no company on earth would have bid for them in the first place if they weren't solid agreements. So you either believe Tambo's nonsense or TLW did proper due diligence.

Slightly related but I follow what's happening in Mexico with their attempts to nationalise a lithium mine and they look likely to lose in the courts. So just saying blah Kenya means your prepared to just stand up and say without evidence because it's an African country it will renege on it's obligations. If Kenya could take the licenses from TLW why hasn't it already? The answer is it can't, well not legally anyways and as a developing nation it wants to be seen as a good investment option for foreign capital. Why sign a deal with Indonesia for a processing facility if you are going to pull the plug. I don't honestly believe Kenya will be the obstacle here. It is and always was securing a partner(s).

Yes and no. Basically if Kenya pull the plug TLW will bill them. Equally though if they can't fund the development ie can't secure a partner then no. So any permutation where TLW are at fault no, any where Kenya backtrack and de-rail the project possibly using ESG as a reason then yes.

I too think people are getting carried away. Remember the original Uganda deal was agreed with Total at $900M, oil was around $70 at the time. It collapsed due to the Ugandan tax authorities scuppering the deal, on paper it was a loss to TLW.

Kenya has smaller reserves, however requires less capital to commence production. 80% for $600M - $750M, retaining 20% I'd be happy with that. Also don't think it's documented beyond pictures of slides on twitter re TLW granting 22.5%, but I'd be surprised if it was entirely gifted to Kenya.

I believe as per the Ugandan disposal any sale will be submitted to shareholders for approval. This does not mean I'm anymore confident than yesterday that a deal will be done but I do trust even if nothing comes of it TLW still has a strong case to recover costs which even in such a scenario would fund an acquisition.

You are suggesting you know how contracts work but then go on to spout bilge about China. If Kenya reneges on it's obligations it will face international arbitration, no ifs or buts about it.

Are you really suggesting that if Kenya loses a hypothetical court case it will ignore it? No chance, regardless of whether China offered all the tea. Kenya is not about to turn into Russia, it needs international investment and something even remotely akin to what you suggest would turn the country into an international pariah state.

All of the oil in those fields belong to TLW, the only way legally Kenya can take it is to buy it from TLW. Anything else is in breach of those contracts and is illegal, remember that and stop posting tripe. Are you really saying they will seize it and give it to China to pay off part of their debt. Nonsensical.

Bullseye normally cost are recovered through tax breaks but there are other ways, we won't know until everything is published.

Tambo210 I think you are ignoring in basic general terms of how contracts on field licensing works. Now it can be quite complicated. Though generally if you exit a licence you give up any rights, which is the same as if you find nothing or nothing that's commercial, then you can claim zilch because the field is worth nothing.

They found 450M barrels, so when Kenya sold these licences a pathway to extraction and production is assumed under the contract, Kenya can reject the FDP but that set's it up for an arbitration decision because TLW will bill Kenya for it's costs to date. TLW bought the licenses in good faith. They spent a lot of time and capital getting to this point. International arbitration although unpredictable, there's little to no chance that TLW would get no compensation.

Kenya may want to revise the FDP which could be a blocker, but if Kenya doesn't want to produce oil ever then they will have to pay TLW off, they know this. The only argument in this scenario is what that amount owed to TLW is. As currently TLW owns 100% of that oil that sits under Kenya.

Anton just for the record that's a very simplistic valuation of Kenya, no field in the history of ever has equated to the estimated oil in the ground for many very important reasons. To name a few;

- 1. Cost of extraction

- 2. 100% extraction is impossible, there is wastage and it becomes more difficult to extract when Capex exceeds payback a well is plugged, often before that inflectionpoint.

- 3. It's an estimate.

- 4. Oil is a commodity so prices are not fixed.

- 5. Cost of getting it to market, processing, logistics, storage etc.

- 6. Decommissioning costs.

- 7. Tax implications.

There are more but I think I've made my point.

Bluemoon71 that's not value accretive. Considering they have invested $2B approx to date I'd be hoping for $600M for retention of a 20% stake which would equate to a free carry with the development costs around $3B.

TLW needs to think longer term, we can't be solely dependent on Ghana it's far too risky. Jubilee will address the refinance issue if oil holds firm. Even ignoring a gas deal in Ghana and a revised FDP in Ten, net debt should be around $1.5B - $1.6B by this time next year so refinancing will be much easier, there is no doubt they need to refinance and holding on to 20,000 bopd is worth more longer term than selling to exit entirely or for a tiny free carry. Our exploration in South America hasn't gone exactly to plan so until we hit new reserves, buying in to mature fields elsewhere is difficult. Look at Paul Mcdades current outfit Afentra, they've only just started acquisitions, despite having a fair chunk of capital for sometime and they hardly brim with confidence.

To maintain what TLW has and grow production, if what you says come to pass then all of that capital from Kenya will need to go towards an acquisition otherwise this will be another Capricorn, declining assets do not improve share prices no matter how much you pump back to investors or pay down debt. Debt is manageable now ignore the headline number, gearing plus cash generation is the key metric for lenders. I fully expect a re-rating from Moody's in the run up to refinancing.

They are already predicting $800M in FCF by end of 2025.

You asked the question and brought it up unprompted, which suggests you know at least something about it. However your response says to everyone that you know it exists and nothing more. So not only can you not spell your own name (I can read that), you also know nothing about one of the topics you frequently brandish about as a dead cert. Well done 7 figures.

Elyisium do you even know what the tax dispute is about? I have been in tax tribunals on a professional level and I'd be interested to know your insight on the GRA's case. If there isn't any then your comments on this subject are as valuable as, blah... fish.

Elyisium first of all congratulations on not being able to spell your own name.

To torpedo your point just with numbers, if first half production stood at 53K then to make the bottom of the range (unchanged remember) production would have to average 64K+ for the remainder of the year and that's even with a Ten planned shut down.

So 3K better off compared with 2022 with not even a full year at max production. Declines will no doubt continue but if JSE comes off then the top of the range will likely be the bottom of the range and for what feels like an eternity we could see 70K within touching distance of production forecasts for 2024.

Still Jam tomorrow (nod to RD). Notable absence of anything regarding Cote D'Ivoire or Kenya.

As has been mentioned nothing unexpected. The wait goes on for fortunes to change here. The bashing brigade (it's 2 people tops though) are still on top... for how long though.

Side note changes to rules on short disclosures announced by FCA come at a bad time for all of LSE. Timing couldn't be better for hedge funds with corporate insolvencies up 40%. Arguably UK needs a recession and oil above $80 could push us there, added to rising interest rates, a slowing jobs market and changes to UK plc border checks kick in this half. Cost of goods going to be higher come December. Pure joy, might retreat to Premium Bonds.

This BB really is the pits right now.

Anyways Oil price reaction to the latest EIA draw was poor. 11 million draw which rises to 14 million if you take out the SPR releases. Peak driving and travel season underway and Hurricane season to follow. This all apparently still during weak demand from China. Markets worrying too much about recession where it seems to be the hard medication required for inflation. The UK looks likely to suffer for longer compared against the Eurozone. Will demand be affected? Well currently US exporting 5 mbpd right now and the SPR is at a 40 year low. Bearish sentiment bullish signs, who'd be a commodity trader... it's all just backwards right now. EIA is already stating 2023 will be a global record for oil demand and the world collectively producing significantly less than 2019.

Pokerchips by "foreseeable" do you mean a few weeks, months, years? What about H1 report due in a couple of months or just simply ignoring IMM stated it is aiming to have 2 clinical trials running in parallel from H2 2023 (FDA greenlight on Lupus and CIDP makes that statement still true from when it was RNS'd in May).

Do only day traders matter here? The SP is awful, everyone can see that, so there's no bones about it. However, the company has taken 2 steps forward and that's currently not reflected in the SP. 2 clinical trials and further announcements to come, IMM suffers from leaderships (current and previous) missteps, their failure is well documented, you can just follow the graphs to see that. Sentiment can only change with continuing material progress. When day traders are replaced with stickier hands I personally would prefer that.

Those chasing spikes (entirely their prerogative) are the ones who worry more about dilution in an investment requiring capital to get off the ground, than someone willing to wait till the end of trials. When dilution occurs (which it will) its just a case of where the SP is at the time. The end prize hasn't changed, it is still entry to billion dollar markets and a market cap many multiples of the current one.

Anton all Directors on FTSE would be forever hit with insider trading then as they all have operational knowledge of performance beyond the required releases.

They are not in a closed period right now and progress in Ghana and Kenya are out of their hands. It makes sense for them to buy before they tie in Jubilee South East fully and even if they announce the FDP in Ghana, FID in Kenya, or a farm in Partner in a few weeks then the regulators wouldn't even bat an eyelid. As anything material to the market has to be disclosed.

The truth is probably that they will be in a closed period shortly to prepare H1 report and the AGM gave them a push due to the criticism directed to the board and also possibly the confidence in Jubilee SE.

Your posting history only shows that you are a bad actor bashing both the company and individual poster's.

Take for example the AGM you decided to try and insinuate that some individual in the Q&A had insight on Institutional investors, when with all due respect to the man he sounded confused because he couldn't find any information about an equity raise that happened 2 years ago. He wanted to know what happened to the funds, well a raise didn't happen so what he subsequently said about institutions can be pretty much written off.

You're a joke mate and your seven figures is pure fantasy. No normal or sensible person with a seven figure gain would A. Announce it publically here B. Spend all their time on here if they weren't invested or actively short.

If it's true you are one very sad arrogant individual, which is actually worse than the alternative which is you're a pathetic liar. By the way everyone knows it's the latter, repeating something often doesn't make it become true.

Come on; your contract note has the date, execution price and settling amount.

NSVPatel Capital Structure is one of the key components of determining future value. So other than nonsense what do you mean? Focusing on assets, debt or equity has a correlation on value as long as there is positive movement in at least one of the measures. Debt has been reduced has it not? Production has increased has it not?

Throw away comments are not even close to being balanced. You won't be here in 2027 I can bet on that, when a full assessment of the CMD can be analysed. You will have crawled back under your rock long before then.

Also contract note, don't be shy you can paste it here.

For strategic reasons, did you not read the Africa Oil and TLW release? You really are an awful little character.

What do you do other than posting on here, doesn't look like you have a life beyond this specific BB. I've got it you're Canary_wharfy aka Jubileee aren't you? Seven figures and spends all day and night on here, yeah right. You should share your contract note, I will pay for a copy how's about it?

Total will have nothing but goodwill for TLW they secured Uganda on favourable terms from us. Additionally Total have green aims and have made no secret that they will be exiting interests over the next few years. Africa Oil were always the weakest partners and don't have the capital to fund their share in development costs and with Venus and the Orange basin to focus on I suspect they probably just decided their limited capital is best placed elsewhere. Just read their release now and that's pretty much what it says so 10 points for me.

Today's news doesn't make Kenya more or less likely, but now any benefits now are effectively doubled. As has already been mentioned no benefit currently priced in and if it does become a stranded asset TLW does have the right to seek arbitration of costs incurred if Kenya decides to not to commit to develop. However this pads out is for the sages to predict but negotiations are now infinitely more straightforward and streamlined. GLA

*Q1 was good