The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Dividends are for mature profitable companies, not for minnows which have only just declared a maiden profit.
The dividend will not attract pension funds etc to invest here. The cashflow should stay on the balance sheet to grow the company and give PI s a capital gain which is more tax efficient.
I think DB has made a strategic error at this stage of the company's growth by contemplating a cash distribution.
After a stock goes ex-dividend, the share price typically drops by the amount of the dividend paid to reflect the fact that new shareholders are not entitled to that payment. So the RNS which announces a dividend is not likely to add much to the SP and it will go down on the ex divi date, for sure, because market makers will drop the price, as they do on all ex divi dates.
A share buy back is simply frittering cash away to reduce the shares in issue, which for a regular dividend payer means an increasing yield % for the same amount of cash distributed. Not sure that will work here, unless there is to be annual dividends rather than a single cash distribution.
Says Garbled...."won't be posting here (on Rkh's bb)
till the sp 20p+ (promise)....ATB".
Proof if needed that The Lord is merciful to mankind.
"Either way of it is Pello then at 3p it's still £500k+ into the coffers"
That's why the SP is going up
raadaar, according to the Feb 2021, Pello can exercise the warrants anytime up to Feb 2023. You cannot forward sell a warrant. The RNS advising the execution of warrants usually is once a month if it is going on, by advising a new block listing.
I executed warrants on another stock at the end of August without an RNS appearing.
From Feb 2021....
"Subject to the completion of the Placing, Pello Capital will be awarded 18,750,000 warrants exercisable at the placing price of £0.02p valid for two years."
All these big black trades are Pello taking a 50% profit from exercising warrants IMO while they still can, surely?
I hope that Mr Bramhill has now understood that more than 99% of his retail investing audience know "b u g g e r a l l" about petroleum reservoir engineering, and it is patently obvious that he should not be talking to Mrs Higginbottom in Bolton about abstract concepts of resources, contingencies and speculative production profiles. He has frightened the pants off her and her ilk.
If he cannot talk to the common person in their common language, he should stop talking and hire a communicator who can. The post RNS interviews just made a bad situation worse.
That lack of grasp has cost the shareholder base 40% of value in just a few days.
Milnrowmug.........
No, they are not "thickoes", they are not petroleum resevoir engineers either.
That RNS today was rather thoughtless in my opinion, and not what might be expected from a company of seasoned professionals. There was so much built up expectation from the GC reserves report, and yet the directors talked at us, rather than speaking to us in words we understand.
99% or more of investors and analysts in small oil company fortunes are not petroleum reservoir engineers, and the language of today’s RNS was therefore bound to cause confusion and panic. It failed to speak the tongue of the common man or woman or reassure them. The company ought to know how to play an audience better by now.
I think that the directors should have shown more sense than publish a technical statement that included the following words (even though they are technically correct) :
1.Speculative
2.Water
3.Potentially
4.Estimated
5.Contingent
6.Illustrative
7.Constrained, 800 bpd for 5 years
They should have said the oil and gas reserves at Wressle are far better than hoped for, and for a full explanation, read the GC report on the Company’s website.
99% of people on Fulham Road, when asked, have never heard of STOIIP, and that is the audience, not members of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
99% of people in Cornwall think an oil/water contact is like the Torrey Canyon disaster.
99% of people in HMP think constrained means they can do nothing about it.
2 of 10, must do better Dave..........
I read this rather differently.
The whole saga of the ICSID panel was not about who was right or wrong, not about who was winner or loser; that was a given from the outset, which is why Harbour Litigation took it on. I believe it was about Italy’s concern that the jurisdiction of ICSID could open the floodgates of dozens of claims, and they wanted it overturned. They tried, tried and tried again to get the case into the European Court of Justice, where a partisan judge and jury would side with them. They even had a ECJ agitator acting as a consultant to the Italian lawyers for that cause.
I remain convinced that the only reason that the ICSID award was rendered at the last hour of the last day was to let the process expire without giving Italy any hope of raising the jurisdiction issue again. It was about the survival of ICSID in Energy Charter Treaty cases.
If all that is so, then pursuing an annulment will not help their cause. Jurisdiction is not a ground for annulment. Money is not the issue, it’s Italian ego.
I think they will accept that this ferret has escaped and they will devote their effort to steer the outstanding ferrets at large into the cage trap of the ECJ, rather than waste three years on a futile annulment expedition here.
I think they will quietly pay up, and move on to the wider agenda of jurisdiction.
Just my take on things FWIW
If the RNS of 1 sept is anything to go by, this month's trache of warrant shares are likely to be issued on Monday 12th and appear in trading accounts soon afterwards.
The Kirkham Abbey limestone reservoir is already highly nacturally fractured. Thats where the porosity lies. Why frac a frac?
Silverfoil, is that research not about particulate emissions, rather than gaseous ones? You know, rubber erosion v tailpipe carbon .
The highway contractors are now putting down smooth tarmac on motorways rather than gritty tarmac, presumably to cut down on tyre particulate emissions. But than turns them into sheets of surface water hazards in heavy rainfall.
From Interactive investor...
"I can confirm that the new shares following the exercise of the warrants haven't been issued to ourselves yet. We are still waiting for Rockhopper to issue them to the custodian, and then they will be released to ourselves. As soon as the shares are sent to ourselves, they will be applied to the account. We thank you for your continued patience."
I don't believe Italy had the option of the 60 day extension. That option was open to the the Arbitration Panel, if they had not been able to publish the award on time after 120 days; but not to the parties of the case. The Panel deliberately ran it down to the wire, to the very last minute, to allow the arbitration process to expire without any further appeals by Italy being possible.
The case has wider implication for the Energy Charter Treaty and ICSID and they did not want their jurisdiction to be challenged in the way Italy tried. That is why the Panel let it expire in the way they did, IMO.
Yes there remains the option for Italy to ask for an annulment, which has no hope of succeeding on the available evidence. It's a bit like a pregnant wife asking the Bishop for her marriage to be annulled on the grounds of non consummation. The Italians have been royally screwed and they must surely know it.
I expect that Harbour Litigation has lined up a portfolio of diplomatic property owned by the Italian State in jurisdictions beyond Italy, such as Washington DC, London, Paris and NY where asset seizures will be granted on the nod of a judges wig.
Gordon57
That is more than the RNS report, so I expect the RNS is wrong.
11,334 warrants exercised for August according to RNS? That's only me and a few other folk.
They show up in my II trading account as shares but they have zero value attributed (even though they took the cash from me) and I cannot sell them because II say I don't have any!
Anyone else tried it?
SH , have you watched her interviews on TV when she just goes dumb when asked a question. The very idea that business who are going bust can be helped through the energy crisis by reducing corporation tax is fatuous - no profit no tax. Reducing VAT cannot help businesses because they don't pay it, they just collect it from the end consumer, Joe Public, and give it to HMRC.
Reducing National Insurance does not help those who do not pay it at the bottom income end of society and those same people do not pay VAT on food, rent, transport, council tax , water etc, so reducing it does not help at all. It's all to help the rich like her.
She has no grasp on the scale of the problem facing society, but none of them do.
Why would the accountant have a breakdown? Is she overworked and claiming stress?
When a Truss is required, you have a hernia to deal with. She is hairbrained. Probably thinks Falkland is the one in Fife and is a SNP problem.