Member Info for senseman

404x
PIs own 21% of HUR - check various places, you'll find it somewhere. it's fact not opinion

the relevant denouement to my car selling tale is this:-
the toerags had spent 2 hrs kicking tyres and pointing out every tiny flaw that would need attending to to make the car 'as new' (it was 10 yrs old). having seen it al before, i kept my gob shut - give toerags enough rope to hang themselves).
when they rang from the pub saying 'OK, £3K it is', I said, 'No, I told you it was £3300 to you for taking the p.ss. And I'm going to come down and stand outside the car till I see you drive off, so you can't damage it'. And I did. They departed with the usual threats of breaking legs etc.
The car sold the next day for £3K advertised price - to the first of 4 others callers early that same morning.
The moral is - if one does not know one's own value, how can one expect others to acknowledge it?
And I have a fair question - how far would you trust a BoD with a stinking history and now selling HUR to actively encourage any other bidder which does not secure them continuing employment and a fat bonus? I have received an email from a source I trust that HUR made the date room a nightmare of confusion, hurdles and inaccessibility to other interested parties. 'A complete mess' was the term used. Always remember basics - HUR chief execs tried to donate 95% of HUR to bondholders in exchange for $50 million cash which would have to be forfeited in increased bond fees anyway.
The deal announcement was delayed until the market bottomed at $74 Brent & SP 6.8p -to be able to headline an '86%?' eventually possible uplift to current SP, and figures were based on long term $80 Brent outlook. Do me a favour. Today Brent is -$85. The odds of it being as low as $80 average for next 2 yrs are -5%.

it's certainly not splitting hairs for those deeply underwater.
And if it's splitting hairs, why not a 14p bid offered? Or why not 15.5p if 14p was offered one way or another? - if, after all, 1.5p is just 'splitting hairs'? After all, it's common sense and commonly accepted the current deal bid is great for Prax, but dog poor for HUR. Imagine the cash value to Prax of the free-gift tax credits. Why didn't they offer far equal deal value for those? And why didn't HUR argue - 'we want a fair value contribution for them, or on your bike'.
I sold a car a while back. It was demonstrably the best value one in the UK for it's age make model mileage etc in the UK by £500. A viewer's argument was - 'It's up for £3K. I'll give you £2700. Come on, let's agree a deal. Let's not split hairs'. My reply - ''I agree, let's not split hairs. £300 is nothing. So let's agree on £3300'. To which the guys (there were 2 of them) replied ' But we've come 100 miles to buy it'. To which I replied 'You've driven 100 miles because at £3K it's £500 cheaper than it should be. The price is £3K. And if you make another taking the p iss offer, the price will be not be £3300, but £3600' After an hour chundering in the pub opposite, a phone call - '£3K it is'

And still far short of what it could and should be.
And it ain't a 12.5p bid.
You split hairs, and work, on your side of the fence
And we'll work ours

ASI
a man knowing the price of everything yet the value of nothing
a man regarding facts as plasticine
a man the most thoroughly disliked on the forum
good night x

Oops, forgot a tiny detail.
I also posted within days of 2021 restructuring plan court application being announced (was it March 21?) that it would be rejected by the court....))))

In this real world my views and opinions helped stopped the bondholders (you included), eh?
And in July 21 predicted $80 oil & $100 oil (and correct months) way before anyone one else did.
And in Dec 21 I predicted all bond cash +$60 mill by June 22 bond repayment date, when no one else did.
Not bad going, eh?))))
You have a nice evening

I rather think one should read the only thing one can find about them and their methodology on the inet (see below). One would be better off asking the cat. They can't even use English correctly.
https://longforecast.com/#:~:text=The%20Economy%20Forecast%20Agency%20(EFA,and%20some%20other%20macroeconomic%20indicators.

First good news for a while - Brent $79.7 so April 3-7(1st 5 oil days April) looking decent for $80 compared to recent $74/$75.
But more important going forward looking rosier as sentiment returns to China demand rising sharply and supply crunch seeing $100 oil for several years if not quasi-permanently
https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1010905/benchmark-crude-oil-prices-expected-to-top-100-barrel-threshold-1010905.html
https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Time-To-Buy-The-Oil-Dip-Goldman-Sachs.html

CA will have done all requested at all stages by HUR to progress any possible deal being negotiated. Does not mean they will agree the outcome. Negotiations usually take months. But like all companies they will have avoided taking final yes-no decision until the final draft was in place. Wouldn't you? I can tell you with absolute certainty that Brent falling further and for longer was a principal decision making concern, indeed perhaps the primary concern.
My saying how I believe things went down does not mean I agree with decisions taken. I don't. Describing and agreeing are separate concepts to all but the simple minded. I disagree the P6 risk assessment, the future Brent price metric used, and view the deal as poor.
A elephant in the room will always be P6 risk assessment. I believe the correct view was that expressed by Maris & Chaffe at 2022 AGM - there was no reason the backup pump should fail to operate (why should it?) and 3 weeks changeover time and cost would not be catastrophic. Look at it this way - that was their chance to instil ultra caution and higher risk possibility into SH's minds but they did not - they did themselves no protective favours by proclaiming a positive view. There is no valid reason for believing their AGM pump risk utterances to be anything but true. Yet now at deal time we are suddenly back into catastrophic risk at any time headline territory.
The other elephant we haven't addressed is how we and CA would view a pump failure/changeover and 3 week shutdown. By the way, my query to all how would P6 operate now under natural flow given when the last time the pump was off it flowed naturally at +90% of pumped rate, still stands. Not being an oiler I don't know the answer. What is the answer is that if say P6 is flowing at 7500 bpd pumped, but unpumped on natural flow it still flows at 7000 bpd? it's a bloody fair question. Perhaps someone could email HUR to enquire? HUR seem suddenly eager to answer all emails they receive so perhaps someone could email asking? The response would be interesting.
Re say a temporary 3 weeks shutdown hiatus how we and CA may view such possibility differently, look at it this way:-
With 3p a share in our pockets most PIs, many deeply underwater, would be upset yet remain sanguine as most (not all) prefer the long haul with risk accepted, and have been through dire times previously. But CA's SHs, even with 3p in their pockets and with Saba's variable windup deadline, are unlikely to remain as sanguine but give their board and investment advisor (RB) hell if a HUR SP drops dramatically (usual market overreaction) and takes 3-6 months to recover. My point being that CA have SHs & Saba to account to - whereas we HUR SHs don't, we just have ourselves to account to. You see how our willingness to accept risk differs from CA's?

Today's oil headlines make interesting reading

I put the pieces together as best I can and made clear it's only my view which may be wholly wrong. That said, am confident it won't be far off the mark.
Keve - my misread so immediate apology. Though re your statings as fact without reasoning remain for me a total no-no.
ASI - Tolstoy could write War & Peace but you would ignore the essential message and seek argument about whether a comma was in the right place. Whilst your heart remains in the wrong place I won't indulge you. Have a pleasant evening.

Kever
a 100% contradiction within a single post
it's senseman teabreak time so levity allowed - i spoke with your mum last night - she smiled ruefully and confided she wished she'd had a headache the night you were conceived

My subconscious whilst aslumber tried to fit the jigsaw pieces and gauge if my 01.11am post was too unnuanced. It was. With caveat I may be wholly wrong this is my best quesstimate of how things evolved, and current status:-
1. CA's EGM request & Albion plan genuine. RB bats straight. And Albion wouldn't be party to tactical misuse. It evidenced time & effort input by RB. In short, RB worked his side of the fence whilst HUR & Stifel worked theirs. CA was not prepared to rely on HUR finding a suitable deal. CA will have communicated to HUR that any deal, if not whole cash, must be part-cash returnable to SHs + beneficial interest in future. As well as Albion deal, RB will have worked phones with other companies to see if any would provide the ideal - a 'farm-in'. Always biggest deterrent - HUR chief execs - mistrust of which by now industry-wide.
2. HUR execs & Stifel, facing EGM removal, actually work to deadline to achieve deal meeting CA basic requirements in some albeit convoluted form, & achieve such (amazing what can be achieved when needed, eh?). I remain sceptical of HUR & Stifel inputting same effort into other party deals which did not ensure senior execs & Stifel remaining in-situ.
3. CA board meet to consider. A decision must be made. Brent -$80, SP 6.8p?, banking squall imminent. Such magnitude decision is not RB's to make - it's board time. CA Chair & board fear Brent crash to -$70, SP to -6p, lengthy bank unrest, CA SP dip. Irrespective of RB view, Chair & board view is CA risk/reward dictates deal acceptance. RB may or may not hold similar view. But even if RB holds different view, will be outvoted. CA board votes yes to deal. I have avoided criticizing RB personally always believing was CA board decision, not RB personal decision. Hence my always writing CA this, CA that, rather than RB this or that.
4. I would be surprised if RB was not still working phones to find a 'farmee' or 'better deal' which, though CA & Ker have signed Irrevocables, HUR BoD would be obliged to consider. HUR itself can walk away from Prax deal. Which leads nicely to 2 further clarification points:-

5. I rarely consider things over till the fat lady sings, and don't now. With 1 month till AGM, 2 things have happened:-
(i) HUR is now in 'auction territory'. I've read enough since 2021 re oil deals to know a month is a long time. Other companies now know the deal they need beat. Clarity focuses others' minds. It would not surprise me to see another bidder surface. NB. this is not saying I EXPECT such.
(ii) PIs' outcry will have provided CA (& thus HUR) honest ammunition to put before Prax & say deal needs be improved otherwise AGM 75% may be at risk; alternatively 90% wont be achieved thus Prax may have a rump of PIs electing to remain noisy disgruntled SHs in new private HUR.
6. I would be astonished if RB had ceased working to achieve farm-in or better deal.

Will post final thought when time allows.

Rod
Sadly, though it pains my naturally gentle instinct to say so, I wouldn't be handing out benefit of doubt to anyone. It's clear from the complexity and document-heavy nature of the deal that this was a far from 'sudden' decision. It's also clear that we 21% (big chunk - which should have been considered) PI SHs figured nowhere in any of the principals' minds - because although 21% we are all the nobody little guys. So sorry - but it's ethical dereliction to construct and divvy up a deal without considering a 21% group. And then worse to ring fence it with a batch of Irrevocable Undertakings.

Kever
With respect, it would not take all day but maximum say 10-30mins. You are not writing War & Peace. Posters often spend longer than that writing more complex posts than that asked of you.
So let us be straight - you are refusing to post the figures you were given by RB
Instead you are suggesting that myriad of posters individually phone RB, thereby wasting collectively many hours of time, and many hours of RB's time

Who else would like to hear the figures whereby RB persuaded Kever? So we may benefit from being able to consider them.

Kever 15.20
"My figures were wrong. RB's figures were correct."
senseman 15.24
"Then we would all appreciate you posting RB's figures here for all to consider. "

Kever - Please, help us to consider your view (& CA's) by telling the forum what are RB' figures which persuaded you? If there is any reason preventing you doing so, just state so and give the reason.

Then we would all appreciate you posting RB's figures here for all to consider. Kindly therefore do so

Mariog - I'm up for Plan B

Working late
Eating sausages and drinking rum - it's the dark hour
The deal is theft
The rational is sh.it
We may lose at AGM. But so what? Sleeping at night knowing one tried and failed is far easier than never trying
Remember - David (we) beat Goliath (HUR BoD) before. So CA have made a wrong judgement call - let us persuade them otherwise - keep writing. Let us persuade that the judgement call was unwise
We have a month before AGM - nil desperandum. We have been here before. Like the North Face of the Eiger - when one cannot see a way up the sheer face - go sideways and agitate - until a narrow upwards crack appears. Agitate, write, never give up