The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Worth taking into account, the MCAP was £14m at one point pre deal. The drop is purely down to impatience and events of AGM and screwed over placing for what was a small dillution. So with a deal surely north of £14m is coming.
Worth taking into account, the MCAP was £14m at one point pre deal. The drop is purely down to impatience and events of AGM and screwed over placing for what was a small dillution. So with a deal surely north of £14m is coming.
Well actually they don’t need a placing to close a deal, the finance is from the spv as per the rns.
Working capital placing isn’t the only reason this could be necessary. If you are looking to acquire the other half of a JV for shares would require appropriate authority. I think it’s possible that we may see this happen with or after a deal. I refer to the section in the rns where it says nuog, MFDevCo and subs need ability to raise capital, and the hint that investment in MFDevCo is key to the revised authority. As pointed out so close to nominal value publishing this now for a further dilution of 290m shares would be a waste of time, they would have surely done a share consolidation today if they expected to place at this level.
“If the consideration for the acquisition is going to be satisfied in full or part by shares in the AIM company, the AIM company will need to ensure that it has the necessary directors' authorities and disapplication of pre-emption rights to allot and issue such shares “
Some other good snippets in this link too....
https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-006-9109?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1#co_anchor_a955292
I believe there is a strong possibility the SPV upfront payment could take care of cash flow.....
failing that a raise at a much higher price
i dont beleive they need the funds to complete a deal.... i believe they expect to land a deal that adds significant value. whether they need or choose to place at that point i dont know, and this rns does not absolutley confirm that. depending on how good the deal is it might be a case of they are stupid not to place
gary - do you think the oo has been a success and has benefited shareholders? has the time and effort of the open offer been worth while?? well seeing as we could now purcahse 50% lower than the open offer price, surely what they are saying makes complete sense and that this absolutley should be removed?
second question.... if like they have been saying with Petrofac RNS, SPV etc they are at the final stages of delivering a deal and this is due to be announced any day, whether you believe it or not assume it was the case, do you think this logical to make this change?
so if we all agree the oo categorically failed us, then we surely agree taking it away is the correct thing to do.
do you not think suggesting that they are doing this to favour the placees is the wrong angle?!
I think NUOG are pis poor at coming out and explaining things and adding sufficient colour....
lets take the Petrofac RNS for example.... i believe there is so much more they could have expanded on about what Petrofac have done so far, have they incurred their own expense, have we introduced them to projects and have they introduced us to projects, have they validated our calculations of project evaluation,. etc etc... instead we get something very vague which sets peoples default stance that nothing significant is going on and it's still early stage.... i believe there is so much more to this than we are aware...
some have been critical at Alison's laugh and comment on timeframes... well apparantly it was misunderstood and the reaction was because we do have several projects and we are certainly not waiting around for a project, some that we are very close of completing and we have worked for a long time to get there already. Again a poor representation and they have not taken the opportunity to clarify or correct the way that was construed. SPV - why not add a statement to update where we are with the SPV process?
again.... with todays rns.... why has graham as chairman not released some kind of podcast reassuring shareholders explaining what this means and why it is necessary... ok there are limitations but they have a habit of releasing things like this with little or no explainiation and then they wonder why the market reacts poorly. I believe they could offer reassurance if they wanted to... thier default stance always appears to be "when we deliver a project it will all be ok".... well no, there are so many things they could have done better in the interim.... but despite this, is there value in this investment at this price.... of course there is
major i agree more transparency would do us all a favour so we know exactly what they are working on.....
I am certain they they have a pipeline of projects that can be very lucrative for us, but they are of no value until they are made clear to the market.
the probelm is other companies may acquire early stage projects, do the dd, then take steps 1,2,3,4 etc..... we are working on projects further down the value chain, and when these type of deals are negotiated, you wont know until it closes.
well my money is on the line.... yours clearly isnt
Cobra by no means am i suggesting there have not been a catelogue of mistakes from the company.....
i am invested here for a high growth opportunity. if i didnt belive in it i would sell and move on...
I accept there are challenges along the way. and i am suffering from the effects of them like any other. everything has a means to an end, and my reading of this is not that this is a sell signal for another messed up placing. I think this is a sign the next placing will be more favourable to us..... i do also wonder if this might not be all it seems and i suspect there could be something bigger at play around entity structure.... i am intrigued by the comment below, maybe reading too much into this but could this indicate a merger as currently raising funds via placing has nothing to do with MFDevCo
Nu-Oil, and its joint venture MFDevCo and subsidiaries, need the ability to raise capital quickly, efficiently and on the best available terms
Lets be clear the effect of this RNS........
1 it removes the open offer committment made at the AGM.... seeing how this played out, is anyone disappointed about that??? i doubt it?
2 it means they can issue up to 35% of the company.... by my calculations they could still issue 200m shares, this increase that to about 490 so another 290m shares. correct me if wrong
The impact of the change in resolution is not particularly damaging....
Perhaps the fear factor is that it indicates a placing is coming.... well this is not a placing RNS this is a change in resolution. Well that could be for one of two reasons; they want cash in the bank at any cost, or they are about to land a deal adding significant value and a much higher share price. Seeing the recent comms with Petrofac, the forum and SPV due any day, i would say the latter.
I think the point has been proven that the changes and agreements within the last agm have been detrimental to the SP. I am confident shareholders would take it back if they could and would be happy to remove this.
If they deliver material news and want to raise funds, do we want to go through that whole saga agin.... no thank you.
This says it all:
Discussions with the Company’s advisers indicate that the Company’s strategy is attractive to
investors, however, to achieve the positive material changes to the business that it believes are
possible, the Company needs the flexibility to implement its strategy in a timely manner, and
without having to conduct an open offer each time a non-pre-emptive placing for cash is
undertaken.
well actually i think it did cause the drop.... the whole thing telegraphed to the market and the brokers how they could screw us.....
yes i agree shareholders asked for it but i dont think anyone understood what was being asked for and the implications of it.
Clearly the placing with open offer did not do us any favours and resulted in the sp dropping from 0.9 to 0.2. So i think this had to happen...
worth noting they still could have raised more on current authority...
Think about this..... lets say they drop news and it does a few hundred percent..... i think we would all take a placing above 2p say... currently they will have probelms raising off the back of this rise.
Question is 12th July is now another date in the diary. Shall we play the whole news before EGM game again?
A couple of things on Tigre.......
Firstly having a competitor is not a bad thing, it is further validation of the model if needed. It might be more worrying if there wasn’t! There are so many possible assets out there the size of the market is vast. The OGA and other studies are also excellent endorsement. Plus majors have come out stating that they are looking at electricity supply as the future of their business with long term plans to transition from fossil fuels.
It doesn’t appear to me as though Tigre have secured any asset at the moment, and appears still at the evaluation phase. An investment decision is not due until next year. So there is no evidence they are ahead of MFDevCo.
I may be wrong but it seems to me their approach is slightly different in that they are looking to build a larger offshore plant on an unused platform or new facility to offer a route to market for asset owners rather than trying to acquire an integrated project.
If you are going by their timeline, 2.5 years to first power. I believe our project will be quicker as it is likely to be smaller, less complicated with a fully integrated solution, we have a more collaborative approach with petrofac a key player. Plus I believe closure of a project will put us ahead of their timetable.
The size is interesting as it shows what is possible. MFDevCo have been clear that their goal is to build a portfolio and a have a pipeline of possible projects. Much better to have a repeatable business model with the opportunity to target multiple assets globally rather than put all eggs in one basket on a larger project. It is the scalability that gives our investment such potential. MFDevCo have to make projects commercially investable and maximise return on investment. A larger project isn’t always the answer. The economics between production and operation of the production wells must be matched to the capacity and profitability of the turbine.
It’s certainly worth keeping an eye on Tigre, but they are currently not a public company you can invest in. It seems to me Tigre have an ambitious solution but don’t yet appear to have quite put a commercial package together whereas MFDevCo I believe have focused more around commerciality and deliverability. I’m sure the OGA and other stakeholders are keen for them both to succeed.
A £1.5bn company endorsing your product and working with you on delivering projects is not news...... ffs.... you are hard to please. Not many £3m mcap companies are even given the time of day but these type of companies.
cobra... that is a very good poi9nt.... this is being seriously undervalued because of a tainted history....
so as soon as they pull a deal off and prove people wrong we will rocket.... nothing priced in, no hype, no over valuation, no speculation...... just the prospect of a extremely valuable deal.
I must say i like the use of the world "scale"...
Little MFDevCo using the big boys resources. One of the big problems for small companies is usually trying to manage growth within their resources. WIth the SPV finance facility and the use of Siemens and Petrofac, we have a strong set up to facilitate growth, and the appetite for all stakeholders to keep adding projects can be well supported.
We are all looking forward to one project which will transform our value from this price, but a pipeline of projects regularly delivering can turn this into a very profitable long term investment.
We have seen a big increase in their efforts to gain exposure over the last few weeks:
Addition of GTW info on MFDevCo website
Industry presentaion with Siemens as announced on twitter
PI article
Launch of GTW forum - cleaner2greener
Petrofac collaboration
Now a new interview
Siemens collaboration would have gained a lot of interest
This is really starting to come together and build momentum. First project cannot be far off IMO
Nearly 3 months since this was announced now. I am very interested to see the details of this.
"MFDevCo will hold 30% equity stake in the SPV which cannot be diluted; the remaining 70% will be held by Marnavi, and other investor(s) if sought"
Who are the other investors? Could Petrofac and Siemens be party to the SPV? Marnavi was first announced as a collaboration agreement.
"We look forward to working more closely with Marnavi in establishing the SPV and to advance the significant GTW opportunities we are working to conclude"
" accelerate the development of the 'project pipeline'"
"We believe this provides the final element required to allow us to move forward"
Some interesting thoughts posted over the last few days on possible fields already linked to Petrofac. Petrofac clearly have an existing network of gas fields they have or are involved in. It would make sense for us to leverage off of that experience.