Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Yet still its 30% down on where it was befreo a fantastic new chairman was announced, and 2 new partners on a new initiative.... it looks like many people have worked out what's happening here now... just needs confirmation.
Interesting article on the owner of the assets mentioned yesterday... the new owner is concerned about funding the decommissioning costs.... this view supports YTs post perfectly, explaining why deferral would be a very attractive option for asset owners, also suggests the cost is quite substantial.
https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/189202/dno-threatens-to-terminate-bid-for-faroe-petroleum/
They had £18k in the bank at the end of May 18 and appears directors have loaned money in, so you can hardly say they have been running at shareholders expense for the last 9 months. They must believe in something.... hlaf year reprot end of Feb will be interesting.
Charles... of course there will be some that will say you will now be selling or indeed have been selling.... I am pretty confident this is not the case and you appear to remain very bullish with your investment?
Hoping to get back in with a punt soon.... I'm not sure another licence can be seen as a placing pump.... history suggests they have never impacted share price. I certainly never believed they are conning shareholders here, rather they are continuing to proceed without really extracting much by way of salary etc out of the company becasue they beleive in it. I would guess they are deferring and running on fumes. If others are paying for sampling etc it could mean they can proceed further witout funds. Never really felt they raised any where near enough cash to do the required work, so a good sign still that not really much has been spent to date..... just have absolutley no idea what has been achieved for it. Always thought they were keeping something back that they might have found.
Some further reading on innovation to make deals happen in the north sea... there is a small mention of a negative selling price. which is what my earlier post was referrring to, and details about different approaches to ongoing decommissioning liability
http://www.cms-lawnow.com/ealerts/2017/03/pdf-innovation-deals-happen-in-north-sea?cc_lang=en
Personally I think there is a strong possibility the decommissioning liability will play a key part in asset negotiations..... The Government are certainly keen to flex the tax position to make it transferrable to encourage smaller companies to take on late life assets from larger companies.
The below report gives a very good understanding of the decommissioning bill, the tax break element of that, the desire of Government to continue to exploit the North Sea resources to its full potential whilst controlling Decommissioning liabilities but meeting obligations.
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Oil-and-gas-in-the-UK-offshore-decommissioning.pdf
Let's say for example a company has a 10m decommissioning obligation... with tax breaks the net cost to them could be say 6.5m. Deferring that liability could make that cheaper in the future; transferring that liability to a new asset owner would save them 6.5m; perhaps they would transfer the asset, plus a few million in cash to remove this liability from their books... maybe they request a small royalty from production, I don't know.
If they can pull off something like this, a placing will not be required and we will be flying. I do feel they have some confidence in what they are doing that funds will not be an issue.
Not been here for a while.... I really want to see this succeed... how can they be going after more licences when they appear to have run out of money and have hardly progressed the very exiting prospects they already have? I guess it’s a good sign they are still moving forward and trying to land grab...
Nobody expects to be producing overnight.... unless you take on an already producing asset... whichever we are also close to... then every acquisition will have a lead time that’s no great revelation...
Time to market will be much quicker than conventional plays.....
We are looking at existing assets that have infrastructure and have already produced....
An existing platform conversion to a power plant facilty is required...
It appears similar to Siemens Seafloat concept in design...
Subsea would likely require more like 15-20km to connect to an offshore wind grid rather than 150+km...
There are many examples of companies whose assets have added significant value that would be much further from production than our GTW project.
Speed to market is one of its benefits.
I would say we will be ahead of Tigre, I would say max 18 months from deal signed, which would be exciting for a little company.
It’s not as if Siemens are an unreliable partner, I mean the collaboration agreement is only for 2 years they wouldn’t sign for 2 years if they expected the first project to take longer would they.... and they clearly want more than one project...
I would also expect other projects to be signed up in that time.
A list of some of the bigger names we are partnering with....
Siemens
Aker Solutions
Aibel
Arup
COSL
KONGSBERG
BRAEMER
Not bad for a tiny little company.... Small boy with access to big boy resources...
Covered in offshore energy
https://www.offshoreenergytoday.com/mfdevcos-marginal-gas-fields-project-gets-siemens-support/
Key sentence.... shows Siemens like our other partners are committing their own resources upfront.
“This commitment by Siemens to project evaluation and design"
Next step I would guess is to announce the operator.... no doubt it will be another really good industry name... will the first project be named at the same time or a little afterwards?
Well no not really.... yes there was pre AGM expectation but we are closer than ever... and it’s not enough to drop share price by 30_40%....0 he talks about urgency in his podcast.... we’ve announced 2 partners for GTW in as many weeks... the Brazil project we appear to be looking at the current owner appears to be getting into bigger trouble...
Circa 0.9p week before the AGM..... since then we have had an excellent appointment of a new chairman, announcement of GTW initiative with first partner and now Siemens, with an excellent podcast from the new chairman in between and of course an greatly successful AGM day of interaction. GTW project appears close, will be a question of how many bags IMO
Well that’s the Partner we wanted! Look forward to see what’s next....
From what I can see, Siemen's would be the preferred partner.... so if they are involved with our GTW projects, then happy days!!
Page 9 of AGM presentation...... Power generastion plant on a fixed platform to include Gas turbines.....
The Seafloat idea is a very interesting concept and has a lot of synergies with our proposals.... theres some good stuff on the website about the gas turbines. Its interesting that they talk about platforms and vessels...
http://nu-oilandgas.com/uploads/files/190125-AGM-Presentation.pdf
Very interesting......
Try NEX.... 1,3m and 0.8m buys this morning on NEX
Agree YT.... but it doesn't look good if they have been unable to pay their share of the costs, why should they retain their interest. I can't see any grounds for a reversal of the decision.
If they can't pay cash calls for Atlanta which you would think would be a safer play for them than TM, I can't see how they are going to cover the charter fee and development costs.