Member Info for ShareScare

Zag, taking a seat outside the echo chamber ? Don't blame you

Iamrich, we do not need to reapply for an EIA, every drill requires its own EIA.
So if we need to drill again and the JR requires any changes, we simply apply for the EIA at that time meeting the new requirements of the EIA, just as we did with the current one.

The only person who walks away from this with a positive balance is Fred Smith QC

Fashionably late... but only by 10 years

https://thenassauguardian.com/us-business-groups-rail-against-bahamas-oil-drilling/

$30 in 6 days, environmentalists do not like speaking with their wallets

https://together.bealiv.com/campaign/79/protecting-the-pristine-bahamian-waters?mc_cid=461f1b3653&mc_eid=8b1a8bb892

I think we can take it as a positive.
The government look like they are being good guys.
The environmentalists get their day in court.

The government like BPC would have originally not wanted the drill stopped, so the cost claim was applied for. Now there is no JR until mid February-March that concern has disappeared after the judge refused a stop to the drill.
The government would have looked bad trying to get costs from the environmentalists, especially now we have all learned they have the begging bowl out.
I posted a link yesterday where they needed $20,000 and had raised $10 in 4 days. The same link was posted a little while later and they had managed to raise $30
Today that link had raised $30 and the amount was reduced to $2500
BPC could theoretically expect a much higher cost/security put in place than the governments $200,000
The JR is going ahead regardless but has no effect on BPC, any changes made to the way EIAs are made will be met by BPC as when they are applied for. So what has really changed ?

Sorry got a bit carried away with the Dr Who Darleks

Exterminate......EXTERMINATE..

http://www.tribune242.com/news/2021/jan/14/bpc-director-oil-resistance-futile/

I wonder why the government had a hearing today, they were down for the 22nd January.

So is it the case that BPC as an affected party will instead make an application for costs security as they were supposed to be heard today.

The government today withdrew its application for security for costs in the Supreme Court during a hearing for the judicial review of its approvals for Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) to drill for oil in The Bahamas
Attorneys for the government submitted, during a hearing before Supreme Court Justice Petra Hanna-Adderley, that the decision was made in an effort to save time and costs. The government was seeking security for cost of $200,000 for the entire action or to have it dismissed

I suspect we will get details via an RNS or BPC statement in the morning

Lets hope Banana and his lucky 7 are right.

BigSi "If however you wish to make statements that encourage others less well informed to invest or even over invest then I sincerely hope you are very sure of yourself as I’m sure you wouldn’t like to think yourself responsible for potentially life changing loss of capital if your shown to have posted recommendations that subsequently where shown to be incorrect."

Conversely BigSi, Prozac, Roseanne, Irene, TRP-BPC, ThePole and all the other dampers will not be making payments to anyone who never got in and missed out IF it should be a successful drill.
Just for balance

Chesh he was here briefly last week using a second moniker, carryyaoilrig or similar, I called him out and he returned as Titan then slinked off again. Possibly a short ban again.

Laallee "My thoughts are not worth that much!" They 100% are

Chesh, Titan did not really lie regarding the shares, his problem was that only investors with a minimum of I think it was $10,000 could get in.
He works for a financial institution in the Bahamas who deal with the BPC shares. He was basically disgruntled, took it personally and the rest is history.

laallee 12p for your thoughts.

Absolutely, in fact many have taken the latest put to indicate we have good news coming. I can not guess the upside now, but I think we are good

SC "However on this matter please don't talk down to me. I'm not an idjut."

I do not know how you come to that conclusion, but apologies if that is how you took it.

Today is a hearing, I guess loosely you could call it a court case. But it really is just BPC making arguments as to why they should be made party to any upcoming JR cases.

o A hearing to determine if BPC should be formally added as a party to the action will be held on 14 January 2021. At this hearing, The Honourable Justice Petra Hanna-Weekes will also provide further directions relating to the future hearings detailed below;


o A further hearing to determine the Government's request for security for costs against the applicants will be heard on 22 January 2021; and


o Thereafter, a hearing in relation to the substantive judicial review will be held either in mid-February 2021, or during March 2021, depending on the availability of the Court and the parties, with a ruling on the substantive application to follow at some point thereafter.

I agree RE any leaks, however I think you may have misunderstood todays hearing.

Cars, I did my little bit and was after the odd 588,481 but ended up with 592,774

Cars, agree, it does appear they have acted in good faith since the SP has as yet not dipped below 2p and from what I read elsewhere they have only sold around 25% of the total volume since the 17th December. They could easily have just kept selling at any price but appear to be acting properly.
I do not believe they are going to stop selling into rises though.
For right now I am interested to see the effect of the 200 million placement tomorrow.