Member Info for SpaceHoppa

Just musing, that whilst once I wanted as many warrants to be taken up as possible, to help fund Rock in 2024.

Now with the OM award almost certainly bringing in a minimum EUR 45, to over EUR 100+ millions, I'd rather as few warrants were exercised as possible!

Morning JEBR, good post, however one correction the hearing is now scheduled to begin in April 2024, according to the latest update.

Kread, to answer your question referring to the below from the Half-Year Results 28 Sept.

1. The warrants are most likely going to be taken up

2. The arbitration award looks like it has been sold, netting between EUR15m to EUR100m+

3. The legal cost will be settled as part of 2.

'At the period end the Group had 53.9 million unexercised 9 pence warrants in issue with an expiry date of 31 December 2023. Assuming the share price is in excess of 9 pence, which it is at time of writing, the Group expects the majority of these warrants to be exercised providing additional funds of up to £4.9 million. However, in the downside circumstances where these outstanding warrants are not fully exercised the Group would have to raise additional funds within the next 12 months to meet both legal costs in relation to the arbitration and normal working capital requirements.

This agreement with the new funder, might possibly hasten the whole process for the reason I took of a website posted below

The high cost of litigation provides well-funded defendants with an overly potent

weapon: financial asymmetry.

Realising that the plaintiff has legal financing in place

is a powerful motivation for a defendant to seek a settlement in a case. After all, it

should be apparent by then that the plaintiff has the ability and the commitment to

fight the case until the end.

I think Italy now know, if they didn't before, that they will be perused for the money until the bitter end. If they lose the annulment case, as they likely will, they may quietly settle sooner, for a small discount.

Fair play to some of you guys.

You respond to the same deramping headline, & the same repeated

again,

and again,

and again

daily deramping nonsense.

You have more patience, or more precious time than I have, as they're all filtered !

Citizen and CantSell,

to be fair the third tranche is the least important as a 20% profit share of even EUR 120m, is only EUR 24m, and only crystallised once Italy have paid the new funder.

Tranche 2 is more important, in so much that should Italy lose the annulment case, to quote Sam, the tranche amount of EUR 65million is paid 'basically immediately from the new funder'.

Cant Sell Now, I queried that with the house broker, he clarified and basically said add tranches 1+2 + 200% of legal costs.

If it was 200% of total costs, tranche 3 would be worthless !

It is badly worded.

Thanks Mike.

I like the way Malcy worded that, a (20%) 'profit share on recovery'. It's a good way to think of it.

Just to add, SM has confirmed what Henry at Canaccord Genuity said.

Also worth putting in to context how much Rock needed for SL.

Hypothetically if the SL phase 1 Capex was $1.3bn, and $1.0bn was from debt finance, Rock would need a gross JV equity contribution of $300mm. Rock are on the hook for 35% of that which is $105mm but we get 2/3 of that in the Navitas loan leaving us with $35mm to pay.

On the assumption Italy lose or even obtain a 50% reduction in the award, Rockhopper have the above easily covered.

Hi Daikihaku and LTT,

there is no doubt this is a good deal.

Worse case is approximately EUR 15m and all legal fees etc paid off.

Best case is legal fees all paid + EUR 102million or more (15m + 65m + 22m+ )

It may fall somewhere between the two and the 3rd tranche is dependant of final recoveries which may take some years. However this provides lots of cash and certainty, and removes the small risk of having nothing but legal bills.

All eyes now on Navitas's next moves.

I just came of the phone to Canaccord Genuity Limited regarding a couple of questions I had.

Regarding the second tranche Eur 65million. As I thought, should the ROI appeal be rejected, as it is likely to be, then this 65million is quote 'crystallised' and payment comes form the legal team, not dependant on payment from ROI.

Regarding Tranche 3, this is a bit more complicated but it hypothetically goes like this.

If appeal is rejected and Italy still owe EUR 250m

Legal team will pay Rock 45 + 65 =110m upfront, PLUS this 20% bit

Specialist Fund legal costs of perhaps 15m, x 2 = 30m

Specialist Fund's total investment including costs.110 + 30 = 140

Award of 250 minus 140 = 110

Rock get 20% of that = Eur 22m

So if the award is thrown out, Rock will recover 45 = 65 + 22 = Eur132m

This IS a good deal for Rock !

Note The Specialist Fund will cover all costs related to the Arbitration from the ''date of this announcement.''

Rock have

1. Paid for all legal costs incurred plus winning fee

2. Have a free carry on future arbitration legal costs

3. Removed the, admittedly very small risk, of losing the appeal and getting nothing.

4. Received Eur 15million upfront to strengthen the books

5. Agreed a Eur 65million payment if Italy lose their appeal

6. Exposes Rock to more Euro millions payment in tranche 3 once the legal team tear ROI a new hole

7. Diminishes needs for a cash call for the foreseeable, when the Eur15m is added to the warrants cash

8. Made our house trolls look stupid

What's not to like ! ;-)

This may have been mentioned by the many posters I have blocked, but this deal seems again sensible given that

'The annulment hearing is currently scheduled to commence in April 2024.'

Which is a slight slippage from Q1 2024.

Disappointing SP reaction on what is essentially a really good deal !!

Before the award outcome most would have jumped at this deal. It may take a while for investors to appreciate it though, plus the warrant situation is perhaps, clouding the share price action.

Of interest,

''Tranche 2 - Additional contingent payment of €65 million upon a successful annulment outcome.''

Says 'outcome', not monetary recoveries. I take that as meaning if ROI appeal is refused, Rock get Eur65m immediately.

It also talks about a hypothetical 20% reduction upon, if we take that as a possible outcome, Rock still get Eur 52m in the 2nd tranche.

Eur45m is secured whatever happens

Eur 52m to 65m is highly likely in tranche 2, and monetised when Italy lose their appeal I feel

Eur 15m+ in tranche 3

To keep this in perspective, Rocks previous open offer, if all warrants are take, would raise $17m, for about 33% dilution.

Good Morning XKR,

yes that is more or less as I read it except Tranche 1 is Euro 45millions but we discharge all our legal costs via this trance.

It is a sensible pragmatic move and I welcome it's certainty of getting at the very minimum of E15m in the short term. Longer term assuming the legal team know their onions, and the reason they've entered this deal with Rock, is we get approximately EUR100 to 115m, but this may be, like it is now, in a year or two.

Main take I feel, is Rock removes all legal liabilities from it's books, and gets a minimum Eur 15m cash injection. This is good news!

Total Receipt by Rockhopper:

From Tranche 1: €15 million - after paying legal fees

From Tranche 2: €65 million (assuming no reduction due to annulment).

From Tranche 3: €26 million.

Hi LTT, it certainly looks like Navitas have so far spent $50m on Sea Lion, Quite a commitment and their London team have done a great job getting costs down to sub $38/bbl. Getting debt finance is a hurdle to surmount, but the numbers stack up very favourably.

News can drop any time, or not for a few months, but it is more likely than not, I feel, that we will see a big RNS coming out detailing real progress towards FID in Q1.

Indeed true Bloobird, however my comment was a generalisation of attitude, rather than Sea Lion specific.

A classic example is the coking coal we can use from Cumbria, but objectors wanted the steel plant to use to use foreign coal shipped in.

Fracking is another example, however we import LNG from USA and Quatar instead of producing it in the UK, bringing jobs, taxes and yes, energy security SmoggyPete.

Nobody in Russia, USA or Norway are worried about running out of gas and oil, for obvious reasons.

My view is we should decarbonise sensibly, and along the way use our own oil and gas in the on land and off shore, Falklands etc, and especially frack, and if someones wedding photo falls of the wall in a miniscule earth tremor, then there can be reduced gas prices for all affected area's. Governments should take difficult decisions for the many, not Russian financed pressure groups or fuknicks like JSO.

Incompetent out of touch, virtue signalling politicians are the principle part of the problem Citizen.

Morning Citizen, there is good support in the Conservative ranks for the Falklands, and for a sensible attitude towards oil and gas, however the Whitehall civil service 'Green Blob', and green zealots MP's of all parties would rather we imported energy security from half way around the world, increasing the carbon foot print, bought from dubious unreliable regimes and losing jobs and taxes as well.

The utter stupidly of this is beyond comprehension, but sums up exactly what is wrong with this country and the dire quality of our law makers !

Also Q3 interims are now in English.

https://navitaspet.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/%E2%80%8F%E2%80%8FNavits-FS-Q3-2023_26112023_eng_HM.pdf

On page 15 , I read it as 2023 Sea Lion spend as

$23,544,000

2022 $11.1m

2021 $14m

It has been suggested this is an accumulated total, however that doesn't look right.

$23m is an excellent indicator of commitment !