Whatver the reason for the stay, it’s progress of some sort. Lots of reasons why they might be convening, what about this one....FRR wanting to advise the judge and Hope that the NY line of credit is now in place, following completion of due diligence. It’s pretty central to the argument and a significant event, and may push both parties to do a deal (if you are Hope you may be holding out in the hope that the funding falls through, if it comes good then he’s surely got to be pushing for a deal). This may be FRR saying we’ve got the cash, let’s get this thing wrapped up
I’ll answer my own question - yes it was Stamford street if you google it so nowt to discuss here by looks of it
London address on YJ’s website shows as Wells St, not sure if it ever was Stamford street but assume it was if FRR had it listed on their website. So probably a change of address rather than any severing of ties
Agreed Zen a lot of IFS, but what we do know suggests BH signed an MOU after all this mess started so on assumption they knew about the legal stuff that was due to kick off, it will depend on what their due diligence has told them as to whether they partner up with us (if there is still an ‘us’ after the court case). As Kickmuck alluded to the court case is a distraction, which if you think about it from a probable future partner angle, I understand that conclusion as if it gets resolved to FRRs satisfaction then BH are on the sidelines waiting to drill and pump alongside a more secure (financially and at board level) company.
Depends on your definition of success - if the results from UD2 is what hooked BP that isn’t a failure in my book
1. Secure NY funding
2. Secure acceptable outcome from court case
3. Ramp up exploration and production in 2019 via a combination of NY funding, BH input via MOU
4. Finalise agreement with BP
5. Relist company
6. Conclude arbitration with GG.
I know there’s a lot of big ticket stuff here to achieve and it’s currently ifs, buts and maybes, but looking at it logically it’s definitely a domino effect of sorts, and I feel that if 1 and 2 come in 3 and 5 should be no brainers and you would hope that allows us to satisfy the requirements of the unhappy GG. 4 is the potential game changer.
So much unknown at present but I’m quietly confident that if 1 and 2 can be delivered the rest will take care of itself.
Hi again I’m keen to become a part of FOF - for some reason my II account is still showing as pending, would you be kind enough to post on there as I know Devex has put some info out. I’m signed up to Tapatalk as well if that kicks off soon thanks again pal
Does this change our ability to do a deal with BH and/or BP?
Does this change our ability to secure funding from the Ny hedge?
Does this change anything about our legal action underway with OMF?
Does this change our ability to extract oil and gas?
I appreciate there are other issues to consider, especially around liquidity of shares, ISA, SIPP but ultimately if the company is able to deliver the right results operationally then The future could be very good. Private is Private, private is not bankruptcy, private is not the asset being stripped.
We move on as a private company. We own shares and if this comes good then who knows what the future holds. Less/no liquidity in the short term but if things go our way over the next few months then shareholders will be rewarded. Let’s remember who the biggest shareholders are....
9 days is a long time and we have the small matter of the company attending court on Thursday. I fully expect to receive an update from the company after Thursday, probably early next week. This should cover off outcome from court plus confirmation of next steps for both that, and on the matter of a new NOMAD. Early next week feels like a crucial communication window but not sure we can expect too much before then. Even if we’ve got a formal offer of funding from the NY hedge not sure there is any value in updating the market now, probably better to wait until we can include as part of a broader update. The management have shown a close affinity with shareholders and I fully expect them to be cognisant of the need for an update - good or bad - prior to the 24th. The fact this falls after the next court date presents an opportunity for a full update. IMO.
Thanks Eyeson! Much appreciated
Could someone post this on the II board please? I’ve signed up for an account but it’s still pending so can’t post. Just wondering what Devex’s thoughts are on the repayment of the loan notes. Do you believe the notes to be repayable at any point including whilst we are in default? That for me is one of the key issues as if we can secure the funding from the NY fund the this whole issue can be sorted with a repayment to OMF (assuming we need to). Thanks in advance
Said we’d be in a different place in 3 months time. If for a minute we forget about the nomad and court case issues I wonder if his 3 month reference was in connection to the new funding agreement? It’s clear we had issues raising capital so this is/was obviously a big issue to overcome, and the finance discussions with the NY lender would have been in full swing back in October. Maybe the 3 month reference was the inferred timeline to complete due dillegence and get the loan agreed. Much of the rest of this ‘noise’ as Kickmuck put it would then dissapear on the basis that the view is we can retire the Outrider debt whilst in default. Perhaps that is why Zaza appeared comfortable and open at the last shareholder event - because he fully expects the new loan to be agreed based on strong operational performance? This feels logical to me and gives me cause for optimism
News we can/should expect to hear on:
Out of court settlement - balance of opinion suggests this is the most likely outcome. Hearing no new news since the Christmas Eve RNS could just be because the Cayman Islands court system is only kicking back in to gear now after Christmas, or could it be because an OOC settlement is being worked on.
Court case - confirmation of what defence Hope and co have filed and a court date.
Due dilliegence to support funding from NY fund: possibly the most crucial bit of news as again balance of opinion suggests that if we can get formal offer of funds prior to court case, we can use this to retire the existing debt, should we need to, regardless of the other issues being discussed.
NOMAD: if you could choose the worst possible date to start a 30 day clock ticking to appoint a new NOMAD Christmas Eve would be it?! Still we have c. 3 weeks to sort and suggestions of WHI are logical and should expedite due dillegence they need to undertake.
Lots of news to come - and Monday onwards is when the new year really starts for proper in the UK in terms of the bulk of the workforce getting back to work so I’m expecting something next week by way of an update. Up to a point though I’m thinking no news is likely to be good news as suggests talks ongoing with a view to settle? Or it could just be delays due to Christmas holidays.
All just IMO and some thoughts for a Friday.
What RNS?
I’m thinking he’s a rep of one of the funds that bought in here earlier in 2018. Timings would work roughly if you
look at when he started posting. If so that would give me a degree of confidence as they are likely to be as in the know as anyone
I would think there are grounds to remain suspended after NOMAdD appointed. Nothwithstanding the finance related issues which may warrant us remaining suspended, we now know BP are one of the companies subject to an NDA. This is obviously material and price sensitive news now it is out on the open,I am not sure without further detail around this topic it would be prudent to resume trading as I for one would want clarity on this. Best case for me is NOMAD appointed alongside an operational and legal update, clarifying state of legalities, NDAs, due diligence progress re new loan from NY, operational plans for 2019. The rns doesn’t need to clear everything up (be great if it does) but if all shareholders can be brought up to speed with the above at least we will know enough to be able to make a decision (who could bring themselves to sell if we are told the NDA with BP is still in play?!) on our shareholding.
Having re read the recent RNSs I am now definitely of the opinion that the default issue and the FRR claim against Hope have been rolled in to one. Apologies if this is old news but with so many posts it’s tricky working out what has and hasn’t been put forward as opinions. Why am I saying that? Well the RNS detailing the news on the injunction being discharged states that FRR intend to appeal against this but I would think that due process requires them to formally do this (the RNS to me reads as FRR saying they will appeal but only if they need to). We then get told the injunction will be reapplied until the next hearing. Well if FRR didn’t lodge a formal appeal on th day then the judge would not link the reapplication of the injunction to the default appeal, as there may not be an appeal. Therefore IMO he must have linked the injunction to the FRR claim versus Hope. This leads me to conclude that the appeal process only becomes relevant if we need to use it i.e. we lose the case against Hope that we have brought. It also suggests to me that we will get a conclusion on the FRR claim reasonably soon I.e. the whole thing hasn’t been kicked down the track until April when the appeal court sits, so once Hope files his defence, if he does, then things will move quickly. If we do end up appealing it won’t be from a position of strength as it will likely mean we have not won the case against Hope. All IMO and remain optimistic of a decent outcome
Couldn’t agree more Dulwich. For anyone with a nervous disposition following the last couple of weeks, suggest reading the latest posts from Devex on the II board. Some very reasoned and rational thoughts which help to put things in to perspective whilst we wait on news
So this will give a huge boost to share price once we get through the court proceedings. Every cloud and all that