We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
That's it in a nutshell Belgrano (Your not an ex submariner by any chance).
It's pushing the Kurds into illegal exporting, which I assume was set up when they were fighting daesh to keep themselves in the game.
Now that threat has reduced, it looks like Iraq want to cripple them to remove wealth and strength.
Erdogan and family were beneficiary's at the time and after ( I belive).
With the US wanting to reduce irans influences will they help the Kurds or throw them under the bus to strengthen relations with Iraq? Trump pulled out and Bush left them high and dry in Gulf 1.
It imo, hangs on what the US will do?
Rgds Sft
Hello Itsaponzi,
1. I see no mention of GKP in the artical, where do they sit in precived "culpability" in this?
2. I suppose the question to be asked now is, with Erdogans visit concluded to bother Iraq and Kurdestan: If Turkey has completed (TBC of course) the visits highlighted focus discussions regarding security and actions against the PKK /Turkeys incursion into Iraqi (Kurdish) territories, water and oil, if the first two have achieved an accord would Turkey have been given favourable terms to receive oil via the planned restart of the Kirkuk–Ceyhan Oil Pipeline and asked not to take anything from the Kurds?
Note: I read on a post that the Iraqi oil is not what the Turkish are currently set up to process? (Not sure how accurate this is)
BUT
The Kurdish goverment must get something from such iraq and Turkey and what support do the PKK get from the the incumbent Kurdish goverment currently.
If they do not the Iran would be the only beneficiary?
Rgds Sft
Col. Nathan R. Surft eventual breaks after the masterful cross examination by the brilliant, insightful and eloquent Lt Daniel "The bold" Kaffee
https://youtu.be/7bVg5R5oq0g?feature=shared
😁
Best regards Sft 😂
Hey Jim, appreciate the replies.
Couple of points that for form and deeper diving:
1. The market would surely understand the farm in deliverables but I think the market (or even the 6%, pure speculation of course) was POSSIBLY expecting more cash I.e. a % free carry rather than loans.
2. Looking at Energeans debt and ability to finance
Referencing Simpley Wall St
https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/energy/lse-enog/energean-shares/news/energean-lonenog-has-a-somewhat-strained-balance-sheet
BUT
But as of 21st of march 2024 and reference Energeans 2023 full year accounts:
"...Funds were used primarily to repay Energean Israel's $625 million notes due in March 2024. As a result of this refinancing, Energean's weighted average life of debt has been extended to more than six years and results in a weighted average interest rate of 6.13%"
Sft note: I am not sure if this is a factor for obtaining further debt or Morocco financing.
3. 85% looks very good!
I am invested in Kistos and they have been involved in 2x failed ( not commercially viable) drilling campaigns (Hollad and the Benriach, WOS).
I am not sure what the % was allocated to Benriach
https://www.oedigital.com/news/502301-totalenergies-to-spud-highly-prospective-benriach-offshore-well-in-q2
4. " My understanding is the onshore retail customer avivo, wil provide such funding" VERY much appreciate that information Jim, but where is the information from and is there a precedence for this already.
5. Not giving the 15mil straight away, but via a caviate, could this have spooked the markets or investors some what???
6. No further comment other than it may be precived by investors as a reflection of poor management decisions / directions on running the company.
But the market possibley react well to cutting loss leading direction/ projects and if the do cut or manage to sell, could result in a SP lift.
7. Costs are possibley minimal but puts more pressure on the onshore being a success as it is still an financial drain. Increasing risk factor.
Up side is very much of significant potential especial as partnered with TotalEnergies.
8. Fid Q2 for Anchois but no income until production....time line to actual production
Again market investors must be doing calculations on Chariots cash reserves (including last fund raise, 10mil time + meeting 15mil criteria, balancing Loukos success and income to Anchois production.
This is why there is a perception of real risk of a further fund raise required a lot hangs on Loukos
As before, hazard hunting balancing controls, mitigations...risk really starts to get removed if Loukos is FULL confirmed commercially viable.
I thank you for your compised and muture comments and if my points can be undermined all the VERY much better. I KNOW I am short on knowledge but if I can think of them how much better can professional energy analysts do????
GLA
Kind Rgds Sft
"Your points are actually non valid for a non share holder looking to consistently FUD eloquently"
Dear dear me TheBold, how many times do I have to state I own CHAR shares, a reasonable amount in my opinion.
This consistan deflection is very illuminating and I think some readers on here will see through your and other posters attempt to undermine such considerations of why the share price is where it is.
I stress its my opinion ONLY and welcome criticism of the points.
For example
Point 4: if I remember correctly, you previously thought finance would/ could come from the onshore gas reciving customer?
I not having experience or examples on this for of financing took it as an potential option. But as it has not been confirmed by CHAR it remains in the Risk section
point 3: CHAR belive it's possible other wise it would not be drilling, BUT there remains RISK.
ALL below havering degrees of (again IMHO) RISK....
and my point remain maybe the market feels the same.
I am now not going to continue with the ping pong.
POSSIBLE REASONS WHY SP WHERE IT IS.
1. the small amount of cash paid out to aquire i.e, the VERY limited FREE carry: instead we have we have sold for finance ( see 2)
2. possibley the partner, namely the debt presently carried and the ability to obtain finance...this MAY be a factor?????? Comments???
3. potential risk on onshore not being commercial viable I.e.the drilling is to confirm.
4. Finance required to fund to onshore sale
5. To recive the 15m this requires addtional OFFshore drill with confirmed flow rates (correct/incorrect?)
6. Management realisation (RNS) that the have to sell or finance/ understand revenue return on the South African "renewables" folly.
7. Hydrogen venture costs/return/ finance
8. ONshore success REQUIRED to keep the company liquid to get to OFFshore production.
Would the 2x 6% ers will have been in talks with management before and after farm in and not seen / recived what was expected?
Sincerely Sft
Hi Wimax, I call my recent move, exiting a % of my exposure as damage limitation and an attempt to invest in other opportunities (that may fail of course) cash whilst we wait for the areas of remaining risk to be reduced. .
See previous post
As before I belive my points raised have some validity, and would welcome removal of such.
Kind rgds Sft
Hello TheBold
Thank you for your concerns. I find investing interesting and have time on my hands presently. I hope to continue to learn through the process, by success or failure in such. I use the Risk Assessment process as a away to do so. Its a tool that is used often in OnG. In fact a high level HAZID is the first part of the process on if a project/workscope can actually be aloud to start. Hazards come in the form of financials as well as indury or damage to asset.
I still think a BB and usefull and informative vehicle to discuss such, although there are always some that dislike perceived hazards. If you know the hazards and can see they have been addressed its called a mitigation or removal of a hazard.
As before I belive my points raised have some validity, and would welcome removal of such.
GLA
Rgds Sft
I welcome, as Wimax has on occasion, counter points to my risk assessment's. BB's are here for such. But there remains a paranoia they "some" are here to ramp / deramp for gain rather than discussion.
Ref my posts on the: 20 Feb 2024 11:11 and 5 Feb 2024 13:45 where I had replied to both Wimax and Thebold
In relation to some posters to undermine the poster rather than the message, could be regarded as a motive in itself.
My comments and opinions (imho) are valid, but there seems a reluctance to discuss or consider such.
Rather, blame any other factor, it is OF course valid to consider ALL, for example the whole of AIM failing as an investment route "really could" be a factor to CHARS struggles.
BUT
I belive the points I have raised MAY be closer to the mark.
GLA
Rgds Sft
Hi Wimax,
For information: I retain just over X00,000 shares in CHAR.
As stated several times (but I appreciate you may have missed the 2 previous posts informing and confirming (to the bold before) such. I informed the BB I sold a percentage of my holdings, taking a hit, to invest in what I believe to be sooner returns and IF successful would MOST likely reinvest that % which I had with drawn.
Kind regards Sft
I also agree GP: Wimax raised a valid point regarding AIM.
I suppose we have to consider how many of the AIM company posters on this board have invested in and how many of those are generating an income, let alone a profit.
I am not sure about you comment ", and is largely derisked as an investment"
If it was de risked why sell? If the 2x 6% are exiting it began after the farm in, which (imo) was precived as a poor deal, in particular:
1. the small amount of cash paid out to aquire i.e, the VERY limited FREE carry: instead we have we have sold for finance ( see 2)
2. possibley the partner, namely the debt presently carried and the ability to obtain finance...this MAY be a factor?????? Comments???
3. potential risk on onshore not being commercial viable I.e.the drilling is to confirm.
4. Finance required to fund to onshore sale
5. To recive the 15m this requires addtional OFFshore drill with confirmed flow rates (correct/incorrect?)
6. Management realisation (RNS) that the have to sell or finance/ understand revenue return on the South African "renewables" folly.
7. Hydrogen venture costs/return/ finance
8. ONshore success REQUIRED to keep the company liquid to get to OFFshore production.
Would the 2x 6% ers will have been in talks with management before and after farm in and not seen / recived what was expected?
Addtional comments:
Maybe the days of big free carrys are well gone and financing for OnG projects are gone for such companies like Chariot? Certainly the lagers operators are NOT struggling to finance (or self finance) the ongoing (larger?) projects I.e. GoM, Guyana, Norway etc etc
1x 2023 Example only
https://www.offshore-energy.biz/round-up-major-multi-billion-oil-gas-projects-greenlighted-in-2023/#:~:text=With%20energy%20security%20running%20the,%2C%20OMV%20Petrom%2C%20and%20ADNOC.
It's also intresting how the UK LSE is loosing listing and the US is energy companies have reportedly out done the even the tech stocks
https://theconversation.com/there-are-ways-to-improve-the-london-stock-exchange-crisis-but-theyre-not-pretty-225834#:~:text=The%20LSE%20is%20not%20seeing,decade%20and%2040%25%20since%202008.
Food for thoughts
GLA, best Sft
Ahhh okay see it now on the update section "Key high lights"
"Strong pipeline of development opportunities across
THREE stable JURISDICTIONS in mature basins - Peak production forecast to reach 15,000 boe/d in 2025
Thank you.
Rgds Sft
Hey NQM,
The way I read the RNS comment: "Mime's share of production from Balder and Ringhorne is expected to be over 2,000 boe/d in 2023. This will increase significantly once the Balder X project is onstream, with production for the enlarged Group expected to be over 15,000 boe/d in 2025 once the Jotun FPSO is onstream"
Is 15,000 boe from Norway i.e. both Balder, Ringhorne AND Balder X (Jotun hooked up and on line)
The adding the NL and West of Shetland gas assets (not sure what the BOE is) correct?
Best rgds Sft
What we have to consider is the % of retail (private) investors that GKP have in relation to institutional and the directors.
Looking at Simpley Wall St
Ownership Breakdown
Employee Share Scheme 0.18% 400,000 shares
Individual Insiders 10.6% 23,630,617 shares
Hedge Funds 14.6% 32,549,217 shares
Institutions 26.3% 58,410,062 shares
General Public 48.3% 107,253,104 shares
Obviously not being sure how many of the 48.3% are on here, but I would imagine the information platforms like Motley fool Simpley Wall Stret, Morning Star etc etc coupled with share specific chat rooms DO have a significant influence, especially when there is a large amount of share held in the retail/ general public hands.
I post on here to pose opinions/ questions ( that's the point of being here) and welcome positive and negative comments. You have to balance the opinions when considering day trading and long term holding.
Several posters on here ( more experienced imo) hold a combination of day trading and longterm but may shift according to precived longterm risk or gain.
Especially with a company that use to provide a very good dividend.
For clarity, I currently day trade GKP BUT did hold a longer term prior, but exited to fund another investment, and came back in in September, then November and January (NOT March unfortunately!)
I am out presently and now remain unsure as to how GPK will pan out but am leaning towards Ponzi thought process and the repairs and planned opening of the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline, is certainly being used as the latest stick to beat the kurds further down.
GKP has always been an interesting share.
GLA
Rgds Sft
I think AA, should consider setting KISTOS up on the USA markets, the London Stock exchange is losing a lot of business and we would get better exposure and investment as an Oil and gas company in the USA. Not sure about the costs of such though??
I would be interested in understanding our liabilities on the additional costs on the Jotun FPSO overun, I am assuming it will be 10% ?
That and the cost of the warrents at 385p, a good deal for MIME now are SP is down to where it is now?
An updated statement RNS Number : 9461C comments about the warrants but does not go into a lot of detail, but it confirms that we move into the fall back option as detailed in the original buy out RNS.
It would be nice to have a cost update, for clarity.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KIST/balder-field-operational-update-0sqij8iccw8256m.html
IMO the MIME take over is going to be are maine income.
If we look at the Benriach West of Shetland (WOS) well not being deemed commercial ( how is the rest of the WOS? for long term returns vs decom costs, the good news is Shells "victory" discovery to tie in to the Total Energies/ Kistos Shetland gas plant) investment standing, the failed drilling in the Netherlands the failed take over attempt and the UK/ NL effects of Wind fall tax FT, the Oil in Norway becomes very significant.
It would also be good to understand investment vs returns ion the EDF Energy (Gas Storage) Limited investment.
I feel that once we get closer to the Jotun departure, the SP will pick up, negative is a further delay.
GLA
Rgds Sft
Hello all, does any have any thoughts on conducting a review of the Mime merger and its affects positive / negative to Kistos.
With PoO looking to be up in the short to Mid term.
Coupled with Norway being a political and SAFE (excluding russian sabotage) location but tax heavy location and the time risk in meeting real start up dates.
19 Apr 2023 07:00
RNS Number : 6690W, Kistos Holdings PLC. 19 April 2023
In particular the 6milion warrants at 365p:
"The consideration for the transaction is US$1 plus the issue of up to 6 million warrants exercisable into new Kistos ordinary shares at a price of 385p each, which represents a premium of 31.4% based on the last trading date prior to this announcement of 293 pence on 18 April 2023"
The actual costs to KISTOS
"US$120MM of Super Senior bonds, which will attract interest of 9.75% per annum, 4.50% of which is payable in cash and 5.25% of which is payable-in-kind in the form of additional Super Senior bonds. The maturity date of the Super Senior bonds is 17 September 2026.
o US$105MM of so-called "MIME02" bonds, which will attract an interest rate of 10.25% payable-in-kind. The maturity date of the MIME02 bonds is 10 November 2027.
· The Mime debt being retained by Kistos or retired by Mime, less Mime's cash balances at 31 March 2023 and less the tax refund due in December 2023, equates to approximately US$111MM"
*NOTE SEE ALSO addtional warrants below on production related warrents
The reduction in payment to Mime ( no production , 500,000 Bbl, before the expected Jotan FPSO of August 2024).
" A contingent payment of US$45MM will be made to the MIME02 bondholders in the event 500,000 bbl (gross) have been offloaded and sold from the Jotun FPSO by 31 December 2024. This will decline to $30MM from 1 January 2025 to 28th February 2025, to US$15MM from 1 March 2025 to 31 May 2025, and to zero thereafter.
· If 500,000 bbl (gross) has not been offloaded and sold from the Jotun FPSO by 31 May 2025, the holders of Mime's Nordic Bonds will be allocated up to 2.4 million warrants exercisable into Kistos ordinary shares at a price of 385p each. The warrants can be exercised between 30 June 2025 and 18 April 2028. *Simultaneously, up to 1.9 million of the 5.5 million warrants issued as consideration for the Mime shares will be cancelled"
Any comments?
Baring in mind Mime / Kistos has 10% of expected production estimated once started up 15,000 boe/d
"Mime's share of production from Balder and Ringhorne is expected to be over 2,000 boe/d in 2023. This will increase significantly once the Balder X project is onstream, with production for the enlarged Group expected to be over 15,000 boe/d in 2025 once the Jotun FPSO is onstream"
Sft Note: ref RNS for full details
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KIST/agreement-to-acquire-mime-petroleum-as-c13cei2hsof4xtr.html
Note Last up date on Jotun
https://www.offshore-energy.biz/fpso-nearing-completion-but-changes-made-to-north-sea-oil-p
I have bottled it, and exited my 20k. Only 5% profit but it has been my concern (previous posts) that the Iraqi goverment could protract the negotiations to undermine Kurdish finances. With the focus shifting to the Kirkuk-Ceyhan PL It satisfies Turkey/Iraq relations and also squeezes the Kurds financially (reducing autonomy aspirations) and helping to push through Turkey stance on the PKK.
It maybe the US may support the Iraqi Kurds but as others have said with the Rusdians having a investment in the Kurdish PL It all looking a bit too fragile for me now.
GLA LTH.
Rgds Sft