The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes place tomorrow with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I think the presentation clarifies that 88E is not a one trick pony, did I mention PANR? It shows that 88E have multiple opportunities with multi Billion barrels of oil to target, income from Texas (and increasing), farm out with multiple interested parties.
I don't mind a further dilution if it proves Phoenix by horizontal as it then reaches the commercial stage and farm out becomes a realistic outcome. I think the presentation is the seed to further dilution and hope that the share price already reflects this.
I would liked to have seen confirmation that analysis of reservoirs wouldn't take months but it reiterates 2H this year. I also believe that stk barrels are not the important measure that PANR defectors think it is, and hopefully a further release will confirm all is well :)
Listing Rules 7.1 and 7.4
As summarised in Section 1.2 above, Listing Rule 7.1 limits the amount of equity securities that a listed company can issue without the approval of its shareholders over any 12 month period to 15% of the fully paid ordinary securities it had on issue at the start of that 12 month period. Under Listing Rule 7.1A, an eligible entity can seek approval from its members, by way of a special resolution passed at its annual general meeting, to increase this 15% limit by an extra 10% to 25%.
Posted above for the benefit of people like me who thought this was gospel, as you can see it is for without shareholder approval and therefor they can use additional dilution once ratified at AGM.
Thank you Older and Brombarb, it finally sunk in.
Older, I may not be as wise in this matter as you but having been a LTH I have seen this many times. It is a ratifying of what was previously promised/used to cover fees, leases etc. All within the confines of the % allowed. That link does not show anything out with the scope of using their allocated maximum which may or may not include the 10% added to the 15%. If it was as simple as you suggest why would they need to add the requested 10% every 3 yrs? Not being defensive ;
My understanding is they can 'spend/use/promise' an amount of shares but then have to get those ratified, everything up to the maximum % allowed which is 15% (+10%). Within the agenda I have often seen comments like - if this is not approved then this can't happen - obviously not verbatim.
Older, the limit is 15%, they had the extra 10% added 3 yrs ago but need it added again this year thus is part of the agenda for next month agm. If you look at the shares outstanding it is almost exactly 25% added per year the last 3 years. I can't see where they could have reset it by my calculations, certainly over the previous 3 years.
As usual Older, you put me in my place, I don't mind that when I make errors. However when Scot declares the gas as a saleable asset I just pointed out that even PANR thought it was a liability. Nothing more, then of course the figures are wrong according to Scot with my misrepresenting gas amounts. This was a genuine error due to my lack of oil knowledge but a straight admission of liability was all I was looking for.
As for being defensive Scot I wasn't aware that I was, I just thought to correct you regarding liability.
Munnie, you are aware that the maximum they can dilute is 15% of the total shares outstanding? And they will be asking for a further 10% to be allowed again at this years AGM. So maximum 25% share dilution permitted. So not quite 'the biggest AIM capital raise dilutions ever seen' you are trying to put out there.
Scot, at least you confirmed that they did call the gas a liability. "a liability can be turned into an asset". So regardless of who tells you it is now a saleable asset PANR were looking at re-injection gas at a cost until it was decided that it was better to call it a saleable asset. An asset that cannot be sold until it has been lifted and stored or connected to a yet non existent pipeline which I think was about 3-5 years away subject to the plant brigade allowing it. In my eyes that is still a liability as who knows what the price will be in 5 years, and after PANR spend $Ms to bring it on board.
Ecuagold yet another shorter and chose his header for a reason.
'Their is plenty of money to be made each year; just have to get the timing right.
Above is a copy of Ecuagold post from earlier.
Can I just ask why you think a large capital raise is needed and why dilution would be terrible?
Massive over average volume and down 33% at this point. I guess even the homies can't decipher the RNS. Management say its great news for the shareholder but nobody else can see it.
I think we need a further release for clarity on certain points, ie 4 stk barrels, and the analysis of even the first reservoir as they must have that by now.