Member Info for theoryman

CCC, from your post 31/03 16:39

Article 11 stipulates..... (key word is my upper case emphasis)

E- - The federal government shall pay the Kurdistan Region's dues contained in this law and the tables attached to it AFTER the region has implemented paragraphs (a, b, c, d) of this article.

I don’t think that as written is open to misinterpretation, so that leaves misreporting, wrong translation or Barzani starting to restart the momentarily hidden but seemingly ever present political blame game.

CCC, there was a post on here, might even have been from you, where the content from one of the news sites implied there were four conditions that the KRG had to meet, to the satisfaction of the ICG, before the payments would start.

One of those conditions was the monthly barrels being delivered through SOMO.

I read it as meet the targets first and then get paid I.e, sequential, as opposed to happening at the same time.

Problem might be the veracity of the source or the quality of the translation or my interpretation.

ss, regular dividends in (1) would need funding from regular payments.

The company has changed its descriptor for the pattern from regular to consistent and I think that is well supported by two pieces of evidence. When the KRG missed a payment they consistently missed the next three. Since the payments restarted they have got consistently later and later.

What probability have you allocated to the next $25 million Dividend being cancelled by a vote at the AGM because yet another series of missed payments has appeared?

Seems there at least three explanations about the difference in number.

1 The lower number is the correct value for the shares outstanding, the other is wrong.

2 The reverse is true.

3 At some stage, the 190 million was the free float but has inadvertently got referred to as the outstanding - so correct number has been given wrong label, hence making it look like a wrong number.

@Bravedog, what if the two numbers both refer to GKP shares but not the same classification?

The higher number being the number of shares outstanding and the lower one the free float?

One gets used for corporate matters and the other for shares that can be freely traded in the market.
Free float = Outstanding - Restricted - Tightly held

LS, 28 days at the reduced 41.6kbopb at $62.26 should bring circa $17.6 export and $5.7 repayment millions net to GKP.

Usual caveat emptor, those payments should have arrived by the end of last week, investors shouldn’t be hoping they might arrive this week or next or...

@Bravedog, complete the title of the Solzhenitsyn novellas, “We never make ********”

There is a massive problem with the fact that you are the one using the information on here AND you are the one who checked it AND it’s your opinion they are a reliable source.

Unless you can provide the name of the organisation and how the information can be accessed to allow forensic analysis of it then it will appeal to a specific audience - those who are prone to believing conspiracy theories.

Basic routine should be in place, you provide everything you have wrt the information, everyone else goes away and tries to rip it to shreds, if they can’t then you might be on to something.

Just to be clear I am not saying your information is useless, just that it is useless in its present form I.e. the complete lack of necessary detail to allow others to look at.

Bravedog, how about applying the idea that the explanation requiring the least number of assumptions/theories etc. is the most likely to be true?

What if the service provider you are referring to has made a mistake? Is this information in the public domain anywhere? Who is the provider? How long have they been reporting the lower number as opposed to everyone else’s circa 210 million?

R2R, thanks for posting those clauses. In order to access the MNR site I had to use a Windows 10 operating system with every security add-on turned off. As a result 90% of my current account leaves on the 1st of the month to support an endangered tribe in Nigeria but the good news is I am an Honorary Chief. IOS 14.4.1 will not download any of it...

You may have noticed that in a previous post to PUTUP I mentioned “despair” with how everyone refused to work through the PSC as it should be, I.e. as a PRODUCTION sharing flowchart.

GKP’s share of the total production according to previous presentations, works out at 36.6%, that is the percentage that they can put into their share of the Cost Pool according to that clause.

The Government share of the total production is either 52% or 48%, if need be I can find which one is correct. To a good approximation just use 50% and that is claimed back directly but not through the Cost Pool.

Just for a laugh load up the RNS for the FYR and scroll down and down and down, until you come to the reference to an non-agreed but operational reduction of the CBC from 40% to 20% in return for... “I give up!” Which is why at the moment I cannot be bothered to sort out the 52 or 48 figure.

BB, a big problem is who each News Agency is reporting quotes from and the accuracy of the translation.

Bear in mind a few years back a reference to “lowest levels within society” was translated as “Protozoa ”!

There is a big difference in terms of implications between a Deputy referring to “at the price of SOMO” and and another source’s “exported through SOMO”

It seems that there are four hoops for the KRG to jump through to the satisfaction of the ICG and then, and ONLY then, will the monthly disbursements start. Hopefully the KRG have been forward planning the steps to deliver what is needed.

Given the past behaviour of both sides but comparing it to what they need to do now, it’s just a matter of sitting back and waiting to see how genuine they are about working through any issues that arise.

Presentation also now on the GKP site. Reason for drop in production was work on wells in Feb, didn’t get back to 44k bopd in March which might be a knock on effect at the start of the month - numbers on slide 7.

Guidance is 40 to 44k average for the year, so probably prudent to work with 42k and +/- 5% boundaries rather than hoping for 44k.

$25 million is $25 million more than I was expecting, so that is a bonus. It can always be vetoed at the AGM if things go pear shaped or more added later on in the year if all goes to plan.

One area of concern is “ Average gross production from Shaikan in 2021 to 29th March is 43,190 bopd, up c.13% from the corresponding period in 2020. “

It was 44.4K bopd during Jan 2020, so for (28+29) days in Feb + March up to the 29th it was much lower.

That will be needed to be fed into projections for what the Feb + Mar payments are and for the rest of the year.

PUTUP, I think that the term “weak holder” does not represent why some people will sell at one price whilst the other won’t.

They could have exactly the same idea of what constitutes fair value in terms of price but are less confident about that happening from a probability perspective.

As a result their exit price will be closer to the action as a direct result of having a lower assessed probability of success.

So if using reward, risk to bank and probability of success leads to me being weak then feel free to kick sand in my face :)

What a wonderful day for finding out that lockdown3 has played havoc with your distance off the tee, compression with your irons and your short game.

Am I the only one who thinks there is a distinct possibility there will be no dividend or buyback announcement?

In 2019 there was just below $300 million cash in the bank and the four consecutive missed payments had not raised their ugly heads, when they announced the last lot.

The CAPEX required to get to 55kbobd has been declared and the process restarted, so given the present much lower cash balance and the knowledge that there have been previous missed payments; would any sort of cash distribution be a sensible risked decision?

In order to protect my mental well being, I prefer to expect no cash distribution under those conditions and will be pleasantly surprised if there is, it will be a bonus.

Some of the factions are playing the numbers game - they have had a lot of practice.

To pass anything you have to have a quorum AND a majority in favour.

If there are N Articles in the Bill and you support all but two then you don’t turn up until you get what you want on those two.

Another group might be the same but of the two issues, one is common with the first group but the other is different.

So unless that all gets sorted, you end up with either not enough members turn up to make a quorum or they do but the majority of them will vote against the Bill.

R2R, I wonder how horrible a PSC it is compared to others signed around the world at the same time?

There is a much “easier” way of raising the revenue generated per barrel and hence the profit. Get the GGI budget signed, sell the oil through SOMO and get a higher price by removing the two discounts the market gives the KRG as a distressed seller of dodgy oil

So the change would come through the (Brent-21) component, could become (Brent-16)?

Allegedly yet another attempt to get the legislation through some time today or maybe tomorrow or maybe...

Bugsy911, if they only used the data available to assess 10% of the field, then they did not have the professional confidence to extend it beyond that size.

As you are probably aware, there are others who are willing to do so.

The requirements for a CPR to enter the AIM are different to those for joining the main listing.

The CPR on transfer from one to the other has to include any relevant new info and meet the new requirements. It is aimed at potential new investors, the outcome might not necessarily meet with enthusiasm from the previous LTH.

Bugsy911, there is no reason why the company’s opinion and the content of the CPR should be the same - they are not necessarily comparing like with like.

A CPR can be used for any purpose including being used as part of the Listing process - each one is specifically designed to meet every criteria required by the relevant Stock Exchange.

A generalised report can be used for any purpose with the exception of providing info with respect to a Listing.

The Competent Person has a duty of care towards the investor rather than the company that employs them or the company applying for the listing.

Their role is to provide a reliable, unbiased and independent opinion of the technical aspects of the company.

If in the case of a field they only refer to x% of it in the CPR, then that will be because the information about the other (100-x)% cannot be used within the limits of their role.

There is nothing to stop others outside of the CPR extrapolating from the x% to the full field. The comparatively conservative numbers from the CPR are a by-product of its requirements and not part of an attempt to hide the “true” size of the field.

Assuming the Competent Persons involved have carried out their duties in a professional manner, the question becomes how can others move beyond the x% when they couldn’t?

Who is doing the extrapolation, what is their motive, how competent are they at doing it and how reliable is the result?

PUTUP, found this extract from some notes I made re PSCs in Indonesia re what qualifies as an acceptable cost wrt Cost Pool.

“ Cost Recovery is...the volume share is calculated based on the amount of costs incurred by the contractor to explore, develop, and operate the PSC (sometimes referred as “cost oil”) ”

Note the reference to operate, a few months back I had distant memory of why lifting costs are allowable and this was probably the source.

One report , which should probably taken with the same degree of skepticism as every other one, stated that their break even PoO, with no agreement with the ICG, was $65.

If anyone wants to run a $70 scenario then then must do a $60 one as well, they might not allocate equal probabilities to the two alternatives but they can’t just ignore the one they don’t want.

If they yet again reach a situation where they can’t pay their own people and the oil companies, who will take the hit this time?

I am the only person looking at the idea of maybe having to calculate the debt repayments needed on any missed debt repayments? ;)