Member Info for Thornback

Cheers Levi.
I'm at a loss as to why a company with so good news and poential growth is struggling SP wise.
Oh well, i'll keep holding and adding and still feel there's plenty of upside and it will pop one week..!

Hi Levi, with regards to your chicanery post, have you any thoughts you'd be willing to share.?
I certainly do think some of the RKH buyers came with the sole intention to make a quick buck.
I'm probably wrong but that's what I believe.

Well, the selling into the good news continues.
How much longer can this go on for..?
We could end up in the red by the end of the day at this rate.
Is this selling from II's who have no interest in UOG's growth or potential.
It's all to do with the RKH aquisition shares II's IMO.

All very true Bozi.
But what Levi, myself and others have been stating for some time (whilst being classed as negative) is why the RKH aquisition shares were bought by the II's under the 3% TR1 threshold..?
Maybe it is purely coincidental and that was their purchase limits, though I think not...!

My email reply from BL on the subject;
A number of our larger shareholders and institutional shareholders sit below the TR1 threshold so there is no reason for them to release one.

I must admit it has currently knocked my confidence but hopefully the SP will pick up as will my confidence.

Another tweet is up this morning for those that are interested..!

Looks like the seller has managed to break 4p today...!

The sudden SP rise could indicate we have some news coming soon..?

Thanks for confirming I'm in the right ball park GH.
I will take your points onboard and modify my spreadsheet.
Thanks again GH.

Hi Lords, welcome.
These are my "roughish" workings.
Revenue
3000 boepd x $70 gives a daily gross = 150,000 (sterling @ 1.4)
Gives £52,800,000/year

Deductions
£31,680,000 to Egypt (@ 60%)
£4,352,229 on Operating costs.
£1,000,000 on Salaries and admin
Profit on 3000 boepd for 12 months at €70/barrel =
£15,767,771

Agreed Dte, that's my take on it too.
I also think any party willing to finance without a PPA in place will want more favourable terms though that is just a hunch.

Not wishing to sound pedantic but TG stated that two parties are currently working through their internal approval processes and have not expressed a specific need to conclude the 10MW PPA in order to progress.
I read that differently to not requiring an award of the 10MW PPA. Who knows what requirements may develop prior to signatures.
That's probably the cinic in me, coupled with past disappointments tbf...

Hope you're right mr m

Whizzer, IMO the main reason the TL scope hasn't started has to be due to the PPA..!
Why start building TL's that you cannot legally use.
Also, if it's a Build and Transfer contract (which I believe it is) there's even less urgency to start the TL's, not only can you not use them you don't own them.
I'd suggest the PPA has been cost engineered to recoup the TL scope expense plus profit, this would make the details of the PPA more complex.
Can you see either the BG or BPC paying for and project managing the TL build, I don't think so.

As for Orapa Brad, I thought that that project may have become plan A but have been told the grid connection is still No1 priority.

I don't know Donkey Brad but I think he's possibly correct.
If the TL's were to be an asset of TLOU's then we may well have started this SOW already.
Because we haven't then it indicates it could well be a Build and Transfer contract and TLOU need to be certain they recoup the TL Scope outlay plus profits, it would be foolish to start anything without getting this detailed and rubber stamped legally before doing so.

Is there anybody out there..?

Thanks for the replies fellas, I too haven't a clue. I do know that the BG have asked for negotiations to be kept confidential as you'd expect.
Let me pose this question;
does anyone think the TL's could be working on a Build and Transfer model..?
That would certainly increase the detail to work through. Or do we think that the TL's will be a TLOU asset..?
Maybe TLOU are building the TL's, handing them over to the BPC and then recouping the costs on the power sold once connected.

If i remember correctly OB appeared to have a sound knowledge of Bots PPA processes and the fact that approval of the PPA would be needed by a number of departments.
Do you think this is the reason for the pace of progress mrmoagi...?
Do you think that negotiations are still ongoing with the figures..?
TLOU have surely put values into a cost model to determine what is acceptible.

OB, apologies in advance if there were other pointers you made regarding the PPA.

Going back to my 16:18 post yesterday regarding my belief that the PPA is far more complex than I thought.
Does anyone agree and if so has anyone got any thoughts on this..?
preferably without just saying TLOU and/or the BG/BPC are useless..?

Hi py, the 70% was just hypothetical figure, my point is we don't know what premium we may have to pay the BPC as part of a 10MW award. Also there may well be a percentage included for the BG. It may be a condition of the PPA who knows.
All guess work from me I'm afraid.
I would think the ideal scenario for TLOU would be to sell direct to the SAPP but they need to be producing 5MW (plus other conditions) before they can apply to become a member.
The PPA is clearly more complex than what I believed IMO.

Some fair points Py but with the greatest respect I do disagree.

We don't know enough about the 2MW PPA for one. Is the 2MW a portion of the 10MW.?
Hypothetically speaking, would 70% of the first 2MW produced go to the BG making it unviable for TLOU without the 10MW being agreed and in place..?
Do the BG want too big a piece of the pie..?
So many questions and so few answers.
One things for sure it isn't just a case of the BG getting a premium for say the first 5MW and off we go..!
The PPA must be more complex than that.
AIMVHO

I personally think the lack of speed is all down to the BG why on earth would TLOU not want to get moving with this project.
I still believe that the PPA unlocks the finance, some companies have indicated that they want an agreed PPA before committing and two parties are currently working through their internal approval processes and have not expressed a specific need to conclude the 10MW PPA in order to progress.
I'd suggest the terms would be more favourable if we were negotiating with a PPA in place and the preferred financier may well be one of the two partoes who want a PPA agreed, that's just my opinion of course.

The question to ask is why is the PPA taking so long..?