Member Info for Tigar

"Harbour had been reported earlier this year to have held preliminary talks with Talos, a US-based producer. But a person familiar with the conversations said a tie-up between the two companies was no longer being pursued."

I did suggest jokingly once that a good tactic on buybacks was to go into talks with a US company on a merger, let the yanks short us to get the best deal then not proceed with merger. It will be interesting to see if shorts fall away if Talos deal is off?

Miles44

No offence taken, always open to debate. My point on taking the divi into consideration on the cancelled share's was made to the point that the buybacks were averaging above the present price so were losing value to the shareholders, my point was that if you wish to do that equation you must take the saving of the divi into that equation, perhaps if I had expressed that point as you must take the increase in the divi for the remaining shareholders into the equation you may have accepted my point. But effectively Buybacks and divi's is money returned for the benefit of remaining shareholders and I believe when the shorts close the remaining holders will be glad it was returned with a buyback. But time will tell looking forward to results.

The buy backs are for the share holder's benefit not HBR's so the equation on the price paid for those shares is on shareholder benefit's so you must include the saving to the remaining s/h from the divi being saved on the cancelled share's!

I have been thinking more on the cost of increased divi to the shorter's it must hit them as the lenders of the shares will require compensation for lost divi as HBR don't pay the lender and the new owner.

Miles44

The shares bought back do not receive the divi so in the equation on their cost to the remaining shareholders, the divi not paid is of benefit to them. The buy backs do not benefit HBR it is the remaining shareholders who it is for! I am quite happy to see as many as possible mopped up at these prices when the short's close out the price may well rise. The holders who are lending shares to the shorter's have to be compensated for the divi as HBR don't pay the lender and the person who buys the shares from the shorter's so the equation for them gets more costly as the divi reses.

Of course we must include the saved divi payments into the equation on buybacks, and will we see another buyback or increased divi? Shorter's obviously think buybacks or perhaps they think the money will dry up?

Don't see how buybacks help shorter's? or how they are not good for PI's?I almost wonder if shorter's are in cahoots with the company to enable buybacks at a low price. At some point buybacks will end, shorter's will close and if we are debt free the pot for dividends will be reflected in the share price or we will be getting a 20% divi.

BTFATH1

Welcome to the long term holders club.

The UK is subject to Parliamentary Law and they can make a law saying whatever it like's it can confiscate all possessions and put us all into slavery ban future elections and rule with a rod of iron so be careful how you vote? Be afraid of organised wolves in sheep's clothing Starmer may not last long if he gets a landslide.

But it has signed international treaties that would make it subject to compensation claims from international companies if it were to rob them. HBR are looking to register in US perhaps we should also think that way?

That is easy. 1 stop government talk that they give support to oil companies by letting them claim back investment against Tax, that is not a subsidy public are brainwashed it is by Greens.

2 Tax the profits on a teared system up to $70 oil normal corporation tax at 20% $70 to $90 oil at 40% $90 to $120 at 60% then over $120 oil at 80% that would be a true windfall tax.

3 Stop banks using ESG to force very high investment costs onto oil companies. Why has it been allowed? ESG is just an unelected government running things!

Most think windfall tax is to be expected on exceptional high oil price but only on that exceptional money.

All banks are raking it in no need to pat the board on the back for the huge profits, it is like declaring Shell or BP bosses are responsible for their profits most of it is being lucky to be in the job at the right time.

She has to go because she is paid £5m to run Natwest not extinction rebellion. If you listen to her interview she talks constantly not on how we grow the banks profits for the shareholders or how we give customers a better service she is always saying how to use the customers money to save the planet and support inclusion by excluding employee's or customers who don't agree with her agender and stop customer's from investing their money in non approved investment's. I was stunned to hear her say 10% of emission's in UK are caused by farming but graciously they were not going to stop lending to farmers but would judge what they wanted loans for with their emissions. I presumed dairy farmers better change Banks ASP

She needs to be sacked.

A2 is funded by A1 so see no need for additional funding, unless they attempt to keep Vermelho or go into a joint venture on it. A delay to start up is the main worry once it is all put together it will be expensive, so it needs to work.

£1.70p options always good to see premium option as the incentive to get it right, fail and you get nothing means they anticipate a lot higher price to come £3.40p and they double their money, I will triple mine.

I question if that little escapade of a generated false price was to take out any trailing stop losses?

Hi AIMOilking

And you didn't even mention the VAT scandal, Travis Perkins have to charge you 20% but the installers are 0% and still double the price of the heat pump!

Https://wintershalldea.com/en/newsroom/pi-23-10

Just a 200-300 Million field.

Hi Pelle

The floor on EPL should make a difference to the Bank reassessment of its $600m loan it may not be reduced by anywhere near as much as thought?

If you spend the money on tax deductible activities then you will pay the 75% on the profits from that as it would be UK investment you can spend on overseas assets Mexico for example and this looks like the plan? buy backs mean that future profits will be shared out to less share's , if you wish to buy back cheap, rumour you are looking to merge with US company you can then rely on good friends in US to crash your share price as they want a bigger slice of cake, then drop them after buying up as many as possible.

I have to ask myself are similar forces working in oil and would the market do the same again to protect them. If so why invest,if the market is the arbiter of who will win.

LONDON, June 20 (Reuters) - The London Metal Exchange cancelled $12 billion worth of trades when nickel prices went haywire in March 2022 to "save" China's Tsingshan, lawyers for two financial firms suing the exchange told London's High Court on Tuesday.

U.S.-based hedge fund Elliott Associates and market maker Jane Street Global Trading say the LME unlawfully cancelled trades made on March 8, 2022, after the nickel price doubled

The 146-year-old exchange argues it was justified in closing the market and cancelling trades because $19.7 billion of margin calls would otherwise have led to the defaults of multiple clearing members and created systemic risk.

Elliott and Jane Street, which are seeking a combined $472 million in damages, accept the LME has the power to cancel trades in "exceptional cases".

But their lawyers argued at London's High Court that the LME had no power to unwind transactions to prevent defaults or tackle systemic risks.

Jane Street's lawyer James Segan said the LSE had provided a "multi-billion-dollar bailout" to Tsingshan, owned by Chinese tycoon Xiang Guangda, which held large short positions that helped spur the explosive rise in nickel prices.

He said the LME's actions meant Jane Street was forced to give up profitable trades "to save one person (Xiang) ... from enormous losses".

We have the licence already for Bressay and Bentley we need a production Licence, it will be easy for Labour to say they meant no more exploration licences all along.