Mal
I’m not saying the oil isn’t worth millions to a JV partner, I’m saying that partner will invest the millions into the field, not into COPL. COPL has not shown the ability to turn cash into efficient production. Investors and COPL should be happy with a carried position with a large partner with the cash to get the oil out of the ground and a proven track record.
Mal
They didn’t get Ryder Scott to consult on a field development study, which is what your passage describes. It was a resources report.
Eazy
I’m not here to save anyone. I’m invested, like a good debate and dislike seeing people spinning yarns loosely coupled to the truth.
Just to back up my point, this is the statement from the Ryder Scott reserve report in COPL’s Annual Information Form on SEDAR:
“In preparing its report Ryder Scott relied upon certain factual information and data furnished by COPL with respect to ownership interests, oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids production, historical costs of operation and development, product prices, agreements relating to current and future operations, sales of production, and other relevant data. The extent and character of all factual information and data supplied were relied upon by Ryder Scott in preparing their report and was accepted as represented without independent verification. Ryder Scott relied upon representations made by the Company as to the completeness and accuracy of the data provided and that no material changes in the performance of the properties has occurred nor is expected to occur, from that which was projected in their reports”
I will point out that Ryder Scott does NOT validate any data.
It is one of the first lines in every single one of their reports. Yep use the data given to them by companies to write reports. The reports are only as good as the data provide.
Tiburn
Apologies, things got a little busy.
“What do you think that reason was other than to use his banked funds below the $2.5m cap
And why now? why not at any time over the summer?
I offered opinion which gives a likely use of the $2.1m funds - convince the BB what you think has more priority for spending than CC wells and gas pressure kit and I will concede the point.”
I don’t claim any great insight into the company books, but COPL is a fledgling producer with scant cash in the books, so I imagine they used to run their business; field works, buying injectant, paying contractors and field engineers.
I’m sure they did lots of spending for the quarter, to imply that the overage was solely due to CC work-overs would seem to be a conclusion beyond the information available.
I hope he would only break liquidity covenants for important work like CC re-works, but I wouldn’t be certain that was the case given the company’s cash position.
Tiburn
We agree on one point finally “AM will sign whatever terms he needs to” though I also don’t see this as a positive.
“he has spent the remaining $2.1m on time critical field developments at CC etc”
This is a wildly speculative claim and you have no way to back it up unless you work at COPL in the accounting department or senior management.
We definitely disagree, but again you stating your opinion is objective and line is not is just silly hubris. We both have our opinions, I request you stop stating yours as fact.
What we do know for sure is that COPL is now subject to far more onerous liquidity obligations as a result of the waiver.
Tiburn
You are certainly entitled to your opinion, you think it was worth it. Just because you think it was worth it does not mean it was actually worth it.
I disagree. The new liquidity covenant is even stricter than the original one, so I disagree that it was worth it.
The waiver on SEDAR has 4 points to it; 2 liquidity breaches as of Dec 31 2022, one for hedges volumes dropping below required levels and lastly a catch all.
The lender has signed a waiver so the company is not currently in default. The waiver was required because the COPL was in default on at least three points.