Member Info for Vernony

They don't have any options, and what ever they conclude is going to be move of desparation rather than a financially acceptable solution to CAZA. The best thing that they can do is just to get on with it, dilution doesn't matter at this stage, provided they are debt free. They still have a product to sell and are selling it right now, so provided that they are not producing at a loss, it can only go upwards in the future, but from a very low restart, Shame that they had to put the RNS out because the result will be more shares needed to pay off their new financial partner . I am not completely happy with this BoD, they seem to have been paralysed and holding out in hope that oil would be over $100 a barrel to solve their debt problems

As per their RNS they are in discussions but between the lines they are not getting a favourable offer. The facts are they are out of money and unlikely to get fresh loans, although existing ones may be extended. They have assets, in the form of working oilfields, that they can sell to help pay off loans. My feeling is that in their current situation they will have to, but thay may leave them too weak to exploit their remaining oil/gas fields. Lookling at the sp, they seem to be running out of options they either have to sell something, or accept the offer that they find unfavourable, unless there is a new kid on the block, with a better offer

Then take a look at this Kevin http://www.oilandgas360.com/bp-energy-outlook-united-states-likely-self-sufficient-oil-2030s/ I am afraid working in the industry does not give you an insight into the political dimension of oil and the desire by countries to be self sufficient in energy. That means that they can manipulate corporation taxes and other costs to favour home production. Dont concern yourself with rigs being shut down, they can also be reopened its called supply and demand. The report I have highlighted expects the USA to be self sufficient by the 2030s that means that their imports will be progressively dropping from now until then, causing and even larger glut of oil and, by that time, there will be other nations into Shale too, possibly the UK. The world is still going to need oil, of course, but in declining quantities

You are wrong, there is a movement in America to start to export oil and gas. They first have to reverse an Act of congress which prohibited oil export, but as we speak American enterprise is building two LNG ports to handle the expected exports. Don't be confused by talk of rig counts, its a false indicator. The amount of rigs in use is what the market can get for the product. Notwithstanding, some exploration companies holding back to hopefully force up the domestic price, for the own purposes. I think it was in the 1970s . You can hang onto your dreams of oil once again being over $65 pbrl . The world is out of recession now so we can't expect a kick start for oil there. China is a problem, but they have the largest Shale fields in the world and they are developing them. India hopes to do the same. The only way that oil can go anywhere near its heady heights of the past is a war in the Middle East, or the Middle East starts to set quotas . The last will but temporary because any attempt by OPEC to limit oil production to force up the price will, in turn, create a dash for gas by countries that are sitting on Shale deposits . Of course, you may wish for a higher price, as do most investors in oil but dreams and reality are not the same thing. Anyway, here is a little quote for you from the city :- Markets have, in Citi’s view, correctly depicted the heart of the lower price oil environment as a result of a conflict between markets and marketing influence, or more directly between the impacts of the shale revolution on OPEC’s ability to drive a significant “permanent” wedge well above production costs to maximize revenues for OPEC and other oil producing countries. No matter what the ultimate outcome, it looks exceedingly unlikely for OPEC to return to its old way of doing business. While many analysts have seen in past market crises “the end of OPEC”, this time around might well be different -:

With the UK companies it is almost as if they really don't believe that they should actually start producing. How many times have we heard after a possible strike has been found that the company says it will now go ahead and submit planning permission, meaning they have to write it first, so we are at least a year to 18 months from submission. As you say, in the USA they do things differently in casscade in the UK they do it decade

A good question CBM and electricity production are not exactly things in which Balfour Beatte have much dealing with. It seems that Barbican Bidco which is new may be an acquistion company for Balfour. What has happened now is that BB has, in passing, acquired 18% of the stock of EDR (40,000,000 shares). So what are they going to do with EDR . I don't think the terms of the agreement between EDR and ALK permitted ALK to dispose of the shares without the permission of EDR, and I think that BB will have bought into that i.e. the agreement still stands and is passed on to BB. The whole thing is a question, Balfour through BB has brought something outside of their normal expertise and comfort zone. So do they hire in the experts and expand it, or are they looking into a way into Shale and this opportunity presented itself along with a going concern...I have a feeling that they may want more of EDR and that could work well with being not only a producer of Shale gas, but owning the plant to supply gas into electricity and pump it into the Grid. Although I may be completely up the wrong tree and they offer to sell their EDR shares back to EDR. There are so many possible scenarios, but EDR shouldn't suffer . The last scenario that I favour is that the is the forefunner of interest by the big guys in shale

Off shore Shale even more than onshore reserves :-Where in the UK will the shale gas reserves be? It’s believed that there will be much more shale oil and gas reserves offshore as compared to onshore, according to Nigel Smith. He is a geophysicist at the British Geological Survey and a subsurface geologist. He goes so far as to say that their reserves offshore may even be five or 10 times higher than the onshore reserves-: http://www.shalegasfracking.co.uk/shale-gas-reserves/

LSE showing it as £2.498.00 per share and saying that it was going down and had lost 16% at the same time. Oh I wish ! :))

How can it be, that is what the market says it is worth and it is in front of you 2.25 pps. The market cannot be wrong, because the market sets the pps, by the minute. The market is made up of thousands upon thousands of experts across the globe, their operatives earn high salaries. If you believe them all to be wrong today, perhaps we could all share in your knowledge ? ! As it is, there is a hint in the buying (all red a few weeks ago, now turning blue and bluer) think that they are onto something, if they are right, then your 8pps will happen....Personally I would like to see it at 15pps, but they don't listen to me

Looks like a few people know the news already . What a jump !

I think you are right, their proven assets underground outweigh their liabilities, although production seems to be slackening off, could be because they are cash strapped . Fracking is virtually a continuous process, and if they slow that process down it will affect output. I think a lot of these shares are bed and breakfast shares. They sense that there may be news, even if it only shoves the sp up 1pd that good news if you have one million of them. Its not illegal of course, but very frustrating for the lower end PI, such as myself, because they are happy to deal in pennies, which means any relatively small gains are immediately wiped out by profit taking

Arn't there just ?

Yes well, the sp only has a speculative value until they start getting it out of the ground

What we really want is somebody to start fraccing. Anybody, not just Edr . Once one starts the others will follow and council will find it harder to refuse because another hasn't refused

Oh and as for buying into Shale. Much of the finance for exploration is probably funneling through Switzerland, or London. Who supplies the funds is not mentioned, usually it is a myriad of sources. The deal is done with banks and finance houses . The American government are not going to go through each deal to see if Arabs are in there, somewhere, because there are probably a dozen financers in a large loan, but you can bet that billions are from oil rich nations . It won't be the SA government which invests itself, but it can make funds available to investors who are investing in shale . Don't forget that billions of Arab money is already invested in the USA, and in the UK, and Europe, for that matter

Saudi are set to sell less and less oil as time goes by, oil will never recover, except for a war, to anything much above $60 per barrel, if that ! On the other hand Shale gas is set to expand and expand for years to come . Saudi are unable to change the facts, shale has arrived. If they invest in shale now, they will assure their failing income from oil, by substituting profits from gas. It is really inmaterial to the shale market whether Saudi do, or do not invest. Shale will continue to progress . But for SA, the answer is, if you can't stop, join it. I can' see what the problem is, its common sense ?

Interesting this quote from their RNS, they are in advanced discussions over refinancing, but seem to be stymied by the conditions being set.......... in this regard, the Company and its advisers have been actively considering all available financing options. Management has recently narrowed its focus and is currently in advanced negotiations with a proposed financing partner to establish a funding structure. However, given the current level of conditionality and the current pricing environment, there is no certainty that any such refinancing will be concluded on acceptable terms......... Seems knife edge situation

Oh why would China be interested in buying into oil ? China is said to have the largest Shale deposits in the world and they are exploring them right now

I don't think that you quite understand the situation. If the Saudis drill more wells, they will have more oil to sell. The situation is that America used to import 25% of all of the oil on the world markets. That is a huge amount of oil and now America is moving towards self sufficiency and even looking to export oil and gas. Yes, OPEC could temporarily force the price up, by limiting production, but the effect would cause a dash for shale gas and oil, so the long term effect would be that they would lose even more of their market. However, the income from oil is just about all most MiddleEastern countries have and the have budgets and wellfare and a Civil Service and an Army and a host of other people to pay. They need that income the same as we need ours . With oil not so much in demand as it was, and more and more shale set to come on stream, then oil must decline... It would make sense for Arab oil money to be invested in Shale because that is the future fuel . They probably already do, the exploration companies have to borrow huge amounts to set up, and its almost impossible to work out who the backers of the backers of the backers are . There are strategic political demands too, to not be too dependent upon oil imports from unstable nations, notwithstanding, the sheer cost of making sure nobody impinges upon the MiddleEast oilfields, as in the past. Go back to the 1970s, the British were in the Gulf, the covert purpose to really ensure that the Gulf oilfields stayed within the western sphere of influence. It was then that the press started to point out that if you took the military presence costs and added it to the price of oil, then in the UK we were paying twice as much for the raw product than the other European countries, who had no military presence in the Gulf. So, in effect, we were keeping oil cheap for Europe and the US. That has not gone away, with two costly wars, the rise of IS, once again we are paying over the odds for MiddleEastern oil, now,especially, the Americans. So it is a political matter, over and above any commercial considerations, that supports Shale gas....In turn, that can only lead to a glut of oil. If the Arabs wish to keep it in the ground, good for them, but they can't live only on dates and sand ! Tide is right !

I like it, but you couldn't make it 35.00 could you ?