Member Info for Washers

Furthermore if Sefton still honours the conversion at some point then that has to be at a price set by Sefton as strongman stated earlier. This is not just a case of Sandabel closing a short on the open market the pain doesn’t end there for them. Turn the screws Sefton.

GLA

Until the short is closed it is most important that Sefton doesn’t issue them shares. This is the key IMO No shares buy on open market SP will rise significantly. Even if an application for conversion has been made if the contact states no shorting then until that is rectified Sefton is perfectly in his rights to withhold shares. This is only if he decides to continue with Sandabel he may tell them to take a hike which still requires then to close shorts. Let’s hope Sefton doesn’t give them an inch. AAOG is in the driving seat.

GLA

When the share price rises for let’s say for argument four days. If Sandabel then has conversions it will be a low of the previous three days of conversion notice which could be nice and high IMO

GLA

If true they need to close short BEFORE conversion shares issued.

GLA

Correct irishmouse but the silver lining is no Sandabel have shown their true colours early and in that scenario they will never be used again. No concern over further drawdowns will raise the SP. We have weathered the storm time for drilling to be in the spotlight.

GLA

Barkingcrazy how much of the money was immediately required is important. If as I eluded to earlier its only for re-spud there could be other alternatives its all guess work at the moment.

If they have breached a contract agreement then it will not have to be honoured so yes it could be void and no conversion will happen if those are the wishes of Sefton.

Whatever the outcome no further funding from Sandabel.

That's a positive in itself.

GLA

Madchatter In regards to the agreement we do not know the answer to that yet!!

GLA

In the first instance a simple email to clarify if there is a clause in the agreement to prevent shorting would allow us to move forward with our discussions on this board.

GLA

A total guess but surely we only need to cover the cost of the respud at this time. I'm sure Sefton has access to what is needed in the short term or come to an agreement with the drilling company to make this work in AAOG favour.
Sefton get this right and we will be in a fantastic position going into the final stages of the drill.

GLA

lol their interest rates would have less impact than Sandabel.

GLA

It only takes hours to get funding but at what cost. If Sefton cancels facility and does and open offer to shareholders I would certainly take up the offer. This way Sanabel are gone the company has immediate funds and breathing space to sort out a placing if necessary at a much higher SP.

Sounds simple but I know there are hurdles.

GLA

Strongman recommended post 10:26.

Thank you.

Luckykids this is the issue and the sticking point for Sandabel if the agreement is in place to prevent a short then they are in breach. If Sefton stops the conversion due to the breach then Sandabel won't have the shares to close their short and will have to buy on the open market.

To prevent this and to keep the £1 million Sefton may come to a new arrangement which will be more beneficial to AAOG and clearly never use Sandabel again.

Therefore a win win for AAOG. To what extend the win will be is down to the agreement. If not specified in agreement then we will still never use Sandabel again and the SP will rise IMO as no further damage can be done.

GLA

Strongman.

Much appreciated that's clear in my head now thank you. Sandabel are in a world of pain.

GLA

If Sandabel simply increased short by .67% how does that explain the 4.7 million trade?

Sorry for being dim.

Strongman you clearly have a grasp of this can I ask a layman question for clarification.

On 20th short showed 0% from 2.93% and we saw a trade of 4.7 million would this not be the short closing?

On 21st a short is shown as opened for 3.6% with an increase of 0.67% from the original 2.93%

Doesn't the 4.7 million trade showing as a buy demonstrate Sandabel have bought those shares effectively closing the short opened on 20th? Not sure where these share would come from unless they used further borrowed shares from the 3.6 short?

Agree they still have 5.8 million to cover.

Apologies if this is obviously wrong.

GLA

jobbinscl if and its a big if Sefton didn't have a clause in the agreement then with certainty he will not use Sandabel facility again which in itself is positive as will not be hanging over our heads.

Win win IMO

GLA

Did Sandabel close their first short of 2.93% 4.7 million shares at 7.1p by using borrowed further shares from the 3.6% short?

If this is the case they would have borrowed 5.87 million shares which they may not be able to buy back.

GLA

Barkingcrazy thank you for your response. I appreciate your frustration but your originally post at 23:21 bears no resemblance to your response at 00:03 having been challenged.

Your original post is unfounded criticism at best and therefore could be damaging to AAOG and Sefton.

Hopefully Sefton will make Sandabel squeal.

GLA

Now that is a post to keep. I will forward to Sefton to see what he makes of your claims. What evidence have you to support that allegation?
Sefton has already stated in an email that Sandabel actions were not agreed and he is urgently addressing it.
Where does it state no agreement in place to prevent this?

Look forward to your response.