Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
Why would the company specifically say:
"The Company believes there is little prospect for a return to shareholders or bond holders."
They know the assets are going to be sold off cheap in a quick sale.
The SL just want their money and nobody cares less about shareholders.
We are going to end up with nothing.
So we seem to be steady at 1000 bopd
Wonder what is the value of an oil company that is producing that. (as a minimum, regardless of other potential production upside/Oip)
365,000 barrels per year x oil at £80 for the next 40 years = $1.168 billion
Hey Shouston, well I meant proper funding , not short term, keep the lights on kinda funding.
We could have offered a huge slice off what we had for a lot of £millions in the not to distance past.
How come we went down the loan shark route?.....which bust the company!
This is a viable business. Needs a bit more cash to get production up.
It cost hundreds of millions of investment to get most oil explorers to this stage.
The debt we have got us this far. The company shouldn't be bust but securing new funding to take us to the next level.
That would probably be happening now if Art and the dopey (I have no financial qualifications) CFO had NOT gone down the death spiral parasitic BOND route.
I should think Summit put in a bid to the amount that will only cover their debt.
That tempts a new bidder who can get an absolute bargain with a slightly higher bid.
So summit get their money back and the bidder gets a bargain.
If no bidder transpires I would imagine summit withdraw their bid and simply seize the assets that their loan was secured on. That is clearly not their preferred option. They don't want to own an oil company. But they would still be able to sell on the asset for some at least of the debt, or a lot more, if properly marketed in the fullness of time.
We could really do with a whistleblower to give us an insider view of what went on.
Someone who really saw what was happening, maybe not empowered to affect any other course of action but was privy to the dynamics of how things transpired.
The demise of COPL is mainly due to:
1 The disastrous decision of Arthur Millholland to fund the acquisition of CUDA with bonds rather than a rights issue when a rights issues was wholly doable at the time.
(what were you thinking Arthur you must realise that you catastrophically shot yourself(and us) in the foot there)
2 Allowing subsequent fund raising to be only through Anavio. No doubt sanctioned by Anavio placed board member(s)
The self serving nature of this parasitic financial arrangement destroyed our ability to raise funds like a normal business.
ALL board members past and previous who went along with this should be ashamed of themselves. You have destroyed the company who you were paid to serve in the best interest of shareholders.
Oil at $84 dollar a barrel at a mere 1000bopd generates $30m revenue per year.
At 2700bopd, which we have achieved with adequate stimulation, grosses nearly $83 m
Is that not a viable business , even with debts of £100m.....I think so.
IF it is the case that a lender scuppered the JV then I presume it must have been the SL rather than Anavio.
Having their loan secured on the assets means that if JV acquired a big chunk then there are obviously less assets.
I also presume the JV wasn't offering enough to clear the SL debt.
What is galling is that even if we mange to get some kind of fair value such that after the debt has been paid shareholders
are left with something we have to share that with the now 3.5 BILLION shares in issue that Anavio have created.
And the icing on the cake is :
Because of the bonds no serious RBL would touch us.
Maybe the JV turned their backs for the same reason. Who wants to JV with a penniless partner whose debtor is grinding your SP into the ground!
It shocking !!
Yep, the bonds was definitely an unconscionable contract.
As soon as Art signed the first round of bonds we were doomed.
There were other options available. He did exactly the opposite of what a CEO is there for. Protect and create wealth for shareholders.
Our CEO is only there to sell off the assets. He has no interest in shareholders.
The SL only want to get their money back.
You can guarantee they will accept any low ball offer that which expediate that end.
Shareholders will get nothing.