Simonhare999
26 Apr 2018
Massively undervalued Cash in hand - £80M = 25p/shareCarry on drill - £40M = 12.5p/shareDrill completion payment - £15M = 4.5p / shareFID Payment - £25M = 7.5p / shareCurrent Total - £160M = 49.5p / share25% Etinde value - £125M - £250M = 38p - 77p / shareBomono value - ??????????????S.P. on successful drill - £245M - £370M = 75p - 113.5p / share
indaknow
26 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... EagleThis extract from your post in the early hours of this morning sums up my issue with you. "I lost a lot but I know of some people who lost their life savings".In my opinion, you should feel partly responsible for the loss that some people suffered with XEL. You aren't responsible for the decisions that people ultimately take, but you certainly did your best to convince anyone reading the XEL board that value would out for shareholders in the long run. Your aggressive style of posting against those with whom you disagree leads to a situation where, by default, only your voice is heard. A cursory glance here, at XEL and JOG provides sufficient evidence for me to make that statement. You continually posted a misinformed position, regardless of good intentions, that will no doubt have been an influence on some people. your own admission, you didn't have a concrete understanding of the differences between English and Welsh law vs BVI law, yet that didn't give you cause to reflect that you should tone down your staunch belief in what would happen. For an accountant, normally quite conservative types, you were extremely bullish. I do hope that on reflection you will realise that your actions contributed to the losses suffered by some. You are doing the same thing here by posting cryptic messages that are pure speculation on your part. People should be aware of you imo.
Bison722
26 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... hi eaglei am glad you re-read the posts again and saw that my comments weren't too inflammatory!i lost out on XEL too by the waybut if i am honest you didnt answer my question - what is this "killer blow" you speak of? to me it is quite simple, its not the cash on BLVNs books that really matters, that will just be factored into the takeover price by the acquirer, it is if company X offers say 65p per share, then ALL shareholders get 65p share, i dont see how COC can stop that?CEO's options dont trigger at anything below 45p so i am happy with that level and will get out at a very small profit which is OK with me because of all the years of KH's misleading and incompetence
sansione
26 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... Don`t understand the comment which bears no relationship to what I said. I have held the shares for over 20 years and will not be selling now!!
eagle51
26 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... .......apologies, bison - I now see it was Indadark who was big on the insults this time; your much milder ones were verging on the complimentary. Thank you.It's only my opinion that Merrill Lynch are likely to be holding as nominees. I stated this in my original post. They'll vote the shares in whatever way their client wants when the time comes, then eventually disappear when whatever COC wants to happen has happened. I doubt very much (sansione) that ML or COC pay much, if any, attention to the 'concert party' rules. They'd be holding them in a bona fide capacity if any questions were asked - not that they're likely to be.COC might have a strong interest in obtaining the best prices for BLVN's assets, but there's a big cash pot there that well worth having whatever happens. How they choose to distribute it is where shareholders are in most danger imo, because COC hold the purse strings and can do anything they like. I'm not considering legality issues - I have first-hand experience of that one. As a amatter of interest, does anyone know where COC is registered? COC are hardly likely imo to have gone though everything they have done to date so that stranded shareholders get to benefit. Rules are there to be circumvented and they have the means to do so, safe in the knowledge their conduct will never be investigated because AIM Investigations and the mighty FCA spend their time doing other things that require a lot less understanding and effort. "How long is it until we get that RPI-linked pension for life - you work it out, Nmanga, then let's have another sweep on what time the tea trolley first appears outside Abdul's office?" kindathing.I might be completely wrong and COC are the kind of people your grannie would love to pieces, so generous are they with their money (which is how they will be viewing the $80m - or is it less now?). Have they started paying consulting fees to strange-sounding organisations yet? The old ones are the best.As long as everyone understands the risks, an investment in BVLN is fine. We are all masters of our own destiny. There's a possibility of a decent gain being made from the present SP level. I just happen to think it's unlikely. Different people have different views.I think I said at the time I sold my modest holding in BVLN what I did with the proceeds. As I only hold 3 shares now and have done for some time - and one of these (CLNR as a binary bet) I bought in the last 18 months - by a process of elimination it must have been JOG and SQZ. I was fortunate. I'd have been pretty depressed by now playing a high risk waiting game here had I not sold. There are companies other than BVLN on the planet.Hedge funds don't all behave dishonestly (or as close to it as makes no difference) and I might be doing COC a grave disservice in suspecting they don't have it in their plans to let much, if any, of what they can easily cause to end up in their bank account go to shareholders other than themselves.All the above are only opinions. I hope you all make a stack.My opinions differ from yours - I deserve to be tarred and feathered (bear in mind I'm feathered already). Let the insults re-commence. imo/dyor
eagle51
26 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... .........."his lack of understanding about the nature of the legal charge, the bondholder's rights and the powers of the liquidator was staggering".......................I believed in the tooth fairy back then, Bison. What I hadn't appreciated was that the bondholders (hedge funds) had fixed things so that although they'd lent the money to a subsidiary of XEL called XER (which was a UK registered company)and secured it on the Bentley Field , XEL (which was registered in the BVI) had provided a guarantee to the bondholders that the loans secured on Bentley would be repaid in full by XEL in the event of a failure by XER to repay any part of the debt. Shareholders hadn't been told about this and there was no way they couldn't find out, because there's no 'Companies House' equivalent in the BVI so you can't look up charges etc on the Company's file. Because XER had granted a charge on Bentley, in the event of it crystallizing it would have resulted in the appointment of a UK based administrative receiver (or liquidator) who would have had to ensure that a fair price was obtained for the charged asset/s, because the conduct of UK insolvency practitioners is subject to scrutiny by various regulatory bodies.The bondholders failed to make demand for repayment of the secured loans from XER. They called on the guarantee of the BVI registered parent XEL instead. The directors allowed this to go unchallenged. XEL (the listed entity) of course couldn't repay the debt. All kinds of legal opinions were sought be people like me about the legality of the whole thing, eg questioning how a guarantee could be called in when no demand for repayment had been made on the subsidiary owing the money. All referred to the fact it would be expensive to find out if BVI laws applied that made any sense in the circumstances - if in fact there were any relevant laws in the BVI. A liquidator of XEL was duly appointed in the BVI, who sold XER (ie the company owning Bentley that held the debt) with tax losses intact to the bondholders for $1 in return for cancellation of the debt. Needless to say everyone believed the liquidator when he assured them the best possible price had been sought for the assets and even if someone had offered to buy Bentley (containing 267MMboe of P2 oil in the North Sea, albeit heavy but known to flow - 227MMboe of this being 1P) the chargeholder would have had to give its consent to the release of the charge blah blah blah. Open robbery.Yes, I did believe a liquidator (an honest one operating in the UK, which is the country in which the owner of the relevant asset was registered that owed the money) would be able to sell a field containing the amount of confirmed oil Bentley had in it, for more than 50 cents a barrel, which is what would have been required to repay the debt. At the time of its demise XEL owed a total sum that was about 7% of its most recent TRACS NPV10 value. North Sea (and world) oil may have been going through difficult times, but not that difficult. I lost a lot but I know of some people who lost their life savings, some running into millions, so secure a picture the PoS directors painted of XEL. The bondholders kept on a few of XEL's senior people and are still waiting to cash in their illicitly gained prize, which is now called Whalsea Energy Limited (look it up). It still isn't possible to tell who owns the shares. They're hedge funds, see?I count myself as fortunate (but we all make our own luck) that I've since made many times what I lost on XEL on Jersey Oil & Gas (JOG - bought most of my large holding at between 8p and 20p) and Serica Energy (SQZ - my average is 22p). Watch this space on both - they might even do as well (shareprice-wise) as BLVN - you never know. XEL at least taught me a lot about hedge funds.I possibly now know almost as much about them and how they operate as you and some others do, BisonThere's nothing wrong with my knowledge of corporate insolvency. I ad
angel al
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... Sansione if this is the case why are you bothering with the share at all? Simply sell move on life’s too short
sansione
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... They can have done as much research as they like, but, as nothing is, or has been happening, for a very long time their knowledge will be no better than anyone else`s.
sansione
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... It can`t be COC as, if it was, as a " concert party " taking COC above 29.9% it would necessitate COC making a bid for the rest of the company.
indaknow
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... Woking's 4th most successful accountant, the Voyeur, has returned to share his personal opinion. Any evidence to support the statement that ML is "probably holding as nominee for an un-named beneficiary"? I'm looking forward to Officer Winnet shooting you down for post unsubstantiated guff.This is my personal favourite "the final one will deal other shareholders the killer blow". Whatever could the Voyeur be suggesting?Anyone who gives Pigeon any credit would be advised to read the XEL board. Pigeon, an esteemed and successful accountant, continually posted that XEL's assets would be disposed of for a sum well in excess of the debt resulting in sums paid to shareholders. For an accountant, his lack of understanding about the nature of the legal charge, the bondholder's rights and the powers of the liquidator was staggering.
Bison722
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... "My personal view is that the final one will deal other shareholders the killer blow"can you elaborate on this eagle or is it more cryptic nonsense with zero substance behind it?can you also define "killer blow" please? are you saying the SP will end up below todays price when the fat lady sings? what about the CEO's options that dont trigger unless SP is above 45p?
eagle51
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... ML is probably holding as nominee for an un-named beneficiary.If it's COC, it's in breach of the Rules. Not saying it is or it isn't - there's no means of knowing. If it is, I doubt it's the first, or indeed the last. My personal view is that the final one will deal other shareholders the killer blow.Mind yer fingers............all imo/dyor
angel al
25 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... For an ii to buy 1% of the company which is not insignificant they will have completed a lot of research. Already holding 5% if that research had proven to be negative we would have seen a sale of 1% or more.In this case it is not an ii doing a punt it is a considered decision on the basis of their current holding. definition then it is a positive for other shareholders to see.
Nervousrex
24 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake... They reckon institutional investors only average getting 3 out of 5 deals right . I wouldn't be buying on the basis that they have bought . I bought because I think there is a profit to be made here .
sansione
24 Apr 2018
Re: Merrill Lynch International up stake fro... Why do some people assume that institutional investors are acting on insider information when they deal. For a start it would be a criminal offence to do so. They are adding to their position as they hope, like the rest of us, that something good will eventually come for shareholders.
