sharetrader
Page 1085 of 1098 FirstFirst ... 85585985103510751081108210831084108510861087108810891095 ... LastLast
Results 16,261 to 16,275 of 16470
  1. #16261
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BIRMANBOY View Post
    Received all of the paperwork and details today in the post.
    Thanks Boffin for letting us know that this problem appears to be resolved.
    Also that you let us know your votes against.
    Nobody on this forum has said they are voting for the scheme.If anyone is voting for the scheme it would be good if you could post.I am sure nobody would attempt to influence you and you would be well-respected for having stood up.It is really good to have a mix of thoughts and intentions and so far there has been no positivity about the scheme that I can see .

  2. #16262
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    I know of one person who voted for the scheme simply because his policy is that he just does what the independent directors tell him to.

    No scrutinising the SoA, no reflecting on whether or not the price being offered is truly reflective of value etc. Just voted for.

    There will be a number of other FOR votes like that, unfortunately.

    However, even if OGOG achieved a whopping turnout for this SoA...say 75% - they would still need damn near 28 million votes to succeed. That is a lot of votes to get, given the serious criticisms being made and strong feelings of opportunism etc.

  3. #16263
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    I know of one person who voted for the scheme simply because his policy is that he just does what the independent directors tell him to.

    No scrutinising the SoA, no reflecting on whether or not the price being offered is truly reflective of value etc. Just voted for.

    There will be a number of other FOR votes like that, unfortunately.

    However, even if OGOG achieved a whopping turnout for this SoA...say 75% - they would still need damn near 28 million votes to succeed. That is a lot of votes to get, given the serious criticisms being made and strong feelings of opportunism etc.
    I fully agree with you and I believe that the soa has no chance of succeeding.
    However the Independent directors are misleading shareholders by their NZX announcement that the stk report says that Ironbark has only a 5% chance of financial success.
    I have now read the stk report several times and it certainly does not say this.
    At this stage of Ironbark with BP the operator and Ocean Apex drilling next year geological success-defined as flowable hydrocarbons is virtually equivalent to commercial success and its demonstrably wrong to announce at this stage that Ironbark has only a 5% chance .
    I intend to pursue this as I cannot believe the Independent directors are not misleading the market(I do not have to prove this is intentional but just that the announcement is misleading)

  4. #16264
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fish View Post
    However the Independent directors are misleading shareholders by their NZX announcement that the stk report says that Ironbark has only a 5% chance of financial success.
    I have now read the stk report several times and it certainly does not say this.
    The PKF report, which references SRK analysis does not explicitly say anywhere that "Ironbark only has a 5% probability of commercial success".

    It does provide a table (4-4) on page 27, which multiplies out the various probabilities to end up with a Low, Preferred and High Value for a discovery. The way the factors are multiplied out, you could infer that the net factor applied is 5% to come up with a valuation range for a discovery.
    Nobody actually believes that, in reality, anybody stumping up the large amount of cash required for exploration wells is anticipating a 95% chance of a dry well though.

    However, PKF then further reduce the low estimate based on the amount paid in earlier farm-in deals with BP and Beach. This gave an incredibly wide value range of A$3.8M - A$536M (with a preferred value of A$357M) for the total value of the prospect. In my view, that range is so wide that it has very little practical use.
    It did mean that NZOG was able to farm-in to Ironbark for more than BP paid, but the same as Beach. NZOG will end up paying, in total, approx $4.4 million to Cue to farm in for 15%.

    The Northington report then states that minority shareholders should therefore sell their interest in Ironbark to OGOG on the same terms as Cue (i.e. $4.4M).

    Well, sorry but that isn't going to fly. Cue was in a different situation - they were trying to attract financial backing for an exciting drill. They were not in a position to negotiate a larger carrying cost from BP, Beach and NZOG - but they have retained 21% equity and will stand to gain a lot, given around half their drill cost will be funded by the other JV partners. If they did not accept NZOG as a JV partner, they would not have fulfilled a key obligation in their option agreement with BP and risked blowing up the whole deal. So Cue shareholders had to take the deal on the table, rightly or wrongly.

    Now, we are in a different situation altogether. Minority Shareholders are not trying to attract any interest to secure finance. OGOG want to buy out our equity, and to do that they will need to offer considerably more (even if they doubled their current offer, I doubt it would be enough). To suggest that because NZOG, BP and Beach got a sweet farm-in deal for Ironbark, and on the strength of that NZOG minority holders should drop their pants too is ludicrous.
    Last edited by mistaTea; 20-09-2019 at 11:05 AM.

  5. #16265
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Thank you Mista tea
    No wonder I cannot find a 5% chance of success in the srk report-I have spent hours trying to find out how anyone could infer only a 5% chance of success in the report.
    Table 4-4 is the estimated value of discovered hydrocarbons .It has nothing that a reasonable person could infer a 5% chance of successful drill.Indeed it uses a 2/7 chance of a wildcat drill being successful based on 7 previous drills in the last 20 years .It gives a preferred value of $357 a$mm so the value to nzo(including cue) is over $100million.
    As I have said before with bp involved the chances of a successful drill with the technology and experience they have is at least 1 in 3 and probably more than 1 in 2.

  6. #16266
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fish View Post
    Thank you Mista tea
    No wonder I cannot find a 5% chance of success in the srk report-I have spent hours trying to find out how anyone could infer only a 5% chance of success in the report.
    Table 4-4 is the estimated value of discovered hydrocarbons .It has nothing that a reasonable person could infer a 5% chance of successful drill.Indeed it uses a 2/7 chance of a wildcat drill being successful based on 7 previous drills in the last 20 years .It gives a preferred value of $357 a$mm so the value to nzo(including cue) is over $100million.
    As I have said before with bp involved the chances of a successful drill with the technology and experience they have is at least 1 in 3 and probably more than 1 in 2.
    Correct, the inferred 5% used to end up with the value range is a framework used to derive some kind of estimate in terms of the value of a discovery in Ironbark.

    Whether you can take that percentage and say therefore the chance of a drill discovering commercially viable levels of extractable hydrocarbons is still unclear to me (and appears dubious).
    Certainly not believable in practice.

  7. #16267
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    473

    Default

    A concern is that the majority of small shareholders don’t follow this thread. They will likely have been unaware of what’s happening when they receive a kind offer for their shares. The offer will explain that the alternative is that they will most likely lose their equity in the upcoming bound-to-fail drills. Is it unreasonable to expect that the offer might therefore be successful? Is there any way an alternative message can be sent to all shareholders?

  8. #16268
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Auckland, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    92

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fish View Post
    Thank you Mista tea
    No wonder I cannot find a 5% chance of success in the srk report-I have spent hours trying to find out how anyone could infer only a 5% chance of success in the report.
    Table 4-4 is the estimated value of discovered hydrocarbons .It has nothing that a reasonable person could infer a 5% chance of successful drill.Indeed it uses a 2/7 chance of a wildcat drill being successful based on 7 previous drills in the last 20 years .It gives a preferred value of $357 a$mm so the value to nzo(including cue) is over $100million.
    As I have said before with bp involved the chances of a successful drill with the technology and experience they have is at least 1 in 3 and probably more than 1 in 2.
    Fish, you are absolutely correct on this point. Nowhere in the SRK report does it refer to a 5% chance of success, and as experts neither would they. The 5% chance of success is a Northington's construct which is an erroneous use of SRK's information, and entirely misleading.

  9. #16269
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arjay View Post
    A concern is that the majority of small shareholders don’t follow this thread. They will likely have been unaware of what’s happening when they receive a kind offer for their shares. The offer will explain that the alternative is that they will most likely lose their equity in the upcoming bound-to-fail drills. Is it unreasonable to expect that the offer might therefore be successful? Is there any way an alternative message can be sent to all shareholders?
    The message could be sent by the takeovers panel or the nzx.
    For instance if you make them aware of your concerns which shows the nzo independent directors are misleading voting shareholders they have tremendous powers to rectify the situation.
    If a statement is made that clearly is not honest opinion and is misleading then it is a breach of the code
    The get out card the directors may use is it is honest opinion.However honest opinion must be
    a)honestly held and
    b)reasonably based and
    c)Not demonstrably wrong

    It is difficult to prove a) but I feel b) and c) could be very difficult for them to dispute.

    Good Luck
    Last edited by fish; 20-09-2019 at 03:10 PM.

  10. #16270
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiremu View Post
    Fish, you are absolutely correct on this point. Nowhere in the SRK report does it refer to a 5% chance of success, and as experts neither would they. The 5% chance of success is a Northington's construct which is an erroneous use of SRK's information, and entirely misleading.
    Thank you wiremu.
    Would you consider making a complaint to both the nzx and the takeovers panel as I feel they need to know from people that have read both the Northington and srk report

  11. #16271
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12269453

    Brian Gaynor using the NZOG SoA as an example, questioning why so many Kiwi Directors are gutless.

  12. #16272
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12269453

    Brian Gaynor using the NZOG SoA as an example, questioning why so many Kiwi Directors are gutless.
    Gutless is assuming the NZO Independent directors have our best interests at heart.They would know the NZX announcement 13/9/19 was misleading and actually false.
    My personal opinion is that Rod Ritchie,with his extensive experience in the petroleum Industry and diverse interests(including OMV -Austrian petrochemical group I think) would certainly Know the Northbridge report was false

  13. #16273
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fish View Post
    Gutless is assuming the NZO Independent directors have our best interests at heart.They would know the NZX announcement 13/9/19 was misleading and actually false.
    My personal opinion is that Rod Ritchie,with his extensive experience in the petroleum Industry and diverse interests(including OMV -Austrian petrochemical group I think) would certainly Know the Northbridge report was false
    Old Roddie boy hasn’t had ahelluva lot to say at all during this whole scam.

    It’s been left up to the academic to convince us.

    She probably subscribes to the whole ‘Modern Portfolio Theory’ and therefore a 25% premium on SP is a damn good deal. Look no further!
    Last edited by mistaTea; 21-09-2019 at 09:30 AM.

  14. #16274
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    Old Roddie boy hasn’t had ahelluva lot to say at all during this whole scam.

    It’s been left up to the academic to convince us.

    She probably subscribes to the whole ‘Modern Portfolio Theory’ and therefore a 25% premium on SP is a damn good deal. Look no further!
    Well it,s like this, average S/H should not been surprised it has come to this offer.
    When the CO. bought out a percentage of shares at what under 75 cents, to get their holding to 70%
    Then let the S/Price drift until all the Ducks lined up and then make this ridiculous offer.
    All the while repeating the Mantra, managements aim is to create value to S/Hs

    Hinted at that in several posts last 2 years.

  15. #16275
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fabs37 View Post
    Well it,s like this, average S/H should not been surprised it has come to this offer.
    When the CO. bought out a percentage of shares at what under 75 cents, to get their holding to 70%
    Then let the S/Price drift until all the Ducks lined up and then make this ridiculous offer.
    All the while repeating the Mantra, managements aim is to create value to S/Hs

    Hinted at that in several posts last 2 years.
    Yes, and it does occur to me too that the whole process they did to ‘clean up’ the shareholder base by purchasing back any holdings under 500 was all part of this ultimate aim.

    Those shareholders were almost certainly not going to bother voting, so a quick ‘tidy up’ would benefit OGOG when it was time to kick the remaining minority holders in the guts with a low ball SOA.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •