NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[Lion]

Well I have done my bit to get this thing voted down. Spoke to all I know that have shares and the indication is that they will vote NO. Have spoke to TR and AK,that is the past CEO and the present one. They know my thoughts and from what I got back AK he did agree with me that acquistions are a good way to go and they are studying a number of companies. I do not buy into the reasoning that if we have a buy back where ZETA has to sell that it would defeat the purpose of the buy back. You can believe anything if the money is right. Anyone wanting to vote please note that time is running out.

Hi Digger, I intend to attend and vote no

[sideline]

Hi everyone,
voted no too.
What does anyone make of the bot-selling today? Saville acting through associates to influence voting???

[blackcap]

Hi everyone,
voted no too.
What does anyone make of the bot-selling today? Saville acting through associates to influence voting???

Is Zeta's influence on NZO good or bad for other holders I wonder. I know they play hardball and will extract what they can for themselves (as they should). However they are not going to waste the cash that is there are they? Ie there may be more value for NZO shareholders with Zeta on board? Not sure what to make of this.

[digger]

Hi everyone,
voted no too.
What does anyone make of the bot-selling today? Saville acting through associates to influence voting???

That is what I would say. The implication is that IF we agree to this vote all will be well. We just have to stay stupid enough to not realize that it will be a controlling 22.5% increase to ZETA at no cost to themselves.
Now of coarse it is true that to anyone who does not sell into this or any other buy back it means a % increase in holding,but the important part is it is not a controlling increase. IF Zeta gets away with this they will immediately want another seat on the board.

It will be too hard for me to attend the meeting so I am doing my bit here and with direct contact,

Again get on and VOTE. Together we can stop this madness.
Cheers.

[Monkey Poms]

Here's a link....
https://waterpressure.wordpress.com/...mine-timeline/
I didn't think much of it as it read conspiracy all over.....
but the more i read the background and relevant links were provided and it made me wonder.
The reason i am posting this link now is because in the article it mentions the silent majority shareholders that are hidden.....
I have no idea what this means...... but it does explain the things that the board does which alot of smaller shareholders find strange.


If you have upwards of an hour spare you might find the above link interesting...... it is however very complex and over my head.
But my nose still works and I smell something..... just dont know what it is...... but it has stopped me from investing in anything but
myself for a very long time.
Hope someone here can make an informed critique of the link.

an extract

55)October 15, 2010: Then, a day later, none other than L1 Capital Pty Ltd of Level 5, 101 Collins Street, Melbourne, commences aggressively buying up shares in Bathurst Resources Ltd as well on behalf of National Nominees Ltd, (who just happen to be major shareholders in New Zealand Oil & Gas Ltd [5.76%] and BNZ/ National Australia Bank [11.98%]) State Street Australia Ltd, Cogent Nominees Ltd and JP Morgan Nominees Australia Ltd (also major shareholders in New Zealand Oil & Gas Ltd [0.65%] and BNZ/National Australia Bank [10.32%]) between October 5
– 13 October 2010 – increase its voting power to 7.09%. [Bathurst website PDF File: Oct 15, 2010, Becoming a Substantial Holder] – we remember, New Zealand Oil & Gas Ltd is the controlling shareholder of Pike River Coal Ltd as well.

Hi Neopole, I have voted against NZO proposal not because of the Zeta situation. Better to put spare funds into buying into a basket of oil shares - say five companies who have an abundance of reserves with low cost of production and quality oil (low sulphur). Think we are getting close to the bottom price of quality companies shares. NZO may never have the opportunity again.

Wouldn't worry too much about the nominee Banks.
Bought my shares through a UK broker who in turn used Bank of New York to appoint BNZ/National Australia Bank to hold the shares. (nominee)
Advised broker to vote against the motion (3,994,244 total shares).

Directors of NZO with inside knowledge of their industry should be able to chose the right shares to invest ????????.

Forum members; which oil shares would you propose NZO to invest in and hold on to until the oil price rises?
5 to 10% cut in oil production would probably send oil above $100

Monkey Poms.

[digger]

Hi Neopole, I have voted against NZO proposal not because of the Zeta situation. Better to put spare funds into buying into a basket of oil shares - say five companies who have an abundance of reserves with low cost of production and quality oil (low sulphur). Think we are getting close to the bottom price of quality companies shares. NZO may never have the opportunity again.

Wouldn't worry too much about the nominee Banks.
Bought my shares through a UK broker who in turn used Bank of New York to appoint BNZ/National Australia Bank to hold the shares. (nominee)
Advised broker to vote against the motion (3,994,244 total shares).

Directors of NZO with inside knowledge of their industry should be able to chose the right shares to invest ????????.

Forum members; which oil shares would you propose NZO to invest in and hold on to until the oil price rises?
5 to 10% cut in oil production would probably send oil above $100

Monkey Poms.

Yes fully agree Monkey Poms,acquisition is the best way to go. Did speak with AK the other day and he did say they were studying a number of companies,so once this remit is turned down I think that is what will happen. Again this is a very unique time in history when oil is probably at about half the long term cost of true production. Of coarse established or pipeline production is less than 90 dollars but true new production costs are higher. At current value all Canada's tar sands will lose money.
Your point about voting against' not to defeat Zeta' does miss a valuable consideration. The 20% limit imposed by the takeover code needs to be strengthened so that there is no way a dominate holder can impose its will on the rest of the company . Get that sorted out then on to acquisitions.
Cheers

[fish]

voting on line is so easy-and confirmation of the no vote via e-mail immediately.

[blackcap]

voting on line is so easy-and confirmation of the no vote via e-mail immediately.

Yes it is isn't it. i have noticed I am voting a lot more the previously even for some of my smaller holdings. But it may hopefully send a message to directors if they stray outside shareholders parameters.

[dolor]

I haven't posted here in years but as a hugely disappointed long-term investor(27 years) it amazes me that our directors are unable to make better use of company funds. To have spare cash at this time and not use it to advance productive assets and future income is bordering on incompetence. The opportunities for quality investment have not been better for years with very little risk. It must be that having such bad experience in Tunisia(cost us $8m) has made the board risk averse to absurdity. Hopefully Digger's efforts will prevail and the board will reconsider this desperate default proposal and move us into something with serious long term benefit.

[arjay]

I've also voted NO online. Dunno how much good it will do though, all us minnows can be cancelled out easily by a yes from bigger fish.