NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[RTM]

The 'Scheme Booklet Supplement' that was released today following the announcement of the raised offer, states:

"If you have already cast a vote or appointed a proxy and do not want to change it, then there is no need to do anything - your vote is still valid and will count."

And another quote from said booklet:

"Your Independent Directors unanimously recommend that you vote in favour of the Scheme, in the absence of a Superior Proposal."

riiighhhtt ..... Didn't they say that last time ? I will check my 'no' vote remains by going to computershare again...

Thanks. RTM

[digger]

The 'Scheme Booklet Supplement' that was released today following the announcement of the raised offer, states:

"If you have already cast a vote or appointed a proxy and do not want to change it, then there is no need to do anything - your vote is still valid and will count."

And another quote from said booklet:

"Your Independent Directors unanimously recommend that you vote in favour of the Scheme, in the absence of a Superior Proposal."

riiighhhtt ..... Didn't they say that last time ? I will check my 'no' vote remains by going to computershare again...

Are these the same independent directors that tried to sell us all out at 62 cents? I would have thought that they would be ***** by now for all the misleading info they put out and voting interference.

Very good point Vaygorl1 to independently check that a no is a no and dosen't slip around to being not counted or worst counted in favor.

[Vince]

Folks,

New and old threads merged now.

Please refrain from personal attacks on people, - broadly speaking this means everyone. Nothing wrong with a good heated robust debate but bear in mind the terms and conditions of this site.

Thank you,
Vince

[mistaTea]

I am still here. Very sad that fish’s profile has been disabled - I hope Sharetrader will let him back on as he has valuable insights.

Our NO votes will still be valid, but feel free to check on Computershare.

I won’t repeat all of the details here - but I did feel bad earlier because I felt indirectly responsible for the thread coming down.

I was aghast at a post my employee John Pagani made in response to fish. I was so shocked about it that I shared the post with another one of my employees - Andrew Jeffries.

I asked Andrew if he was happy with his workers representing my company in that manner etc. It was such a toxic personal attack out of nowhere really.

Within half an hour all of the offending posts and replies etc were removed and then the whole thread was disabled! So clearly someone kicked up a big enough stink to have Sharetrader intervene - we can speculate until the cows come home how it all went down.

Anyway, glad it is back up and running now so we can continue to discuss the latest low ball offer.

[Carpenterjoe]

Are these the same independent directors that tried to sell us all out at 62 cents? I would have thought that they would ****by now for all the misleading info they put out and voting interference.

Very good point Vaygorl1 to independently check that a no is a no and dosen't slip around to being not counted or worst counted in favor.

yip, I do not get it.

Independent Directors recommend 62 cents. Then change their mind to 74 cents. It might be best to start all over again next year.

Is there a change of date for finial voting submissions?

Seems, I will be awaiting the new information by snail mail so i can vote this down, This new postal submission allows for more people to vote it down. I hope the active members of nzog ST not be punished for expressing their personal views of acting board members.

I find it disgusting that an employee of NZOG can threaten legal proceedings on any shareholder or potential shareholder in an open online forum during a voting situation, disgusting. I suspect the nzx should put a halt to the take over proceedings asap.

Thank you Vince, for staying on top of it. I do hope you are fairly reimbursed for your efforts.

[digger]

I am still here. Very sad that fish’s profile has been disabled - I hope Sharetrader will let him back on as he has valuable insights.

Our NO votes will still be valid, but feel free to check on Computershare.

I won’t repeat all of the details here - but I did feel bad earlier because I felt indirectly responsible for the thread coming down.

I was aghast at a post my employee John Pagani made in response to fish. I was so shocked about it that I shared the post with another one of my employees - Andrew Jeffries.

I asked Andrew if he was happy with his workers representing my company in that manner etc. It was such a toxic personal attack out of nowhere really.

Within half an hour all of the offending posts and replies etc were removed and then the whole thread was disabled! So clearly someone kicked up a big enough stink to have Sharetrader intervene - we can speculate until the cows come home how it all went down.

Anyway, glad it is back up and running now so we can continue to discuss the latest low ball offer.

Did anyone by chance make a hard copy of fish's posts. He had several lately that were very telling and I was going to get back to them for a slower read and think,but now they are gone.

[Ripping]

I logged on to computershare late this evening to check my vote remained 'no' - and it had.
It clearly states that if you do not want to change your previously registered vote you need not do anything. Always good to be sure though eh?

[mistaTea]

If OGOG were smart (and not so damn greedy) their first offer would have been 74c (effectively what shareholders were paid last time when they bought 70%: 78c minus the 4c dividend that was declared.

We would have rejected that offer as low ball, but we would not have been nearly as outraged. At least their offer was on the same terms as the earlier one, we would have thought. But why would we sell 2 years later at the same price when Ironbark agreements are now signed and we are getting ready for one of the big drills of the century? Or so the thinking would have gone.

Then they could have come back with a higher offer - 85c. That number would essentially be a fair offer for existing assets, nothing for a Ironbark really but it would give shareholders who may be having second thoughts about drilling risk etc an option to bail at a fair price for the existing business. And it would have likely gotten through at that price.

All up, it would have cost them US$25M (their current offer is US$$22.6).

And because of their inherent stinking attitude, this latest offer is doomed to fail too. Damned foolish, the whole thing.

[mistaTea]

I can also now give a bit more detail about the meeting I had with the OGOG CEO (given this is now their full and final offer).

After giving it to him straight about how outrageous 62c was, and outlining all the reasons why his offer was going to fail miserably...

I eventually named a price that the large shareholders and I would accept reluctantly at a minimum. I pointed out that the 5 of us hold approx 16% of the minority shares, and without our support any future offers are unlikely to succeed. He accepted the truth in that.

We fundamentally do not want to sell, but we figured if it was going to be forced on us we had better front foot it to get a a reasonable price. Rather than have OGOG keep coming back with incrementally higher offers, wearing the minority base down over time into accepting a low offer.

Anyway, I won’t declare what that price is here as the others I am working closely with will want to keep as many cards up our sleeves as possible while our thinking evolves.

Suffice it to say, it was considerably more than 74c.

Anyway, as I was finishing my coffee I said, and I quote...”Alistair, mate if you are going to come back with a higher offer make sure it is not 1 cent below our asking price because that will just piss us off”.

He nodded, said very little and it would now appear that he thought I was joking.

I most definitely was not.

[Bart]

Thanks to all serious traders keeping people with small holdings like me informed. I can only guess what is going on, and I am disappointed that historic explanations from Fish have been removed. I am still puzzled how a truly independent director can say that 62 cents is a fair offer, and then only weeks later say that 74 cents is now a fair (and final) offer. I do expect such behavior from second hand car salesmen. An effort is made to relate this increased offer to the rise of Cue ("a relatively small, illiquid stock"), but then again the increase of Cue adds only something like 5 cents to the NZO share, so they are very generous. The new booklet also states "The chance of commercial success (of Ironbark) has beenindependently assessed to be highly unlikely" - what fools BP and our directors must have been to invest in that!!