NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[mistaTea]

Just a big FU (to shareholders) from the takeovers panel. As expected.

A damn shame really.

I will never understand how Northington are able to get away with 'deriving' a 5% chance of success figure that was never mentioned in the SRK report. SRK never discuss probability of success anywhere in their report - they only attempt to calculate the value of the prospect.

It is absolutely misleading to to state that investors should believe the chance of a commercial discovery is only 5%.

The only way we avoid being robbed blind is for enough of us to vote NO. Cannot rely on any other parties.

[blackcap]

A damn shame really.

I will never understand how Northington are able to get away with 'deriving' a 5% chance of success figure that was never mentioned in the SRK report. SRK never discuss probability of success anywhere in their report - they only attempt to calculate the value of the prospect.

It is absolutely misleading to to state that investors should believe the chance of a commercial discovery is only 5%.

The only way we avoid being robbed blind is for enough of us to vote NO. Cannot rely on any other parties.

I have not called them (Northington) but I would really like to ask them what the liquidation valuation is that they have for NZO and why that was not included in their report. I may give them a call and see what they say.

That alone (not having a liquidation value) should send alarm bells ringing at the Takeovers Panel, but obviously not.

[mistaTea]

"WA-359-P
15% New Zealand Oil & Gas
21.5% Cue Energy*
42.5% BP Developments Australia Pty Ltd (Operator)
21% Beach Energy
Ironbark-1 planning is progressing with the well scheduled tobe drilled in late 2020 using the Ocean Apex drill rig.During the quarter, site survey operations over the welllocation were completed."

Two sentences. That is all they had to say about Ironbark in the Activities Report.

If it weren't for the current theft attempt (I mean perfectly legitimate and generous Scheme of Arrangement) you can bet they would be much more bullish in their update on Ironbark.

[Sideshow Bob]

I have not called them (Northington) but I would really like to ask them what the liquidation valuation is that they have for NZO and why that was not included in their report. I may give them a call and see what they say.

That alone should send alarm bells ringing at the Takeovers Panel, but obviously not.

The MD was my first year finance lecturer at Lincoln, many many moons ago. Good dude, and good lecturer. I remember a lot of the exams questions revolved around names of All Blacks and cricketers...…

Maybe he has moved to the corporate dark side!!

[Fabs37]

Just a big FU (to shareholders) from the takeovers panel. As expected.

YES, no surprise here and Totally Predictable.

Objective scrutiny, questioning & opinions on official narratives going the same way as Free Speech, on the Way-Out.

DO WHAT THOU WILL-ST SHALL BE THE WHOLE OF THE LAW.

for some

[blackcap]

The MD was my first year finance lecturer at Lincoln, many many moons ago. Good dude, and good lecturer. I remember a lot of the exams questions revolved around names of All Blacks and cricketers...…

Maybe he has moved to the corporate dark side!!

Well that is interesting. The corporate world can suck the soul out of you and or change ethics. Then again the MD may not even know about this little report but would be indicative of culture at the organisation.

[mistaTea]

For what it's worth - I do think we need to be a little careful here, and make sure we avoid inadvertently falling into the trap of 'Group Think'.

Posters to this forum seem to be in agreement that the current offer is still too low, relative to the value of existing assets (and of course, the potentially large upside in Ironbark and Clipper).

I have been very frustrated with the Northington Report, and I disagree with the notion that you can infer a 5% probability of commercial success that was not stated in the referenced report (SRK). It also is not good enough, in my view, for Northington to not include a liquidation value estimate.

However, the Takeovers Panel do point out that they have a high bar threshold when it comes to misleading content and statements. Though the current ruling did not go in my favour, I do see that this high bar is necessary. Our opinion is that the Northington Report is not good enough, and significantly understates the value of the company.
However, so far as the TO Panel can see anyway...the views expressed by Northington and the IDC are genuinely held and reasonably derived.
In other words, we might not like the methodology they have used, and in our opinion there are better methods that should have been used...however Northington have used 'a methodology' that is not completely bonkers, and they genuinely believe the one they have used provides a fair estimate for the business. And that is where it ends I think, so far as the valuation and subsequent SoA statements go.

Our strong opinion is that the business is worth considerably more, so all we can do it make sure we get enough NO votes to stop the deal going ahead.

Then hopefully that is the end of it and we can all explore Ironbark. Or OGOG can think about it for a bit and come back with a higher offer - and then we assess that on its merits again.

[Baa_Baa]

For what it's worth - I do think we need to be a little careful here, and make sure we avoid inadvertently falling into the trap of 'Group Think'.

Posters to this forum seem to be in agreement that the current offer is still too low, relative to the value of existing assets (and of course, the potentially large upside in Ironbark and Clipper).

I have been very frustrated with the Northington Report, and I disagree with the notion that you can infer a 5% probability of commercial success that was not stated in the referenced report (SRK). It also is not good enough, in my view, for Northington to not include a liquidation value estimate.

However, the Takeovers Panel do point out that they have a high bar threshold when it comes to misleading content and statements. Though the current ruling did not go in my favour, I do see that this high bar is necessary. Our opinion is that the Northington Report is not good enough, and significantly understates the value of the company.
However, so far as the TO Panel can see anyway...the views expressed by Northington and the IDC are genuinely held and reasonably derived.
In other words, we might not like the methodology they have used, and in our opinion there are better methods that should have been used...however Northington have used 'a methodology' that is not completely bonkers, and they genuinely believe the one they have used provides a fair estimate for the business. And that is where it ends I think, so far as the valuation and subsequent SoA statements go.

Our strong opinion is that the business is worth considerably more, so all we can do it make sure we get enough NO votes to stop the deal going ahead.

Then hopefully that is the end of it and we can all explore Ironbark. Or OGOG can think about it for a bit and come back with a higher offer - and then we assess that on its merits again.

Some objectivity goes a long way, as was also pointed out, the 'market' does not agree either with the opinions expressed here, that the 'value' is anything more than the price the market will pay for it. And the market price is now tracking the OGOG offer price.

As you say, the only chance you shareholders have is by voting no in the required % of all shareholdings. At that point if successful and OGOG are true their word, you will retain the company and the bidder will not counter their firm and final offer.

[THEONE]

Probably raised before, but this from Cue

Cue estimates the Ironbark prospect contains 15Tcf of prospective recoverable gas(2) at a
25% chance of success.

https://www.cuenrg.com.au/irm/PDF/24...ronbarkFunding

[Leftfield]

Interesting article for holders.....ACC to play a key role in shareholder sale vote.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opi...takeover-looms