NZ Oil & Gas (NZO)

[digger]

Well that post beats me Mista tea.. I was looked right in the eye by our nZO directors and assured that 5% it was. So your post from Beach must be in error.
Looking forward to next years drill. The 5% is just 11 months away. I certainly hope OGOG keeps to their word and dose not come back with another slightly improved SOA.

[rooster]

So Beach released this today: https://yourir.info/resources/0c5a44...esentation.pdf

Of particular interest to us is the commentary on Slide 18:

"The final area I wanted to highlight was our upcoming frontier exploration opportunities.
Our exploration team carefully assesses new exploration opportunities for investment, and Beach’s hurdle for frontier areas is very high. We are not a company that participates in 1 in 8 or 1 in 10 chance of success wells, no matter how material they may be.

For us, we like a 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 chance of success at these large frontier exploration plays. We currently have an interest in 2 material frontier investment opportunities which fit this criteria.

Our investment in these wells in the Carnarvon Basin and offshore New Zealand is modest; we are not betting the company on any of these. However the success case in any one of these wells has the potential to add material resources to the company and provide another avenue for medium to long term growth. In short – they have “company changer” potential."

5% Probability of commercial success indeed!

If only sharetrader allowed thumbs up on posts like on hotcopper

[Ripping]

If only sharetrader allowed thumbs up on posts like on hotcopper

::tup:: ....

[blackcap]

Thanks for that Mista Tea, that is very telling indeed. Incredible really. I think these prices of NZO at 62 cents are very cheap. Time to load up.

[mistaTea]

Thanks for that Mista Tea, that is very telling indeed. Incredible really. I think these prices of NZO at 62 cents are very cheap. Time to load up.

No doubt if you quizzed the Great Minds at NZOG, they would try to bog you down in semantics. They would say the 5% estimate referred to commercial success, whereas Beach have just said 'success' - which could mean just discovering hydrocarbons but then not being able to extract them.

And of course it will be more bs from our Trustworthy Leaders - I do not believe for a second that Beach Energy are misleading their investors by issuing a 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 probability of success figure, when they know damn well the $35M they are about to spend is actually 95% sure to be money down the drain.

I like how they categorically state they wouldn't even touch a 1 in 8 (12.5%) or a 1 in 10 (10%) odds of success prospect, regardless of how large the potential upside might be. Those odds are a lot higher than what we were told!

How the Directors could look digger in the eye and tell him the odds of success truly are 1 in 20 really does make me feel sick.

Proving they mislead the market is near impossible under the current framework, unfortunately - but the whole thing really is shameful. I know the TO Panel are still doing a retrospective on this, I have chatted to them and others are yet to meet with them. With a little luck they will be able to make some improvements for future SoA's so that minority holders are not at such a significant information disadvantage to the majority owner.

Fortunately in this case we were thoughtful and not so easily duped. But you can see how in other cases minority interests can easily be screwed over.

[mistaTea]

SP seems to be holding steady around 61 - 62c.

Perhaps the recent events have at the very least caused existing shareholders to rethink how much they give their shares away for.

[Wiremu]

Beach Energy, now as a big partner of OGOG, have made a bold statement with their "wouldn't even touch a 1 in 8 (12.5%) or a 1 in 10 (10%) odds of success prospect".

With the NZO Annual Meeting two weeks away, remember these final remarks from Rosalind Archer at the Special Meeting:

"Against this, you are being asked to believe the opinions of people who are trying to maximise the value they receive for their shares.
Look at some of their complaints:
They have complained that we didn’t have a commercial adviser. We did.
They complained that Kupe’s value did not reflect the project currently underway. It does.
Imagine if we drilled Ironbark, and it came in unsuccessfully. Then imagine that as a shareholder you discovered a report exists, from which a 5 per cent chance of success at Ironbark can be derived. And then imagine that you found out the independent directors knew about it, and had not alerted you to it.
I believe it is correct and prudent to put this choice in front of you. That’s why there is a vote."

So its wrong to maximise the value we receive for our shares! Naughty, naughty minority shareholders.

That was answered with 63% of the votes of minority shareholders being lodged against the scheme she was actively promoting. Such a rejection is almost unprecedented.

Let that not be the end of the matter - we must keep up the pressure on the board to appoint truly independent directors to look after minority shareholder interests. That may only be wishful thinking, but we need to make the effort in our own best interests.

The Annual Meeting is our next chance to do so, and you know what to do with your votes for the election of directors at that meeting.

[blackcap]

Gidday team and many thanks to Wiremu for his recent post. I know that both new nominees for the NZOG Board, Samantha and Brian are working hard behind the scenes. Clearly, they don't necessarily post everything in public in this forum - but a lot going on to try and get the best for shareholders.

[CD_CHCH]

Just voted online for Brian, and voted against Rod.

Logic being, the current director's did absolutely nothing to look after and protect the interests of the small shareholders in the recent scheme of arrangement, whereas Brian was working hard behind the scenes to assist the small shareholders in NZO.

Even if as a group, the small shareholders are unsuccessful in having Brian elected and/or preventing the re-election of Rod, it should serve to send the current board a powerful message if all the small shareholders were to vote against Rod's re-election.

Hopefully given the recent public statements from Beach Energy and Cue regarding the chances of success with Ironbark, the Takeover Panels will take a long hard look at the statements made by the NZO directors, and call them to account.

[digger]

Just voted online for Brian, and voted against Rod.

Logic being, the current director's did absolutely nothing to look after and protect the interests of the small shareholders in the recent scheme of arrangement, whereas Brian was working hard behind the scenes to assist the small shareholders in NZO.

Even if as a group, the small shareholders are unsuccessful in having Brian elected and/or preventing the re-election of Rod, it should serve to send the current board a powerful message if all the small shareholders were to vote against Rod's re-election.

Hopefully given the recent public statements from Beach Energy and Cue regarding the chances of success with Ironbark, the Takeover Panels will take a long hard look at the statements made by the NZO directors, and call them to account.

so where did you get the info for voting. I have been waiting for an email message but nothing yet. Did you go to computershare? Seems I missed the action up to now but sure want to you as you have done. Your reason is sound and I sure hope small voters take it up.