Re: 60% of sealion sold for $400million All possibilities, and we'll know the actual answer when it happens.However, in the background, HMG wants its defence spending refunded and the latest row with Russia once again makes everyone nervous about energy dependence on states which could suddenly pull the plug, or use it as a threat/lever, etc.The FI region is probably the only one left for the UK, so I'd say that Export Credit financing is a distinct probability and while we continue to speculate, everything will become clear quite soon.
Re: 60% of sealion sold for $400million Or PMO put development on hold.... rockhopper run out of cash......
60% of sealion sold for $400million rkh got $250million in cash and exploration carrynow development carry could become $150millionmeans we sold sealion 60% for $400millionwhat a disaster this deal has becomeSam, have some balls and tell pmo that no more reduction in development carry
Re: shocking? rkh is pmo's bi*tch vendor financing is from vendor and not from pmo, so it should NOT affect the carry, in my view it should be as follows:- $1.5billion total- $400million vendor financing- $1100million remaining split on 60/40 to pmo/rkh so rkh share $440million then now deduct $337million development carry and rkh pay $103millionbut rkh will bend over again and again and get f*ucked by pmo
Re: shocking? rkh is pmo's bi*tch Suresh it has to change to get it to work with the vendor finance etc... pmo cant afford the carry anyway. It wont just switch to $150 million tho imo.Funny tho PMO are doing exactly what they did with EnQuest.. let the market batter the share price due to poor sentiment... then pick up the pieces on the cheap.
very disappointing development carry $675million in 2014split it into two so it becomes $337millionnow reduce that to $150millionwhat a dog this company is becoming
shocking? rkh is pmo's bi*tch From Edison reportGiven the debt-biased financing structure outlined by PMO, the carry net to RKH of the $375m equity finance for Phase 1 pre-first oil would only be $150m. We would not be surprised to see an evolution of the existing farm-out agreement.WTH
Re: New Edison report third mistake was the expensive drilling with not much result, but we can put that down to premier or luck.
Re: New Edison report If / when project goes a head then share price will be higher and rkh can raise small amount of cash through new shares, e.g. if share prices goes to 80pence then raise $10million will not be a problemwhat will be worrying will be cash to appraise the isobel/elaine, when rig arrives in falklands for development, same time they will do some appraisal wells on isobel / elaine and development carry will not cover the cost of that, so from where that money will come?rkh has done few mistakes:1. acquiring MOG2. diluting company by huge amount to acquire foglNo. 2 could prove to be good, let us see
Re: New Edison report It does seem like a strange number.Of the $18.5m Edison includes for capex in 2018, $4m can be attributed to Egypt which is disclosed, leaving $14.5m (or potentially c$13m if one includes the $1.6m cash payment on the disposal of Civita) that must be associated with the Falklands.$4m was spent in H1 2017 on "pre-development activities" and one can extrapolate from the February presentation that a similar amount was spent in H2 2017 for $8m in total. It's hard to envisage what's actually accounting for this amount given the level of activity, but it's certainly not apparent why it should increase into 2018, assuming there's no residual close out costs.Edison are RKH's paid broker (i.e. paid specifically to write research/promote the company), so one would expect them to have a reasonable grasp or at least run the numbers by the company for reasonableness. That being said, any such confirmation would have been equally market sensitive, so they may just be angling on the conservative side.Ultimately it doesn't really matter if the project is sanctioned. And if it's not, well the cash balance isn't going to be a saving grace either.
Re: New Edison report I'm hugely surprised about that US$15m cash burn number, and am sceptical of it. Rockhopper's total capex in 2017 came to $27m, but a whopping $16m of that came from the exploration campaign close out costs (shockingly). Remove that, and total capex in 2017 was some $12m--a figure I'd expect to be in line with this year's outlay (no Ombrina Mare tripod removal in 2018, for example). Anyhow, combine the $12m of capex with around $6m of G&A, it means total spending this year should not come in more than $20m, and hopefully a little less. Either way, with revenue of $20m+, I would expect the reduction in the cash pile to be no more than $10m (keeping in mind that $20m will be taxed, and there are cost of sales etc). Two things to note though:1) I asked Rockhopper about anticipated cash burn in 2018 and they said it was market sensitive so they could not share it. 2) Rockhopper's cash burn has always been more than I had anticipated. We should be getting the annual results next month, so we won't have to wait long to find out.
Re: New Edison report $15m cash burn this year shows what an utter disaster the med portfolio has been from day 1. Lets just hope we can re-coup our losses through the litigation.
New Edison report See link below[link]
Re: Keep the faith While things will accelerate after production starts, as far as the sp is concerned, that will take off long before first oil.
Re: Keep the faith No argument about the value (and interesting to see comparators for what might be if we get sanction), but note that the earliest Sea Lion will see any oil is the back half of 2022. The development is estimated to take 3 1/2 to 4 years with sanction/approval from FIG not until the beginning of 2019 in a best case scenario. 2023 is probably more realistic. "Realistic" makes me shudder a little given the history...