You’ve just added your first Follow! This is a brand new feature that will be at the core of several new tools and personalized information feeds that are coming soon.
Please continue to add stocks to your Follow list so that when the new tools and feeds roll out, you’ll immediately get to make use of them! We will alert early adopters of the Follow list to these new features first.
Aminex Share Chat (AEX)
|Share Name||Share Symbol||Market||Type||Share ISIN||Share Description|
|Aminex||LSE:AEX||London||Ordinary Share||IE0003073255||ORD EUR0.001|
|Price Change||% Change||Share Price||Bid Price||Offer Price||High Price||Low Price||Open Price||Shares Traded||Last Trade|
|Industry Sector||Turnover (m)||Profit (m)||EPS - Basic||PE Ratio||Market Cap (m)|
|Oil & Gas Producers||1.4||-10.4||-1.3||-||24.70|
Aminex Share Discussion Threads
|Can I please remind everyone about the rules around swearing on this internet message board. Many posters are elderly or have young children in the family. Colourful language should be avoided.||bunbooster2|
|"BLVN mention conspicuous by its absence in retrospect" I agree. With hindsight from both the AEX and BLVN side there were indications it wasn't going to happen from before the holiday season. BLVN had that slidedeck with Tanzania relegated to a footnote and flagged as 'if the deal procedes'. Numbers coming out of AEX were all minus BLVN share.||bunbooster2|
|horse-racing transparent. LOL||blackgold00|
|The Panto may be over but the Greek Tragety continues behind unreadable masks. I'm off horse-racing much more transparent.||gerryjames|
|It would appear that it was the timing of or the acceleration of the work program that they were all unable to agree on.
this from the farm-out RNS, my brackets
|"Did they respond to shareholder pressure with cold feet and decide that was the easy way out" Yep, could well have been that. Weak, weak management if so - but little value in speculating. That whole pantomime was very frustrating. I am frustrated. Oh well, onwards to this next news on Ntorya that the close lipped Neil Ritson has been promising (or was that it)!||bunbooster2|
|What do you mean couldn't agree to the work program proposals? Couldn't agree on dates? Couldn't agree on what should be drilled?No idea, BB. My guess would be timing, given that TPDC were apparently included in those who wouldn't agree to the proposed program. Odd though that, since it's hardly rocket science for BLVN to have known what the license requirements are when they signed the initial agreement. Did you they respond to shareholder pressure with cold feet and decide that was the easy way out? Who knows?No idea what the transferable ownership issue is, though I'd suspect it might have had something to do with what happened to the assets if the rest of the partners had agreed to a program that didn't meet the licence requirements?Peter||greyingsurfer|
|Because a rights issue doesn't dilute your stake in the asset. StepOne||stepone68|
|It'll be over money Bun not a geologist spat. "Not too worried about a rights issue" The difference between a rights issue and an asset sale is the share price A cash call will tank it and a deal on speculative assets sent it North. That's why we Farm-out before admitting our financial game plan has failed. Not sure how anyone can see them as "fundamentally" the same. Without trading this has been a disaster over the many years, stopping people exercising their rights in an open offer to avoid dilution. Most LTHs are regarding it like religion, hoping to be pleasantly surprised one day but feel they have contributed enough towards the new Church roof. Don't see it as one of those lovely but rare surprises when investors buy-in much higher than the current share price They always stated the intention was a soft loan against the GSA...now we'll see if the professionals rate their chances of profitability working with the TPDC in Tanzania under financial stress and SOLO. Assuming the well works to expectations off course.||gerryjames|
|What do you mean couldn't agree to the work program proposals? Couldn't agree on dates? Couldn't agree on what should be drilled? Warbaby - what does transferable ownership mean in this context?||bunbooster2|
|Hi WB "In discussions during the due diligence process, a forward work programme could not be agreed which would be acceptable to Aminex, ITS LENDER, the Tanzanian authorities and Solo Oil plc ("Solo")." I suspect that listening to people quoting unattributed sources on the internet is generally a mistake, and never more so that when the source is presumably, given where they are posting, someone with an interest on the other side of the argument. For what little it's worth,(and clearly my own warning applies here!) any hints I've picked up suggest that the wording of the RNS should be read exactly as written - those 4 parties as a group were not prepared to agree to the work program proposals from BLVN. Peter||greyingsurfer|
|Interesting post on the BLVN board today relating to last Monday's RNS. It comes from a S Africa based finance guy, le commissaire, who is one of that board's more regular contributors: "i did some digging post the removal from the AEX deal and from what i hear, the breakdown of agreement was more to do with "tranferable ownership". So is some re-interpretation of the RNS now appropriate "In discussions during the due diligence process, a forward work programme could not be agreed which would be acceptable to Aminex, ITS LENDER, the Tanzanian authorities and Solo Oil plc ("Solo")." (My caps)||warbaby43|
|Anyone else worried about another rights issue being announced to pay for Ntorya drilling? It's certainly possible, at least as part of a solution. Not too worried about a rights issue (or far more likely given the size - a placing) in principle, after all the BLVN deal involved handing over nearly 50% of assets, so the end result for existing shareholders wouldn't have been fundamentally different to a large placing. And I regarded that as a good deal for both parties. The issue is, of course, at what cost. I suspect ngms is being a bit pessimistic on price, but it would certainly be at a good discount to the current share price In practice, I'd suspect that failing another farmout deal the solution will be a mixed one - some new/rescheduled debt, some placing and possibly some form of forward sale of KN-1 and possibly Ntorya production. On top of which, of course there is a possible $3.5m from Solo and revenue from the US. Perhaps, ngms, you could point me to the statement that expect material production declines at KN-1 within 18 months? I don't remember seeing one. Peter||greyingsurfer|
|They have to raise capital that is substantial when compared to the market cap. This is to pay the likely $10m plus that the Argo loan now amounts to and to drill the 4 wells on Ntorya. I doubt they could get another loan (for everything that's required) given they have stated KN-1 will be in material decline within 18 months. So to me it's either a Bowleven type deal or massive rights issue that would probably have to be around 0.8p. For these very reasons I sold out when BLVN decided not to proceed.||ngms27|
|Anyone else worried about another rights issue being announced to pay for Ntorya drilling?||vike1|
|Interesting to see and contrast the sums Orca can talk about:
|not heard, as of 24 November 2015, that Orca and TPDC have agreed Commercial terms for Orca to sale future incremental gas from the Songo Songo gas field to TPDC'S and into the new Gas Infrastructure.
No doubt a price will be struck, but with Wentworth/M&P able to supply 130mmcfd and KN hopefully 30mmcfd, then at this present time I don't think TPDC is short of gas and under any pressure to offer more than they pay under WRL/M&P and AEX's GSA, whether that is agreeable or commercially viable for Orca, time will tell.
|Looking for gas?
Orca / PanAfrican Energy - We Can Produce More Gas
"When the current repair and drilling is over we expect the daily gas volumes to rise from the pre-campaign workovers and drilling of 85 million to nearly 180 million cubic feet."
|This on 4th June last year really propelled hopes and sp: "The Company is currently in discussions with a substantial financial group which has indicated a willingness in principle to make loan finance available to Aminex which will allow the Company to pay down its existing loan obligations and continue to develop its Tanzanian licences, especially the Ruvuma PSA. While there can be no certainty that these discussions will conclude satisfactorily, the Board of the Company has a reasonable expectation that an initial part of such a facility would be available prior to the commencement of production and will not be conditional on signature of the GSA in Tanzania or commencement of production" By H1 Results on 28/08/15 it was rather less bullish and the "substantial financial group" had morphed into "a major financial institution" which would have precluded Gemini "As previously reported, the Company is in discussions with a major financial institution to arrange longer term funding options for its Tanzanian work programme. Aminex continues to review alternative financing options to enable the repayment or refinancing of the corporate loan" Then on 19/11/15 came news of the BLVN farmout negotiations for which would have been going on quite some months and almost certainly preceding the H1 Results given the glacial pace at which this industry moves. So did they get the bums rush from Megabank or simply opt for the farmout when that option presented itself? Meanwhile, noting this phrase in Monday's RNS - "Aminex is currently assessing alternative ways to monetise its gas in the Ruvuma PSA acreage" struck me as intriguing. Not monetising KN-1 but Ruvuma gas! Wasn't that the Gemini format where they provided funding and then took a percentage of production revenue?||warbaby43|