We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aminex Plc | LSE:AEX | London | Ordinary Share | IE0003073255 | ORD EUR0.001 (CDI) |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.375 | 46.88% | 1.175 | 1.15 | 1.20 | 1.175 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 58,697,740 | 16:27:57 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs | 64k | -4.06M | -0.0010 | -11.70 | 49.27M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
31/5/2016 21:18 | PJ1, just in case you have'nt seen this. But it all seems pretty fair and reasonable to me. Term of Agreement "Exploration up to 11 years divided into an initial and two renewal periods of 4, 4 and 3 years respectively, Appraisal normally 2 years but more if necessary. Development and Production - 25 years with the possibility of an extension for a further 20 years." Legal & Fiscal PETROLEUM (Exploration and Production) Act, 1980 Petroleum exploration and development in Tanzania is governed by the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act 1980. This Act vests title to petroleum deposits within Tanzania in the State and is designed to create a favorable legal environment for exploration by oil companies. The Act expressly permits the Government to enter into a petroleum agreement under which an oil company may be granted exclusive rights to explore for and produce petroleum. Under the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) arrangements currently in place in Tanzania, TPDC is granted the licences under the Act with the Government and TPDC entering into PSA's with the oil companies. The terms of the PSA's form the basis of the licences and are negotiable. The legislative framework offers considerable flexibility to the Government in negotiating acceptable terms with oil companies. An exploration licence normally consists of 60 blocks (each block being a 5 minute x 5 minute graticular unit) but the Act does provide flexibility for more than one licence to be granted and, in certain cases, for a licence to comprise more than 60 blocks. The Act also provides for exploration, appraisal, development and production periods. Full details are given in the next section. In the event of a commercial discovery, the holder of an exploration licence has a right to a development licence, subject to the development plan ensuring the most efficient and beneficial use of the petroleum resources. Model Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) Tanzania's Model PSA serves as the basic document for negotiations between foreign oil companies, the Government and TPDC. It sets out the terms under which exploration and production can take place. Although the terms - which are internationally competitive -mirror closely those incorporated in earlier PSA's concluded in Tanzania, the Government's flexible approach allows for the negotiation of the important issues (such as Area, Work Program and Economic terms etc.) within the framework of production sharing arrangements. The Government's objective is to negotiate terms with the oil industry which are fair and balanced, bearing in mind the usual risks associated with exploration and the State's legitimate desire for revenues as owner of a depleting, non-renewable, natural resource. The Government seeks to encourage the development of small and marginal discoveries; obtain a higher share of profits from the more attractive fields, and satisfy national objectives such as the transfer of petroleum skills and the acquisition of more data. The following is a brief summary of some of the key terms in Tanzania's Model PSA;- Parties to the Contract The parties to the Contract shall be the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation, and the oil company. Type of Agreement Production sharing in which the foreign oil company undertakes the exploration, development and production activities. Contract Area Each PSA can cover more than one exploration Licence. Term of Agreement Exploration up to 11 years divided into an initial and two renewal periods of 4, 4 and 3 years respectively, Appraisal normally 2 years but more if necessary. Development and Production - 25 years with the possibility of an extension for a further 20 years. | blackgold00 | |
31/5/2016 21:16 | Quite an assembly of sceptics in recent days. With no position of course, some are (re)appearing to offer advice to counter the lamentable folly of those deluded AEX investors, who may mistakenly anticipate cash flow from KN, and worse improving prospects in Ruvuma. Thank goodness we have NGMS (aka Jonny), Epic Dan, PJ1 and the admirable Skin Wa*ker to bring us back from the precipice. | lfdkmp | |
31/5/2016 20:21 | 31/5/2016- still NIL cash received allegedly.. | pj 1 | |
31/5/2016 20:12 | I was absolutely gobsmacked that after emtyends extremely PROMPT Bulletin Board response to me, that not one other poster attempted to continue the communications on the thread, with him. Somehow looking at a gift horse in the mouth springs to mind. Then again its your hard earned cash propping the Company up. | pj 1 | |
31/5/2016 20:03 | Vike- they have no right. They have the right to apply the right to extend. That is 2 entirely different kettle of fish. The key question is who else may pick up the 'rights', and how many, and can they action quicker than AEX. Unless brown paper parcels are exchanging hands of course. Would you trst the Tanz. Govmt. and AEX's 'close' relationship? Allegedly IMO Why not ask AEX for an update? I'm sure such an open and honest Company such as Aminex, with a fantastic record of shareholder returns, would love to fully explain to their owners the full extents of their current negotiations. On a more serious note---I really do believe shareholders here (who own the Company) are ignorant of how much strength they have in unison to influence and direct , and ascertain the truth. But you abstain? Im sure Brokermandan, Doc or even sharesoc (if any of you have ever heard of it never mind join it) would be glad to offer advice (assuming you subscribe of course) In fact, surprise, surprise, you could even ask emptyend direct on here. Wow what a coup and brilliant idea that would be. He's recently proven how much he loves to communicate via the Bulletin Boards with interested parties. Try it? | pj 1 | |
31/5/2016 16:29 | 20 mins ago, you wrote "They have absolutely not right whatsoever to extend the Ruvuma drilling deadline." That statement seemed pretty conclusive to me (and misleading). And yes, it is my "guess" it will be extended, as I said above. The company was one of the first investors in TZ, have invested over $100m to date, and literally have a rig sitting on top of the N2 target site, ready to go. And they have a history of having their extensions at every request. And, AEX has proven they can bring gas to market via KN1. There are only 3 producers in Tanzania, one of which is us. IMO, I think TPDC sees us as a partner, and will want to keep working together. As AEX focuses more specifically on a few key targets, I wouldn't be surprised if they relinquish some of the Ruvuma acreage. From their presentation, it's clear which drill sites are priorities. | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 16:15 | Yes they have a right to apply I wasn't arguing that. You suggest they only have to apply to have them granted which is a total falsehood. If you were TPDC would you grant rights for further exploration given the continual failure of the Company to meet previous obligation's on the acreage twice now? I'm sure they will get to keep NT-1 appraisal area as it's a legal minefield if they don't but anything else if far far from a shoe-in. They also shouldn't bother with the deep water seismic, no ones interested in any gas out there all the current discoveries look stranded given the current market for some foreseeable time. | ngms27 | |
31/5/2016 16:07 | ngms 27, Really? Do your homework before stating such things. Those are the terms if no extensions are granted. The extension terms are clearly stated on AEX's website. 1) Ruvuma Exploration Area: Right to apply for 1 year extension ending 2017 2) Ruvuma Appraisal Area: Right to apply for 3 year extension ending 2019 Yes, perhaps TPDC will not grant AEX the extensions that they are entitled to. My guess is they will. JB and N Ritson from SOLO are even in Tanzania this week, as per SOLO's twitter page. Hopefully we'll hear something on this shortly, as I'm sure it is a requirement for Financing/Farmout terms. | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 15:58 | You'll know that we're only planning to complete seismic for part of the acreage, targeting Pande West and Balungi leads. It therefore depends on how much km2 we will cover of course, which we don't yet know. Any dummy with access to Google can look up the estimated rates for offshore seismics, though this may not price in the current market discounts. We'll pick up 90% of the costs of course. The important point here is that we have years to drill Nyuni. Ideally it can happen sooner than later if there's a farmout market. But if it happens later, as TZ's LNG plans become clearer, so be it. Ruvuma is our priority, not offshore. | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 15:56 | They have absolutely not right whatsoever to extend the Ruvuma drilling deadline. It's quite simple: Drill 4 wells by 31st January 2016 or lose rights over KN-1 (upto 15%) and risk ceeding all the acreage other than NT-1 It really is that bleak | ngms27 | |
31/5/2016 15:37 | Deary me. Go on then Vike, how much do you think this Nyuni seismic is going to cost? | dan_the_epic | |
31/5/2016 15:12 | In the next two months, I suspect we'll see the following: - Commencement of KN1 delivering 30Mmscf/day from July, delivering USD1m net CF per mo. - Extension of Ruvuma drilling terms, as is within our PSA rights - New financing deal for N2 drilling, possibly N3 as well, and existing loan Some of these might be announced sooner. Much sooner. Cash flow from KN1 can cover Nyuni seismic, esp if not started until 2017. I don't think it's been fully appreciated how much having a producing asset and positive cash flows will transform AEX's capital structure and solvency. I'm sure some of the more foul-mouthed bears on this Board will disagree. | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 14:29 | Symbion socking it to 'em! | warbaby43 | |
31/5/2016 14:24 | Utterly delusional Vike. No money to do any bloody 3D seismic that will attrack partners within that timeframe. The only partner of scale was RAKgas who would've loved a shot at big resources, but they walked away, LOL. At least there are more and more sane Aminex watchers by the way. Some of the tripe that is peddled is bonkers. | dan_the_epic | |
31/5/2016 14:22 | More positive sentiment towards Tanzania and its gas would be beneficial to Aminex and in that regard LNG movement would be helpful as, indeed, would news that Shell intended to retain for development the BG Tanzanian assets rather than putting them up for sale. | warbaby43 | |
31/5/2016 13:07 | LNG is not our game. Leave that to the majors with longer time horizons and export networks. If we make a discovery in Nyuni, the proposal in the April Corp presentation is to link a subsea pipeline to the Songo Songo plant to serve the domestic/EAC market. Much faster. Nyuni 3D seismic planned for late 2016/early 2017, then farmout. | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 11:40 | While Tanzania may lay claim to c 55tcf of offshore gas, given the existing world gas glut and relatively depressed prices some way into the future, the mega scale C$30bn+ onshore LNG that was previously discussed looks increasingly like dreamland until at least some way into the next decade especially given the distance offshore of much of the gas and the challenging nature of the seabed. Smaller scale FLNG, therefore looks a deal more realistic especially for nearshore (Nyuni?)and onshore gas. I have previously posted about Golar FLNG but there is clearly also Exmar in this market: | warbaby43 | |
31/5/2016 11:28 | JB an investment banker? Are you kidding? He wasn't much good at it clearly. | skinwalker | |
31/5/2016 10:59 | ngms27, i) Pay Investment Bankers, because they joined profitable businesses and are worth it. ii) Don't pay entrepreneurs or industry builders because they don't work. Got it, thanks! (Interestingly, JB previously was an I-banker. Hmm, I might need to re-think your model) | vike1 | |
31/5/2016 09:50 | When you consider that they are working for a loss making company, have eroded shareholder value, the company is only worth 25m my view is that the salaries are totally outrageous. What's even more outrageous is comparing them the Investment Bankers who actually work for very profitable global business's worth billions. My view is that they are actually Merchant Bankers taking the p1ss out of shareholders. The whole process of them coming on board has a certain whiff about it. | ngms27 | |
30/5/2016 10:28 | Wow...has anyone tried begging letters to recoup loses directly from the millionaire management. If any of you aren't reading, again, personally I'm up a little over the years with a current small position just above your new 7%. Also are these part-time jobs and can I have one? I'm free most Thursday mornings. | gerryjames | |
30/5/2016 08:58 | Warbaby, DantheEpic, I don't think that's true. Would love to see even the tiniest shred of evidence on that quite extravagant claim. | vike1 | |
30/5/2016 07:28 | At the Investment Banking level. I agree it's a lot of money and don't care to estimate what ppl on this Board earn, but I think you're underestimating what senior mgmt earn. If you disagree, take a flip through ANY Annual Report's remuneration report of a junior O&G company to compare. AEX is well below average. Again, i'm not condoning the amounts, just reporting facts. As for IB, here's a link of UK MD salaries. Not CEO level, just MD. hxxp://uk.businessin | vike1 | |
30/5/2016 07:26 | Dan_the_Epic, glad you are hereabouts to confirm or otherwise the accuracy of my memory with regard to this issue of the Canyon Cronies putting in at the Placing shedloads of "their own cash." As I recall, there was much groupie whoopin' and hollerin' at the time at the notion that they were "putting in over a million pounds of their own money." On the other hand, though, didn't you do some close research and reading of the small print in subsequent accounts to demonstrate that far from being "their own money" it was in fact Aminex shareholder money being recycled through Aminex to fund in total, or at least in very large part, the purchase of their 191m Placing shares? | warbaby43 | |
30/5/2016 01:23 | 170,000 pounds? Average salary? I'm sorry but you are quite mad. That is a huge amount and I can GUARANTEE that not a single person reading this thread has that kind of income. | bunbooster2 |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions