We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global Energy | GED | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 14.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.00 | 14.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 09/2/2017 10:03 by eezymunny The issue novice62 is that the vessels have been bought from companies related to the GED directors.My reading is that, best case, these vessels are old, laid up, and will simply drain cash unless the oil price, and therefore offshore dev't, picks up a fair bit further. It looks like a great transfer of risk from related parties companies to GED. If the ships never get used profitably again GED's cash pile will gradually disappear as loans (for the vessels) are paid back to the related parties. I guess it might work out OK if these vessels can be put to work in the future but I really really struggle to think that this was the best use of GED's cash pile... |
Posted at 06/2/2017 23:13 by hugepants Anangf, Agree that those who sold out immediately the money was loaned got it completely right but it does not have to be a 100% loss from here. For me the terms did not look too bad because worst case GED would earn some decent interest and take on a couple of boats. As it turns out they've taken on a whole fleet of rust-buckets. |
Posted at 17/1/2017 08:57 by ghhghh My concern with this deal is that yes, oil will bounce but for long?As soon as GED get a charter they will have to invest significant amount getting the vessel back into service. Bound to be problems/unforeseen costs. How long the charter? To what extent will it cover these costs? I suspect these are short term charters. If they can charter out for 10 yrs then good deal!!! Then at the mercy of any oil price fall which will result in a pile of useless junk. Assume everyone voting against FWIW. The related parties have over 50% of total shares so should easily get 75% of actual vote. Also have you emailed GED? I have fwiw! |
Posted at 17/1/2017 07:42 by gbill11 The average age of the transaction B vessels is 36 years.The Company is incurring non-recurring costs associated with the Transactions and the Admission process. The Directors are firm in their view that the Company will not take on uneconomic work in order to have its vessels in service. Accordingly, it is likely that the vessels will remain inactive for a considerable period until the oil price recovers and exploration and production operations return in the shallow water areas of the Gulf of Mexico. The Company will continue to incur maintenance and docking costs which may not be covered by its earnings while the vessels remain inactive. The Company's strong cash balance will enable it to adopt such an approach for the foreseeable future. Upon a recovery in the market, Global will determine in what order it will put its vessels into service (if at all). DIVIDEND POLICY The Company has not to date paid any dividends and has no current plans to do so. Under the terms of the Convertible B Loan Notes and the Convertible C Loan Notes while any of such notes remaining outstanding the Company shall not declare or pay any cash or share dividends to be paid to its shareholders for three years following the issuance date of those Notes. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS Everest and Everest Vessel Holdings are affiliated companies of the Quasha family trusts which also have an interest in Lyford, an existing shareholder in Global. Alan Quasha, the proposed seller of Everest Vessel Holdings is a principal beneficiary of the Quasha family trusts. Alan Quasha is a director of HKN, the Company's principal shareholder. In addition, Alan Quasha's brother, Wayne Quasha, controls Everest which itself controls Lyford. HKN, Lyford and the parties acting in concert with it are interested in 22,553,406 Ordinary Shares, representing 62.45 per cent. of the issued share capital of the Company. By virtue of these holdings, the entry into the Transaction Agreements with Everest and Alan Quasha and the amendments to the Everest Loan Note and issuance to Everest and Alan Quasha of Convertible Loan Notes constitute related party transactions in accordance with AIM Rule 13. |
Posted at 16/1/2017 23:36 by alamaison5 GED: Number of shares issued:36m + 33m = 69m x $0.204 (price per share) = $14,076,000 Cash in the bank 21m + new loan (just say 21m for now). So, 21m in the bank minus 14,076,000 it gives a difference of $6,924,000m. Meaning that right now the company is valued at $7,000,000 less that if has in cash, lol. Which is 33%. No bad for a discount. Also, millions of $ will be added to this valuation (loan) when the deal is done... If the 35% holder was to buy any more shares (1%) it will able to make an offer. Won't be a bad deal wouldn't it? |
Posted at 16/1/2017 08:33 by ghhghh I agree it looks like a scam but the Board of Directors appear credible?They are buying at bottom of the market so that's good but why the $5m contingent on top of $8m fair value? What is this contingent on? Everest look distressed so why aren't GED taking them to the cleaners? |
Posted at 16/1/2017 07:30 by anangf Yes big news. They can't pay so guess what the loan is being forgiven in return for some nearly new rust buckets. We will never see any cash. Special dividend or stock buy back is not going to happen. |
Posted at 15/11/2016 21:08 by hugepants The concert party holds 65% of GED. I doubt its going to be in their best interests to screw over GED shareholders given they are the biggest!Getting 12% interest on a secured loan basis is not actually a bad deal. eg. Look what Bowleven have done with a big part of their cash over the last 12 months; squandered it on a mediocre gas project. I think the concert party must value the listing otherwise they could offer GED shareholders 35p a share and I'm sure most would accept just to escape. |
Posted at 12/11/2016 13:25 by family values HughPants, are you having a laugh?2 rust buckets from the bloated shipping sector. One of our Director's other companies was unable to sell them on, and is now going to offload them to GED. Why do I fear that GED will swap a large amount of cash for these disasters? But rest assured our trusty, independent, Director, Mr Blindy McBrown Envelope, will say everything is fine. This company stinks to high heaven. Keep your ships, return the cash to shareholders! |
Posted at 23/8/2016 23:10 by neo26 reading up more, ged lent further 2m to everest, the loan guaranteed against everest 9.3m shares in GED. Total shares in ged are 31m.If everest dont pay back the $10m, their shares are cancelled in ged. Then at current share price mkt cap will be around 5.7m. With cash around $23.5m in bank the value of the company will be 3 times less than cash in bank. I hope everest dont pay back next month.... easy 3 bagger... At these levels this company is cheap, anyone else feel same.. :) |
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
Hot Features
Premium
