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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tethys | LSE:TPL | London | Ordinary Share | KYG876361091 | ORD USD0.10 |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.00 | 0.00% | 1.125 | - | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 0 | N/A | 0 |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
28/11/2016 14:49 | Anyone had a email from certain people connected with olisol | the_isolator | |
28/11/2016 13:51 | Three weeks since we heard about the Kumars. The deal was just a simple placing that does not require any approvals either regulatory or from shareholders. In their announcement TPL said it would be done and dusted by the 11th, more than two weeks ago. So what is holding up the deal? Admin/due diligence? Olisol shenanigans? Lenders? Other suitors finally coming out of the woodwork? Kaz officials? Bod changed its mind and wants more competitive offer from the Kumars? The Kumars changed their mind? | casual47 | |
28/11/2016 09:47 | Casual, I'm not saying you are wrong, or anyone else is right just that you were starting to speak as if it were fact, which it is not, perhaps maybe not yet. | dorset64 | |
28/11/2016 09:24 | Of course it's speculation. The happy scenario of Mattias The Saviour just seems unlikely. Mattias is taking the shilling from someone for some reason. I doubt he is doing it so he can add another directorship role to his LinkedIn profile or to get some extra pocket money. Just trying to understand. While the original Caymans loan was unsecured it had to be renegotiated in order to allow Olisol to proceed with the deal. As part of that first reiteration the Caymans lender was strong enough to negotiate a clause that would secure the loan against all the assets. As it happens that clause is no longer valid now. But it shows the strength of the lender. | casual47 | |
28/11/2016 08:21 | Dorset it has been commented on before :-) (I am not claiming that all or indeed any of my extracts were from casual47) LFDKMP 27 Oct '16 - 21:55 - 11882 of 12531 3 0 Edit Extracts from a number of posts since the last announcement: "1.Let us assume that Tethys and PAM have been actively involved in discussions with potential strategic partners in order to fund its exploration business. 3. The Claim by EGG, a subsidiary of Olisol for non-delivery of oil is weak on the basis that it owes TAG money for oil already delivered. 6. It is hoped that Tethys and PAM have kept potential partners fully informed of the developments so far and that they are quite comfortable in stepping in to partner Tethys in order to grow the business. This last minute court case nonsense is an act of desperation, they are trying to invoke a default trigger based on a spurious default that they have set up themselves. No need to worry too much as " act in haste and repent at leisure " applies here. Was it part of some kind of game of brinkmanship or was it because they felt able to do it because they know they had something on the table that was a better deal?" What concerns me about these posts is that they are presenting conjecture as plausible fact. In addition they appear to be applying evaluation criteria that would be reasonable if the jurisdiction was UK. However,this is Kazakhstan and my experience is that what is the norm and reasonable/spurious in the UK, may well be very different in other jurisdictions, particularly if other "interested parties" have influence in the judicial process. I'll make a prediction. In the coming months there will be a series of actions that would be outrageous under UK jurisdiction, but nonetheless will restructure TPL and transfer ownership of TPL assets to other parties. This transfer will pull the rug from under my feet and the feet of other non influential shareholders. However, influential shareholders will participate in the restructuring ( amazing what you can do with secured funding) and their interests will by and large be protected. Watch this space PS I am a big boy, or more accurately an "old boy". I am big enough and ugly enough to do my own research. However, a new input into any future research will be a natural aversion to any speculative investment that has previously been identified by Mr Botting (aka as JTCod). This experience with TPL (and also TAIH and to a lesser extent GNG), means I have since invested in a very long bargepole | lfdkmp | |
28/11/2016 08:14 | LFDKMP If that is the primary aim of a bulletin board, then this one is a world leader. :-) | seroserio | |
28/11/2016 08:13 | lol LFDKMP, it sure is what you say but just pointing out that casual47 was almost at a point of stating it as fact, which presently it most certainly is not. | dorset64 | |
28/11/2016 07:26 | Oh Dorset, you spoilsport. I thought that was one of the primary purposes of bulletin boards: To dress up conjecture (fantasy?) as erudite analysis. What's an intelligent pi to do with his/her time all day? | lfdkmp | |
28/11/2016 07:25 | Casual, So you now accept that the Plena/Sjoborg BOD appointment was not related to Cayman after all, but " having their own Cayman guy on the BOD could have been a compromise". My optimistic view is that Wells and May may come up with a solution to remove the short term loans of Cayman, AGR Energy and Olisol's W/C in the near future. The sensible way forward is to come up with a medium term funding strategy based on an asset based loan which includes the repayment of all the short term loans and also provides cash to finance its drilling of existing oil and gas wells. This can be achieved by using the existing proved oil and gas reserves as collateral in order to meet its commitments of about $40m over the next 3-5 years. | hguess16 | |
28/11/2016 07:07 | Casual, you write: The Cayman's loan could have been renegotiated.... Something similar may be going on now...... The Cayman guys may well think....... Unless it has already been renegotiated otherwise...... They will probably prefer a scenario...... Everything you write is pure & utter conjecture, nothing else. The only FACT we know about the Caymans loan is that at present it is an un-secured loan, even though naimanka appears to lap up every negative you write regarding this loan. Who knows why or for what reason the new addition was made to the board, it's also pure conjecture if you were to post that the reason he was put onto the BoD's was because they've just made a 50p all share buy-out of TPL and are going to pay us Shareholders an additional £1 per share to take it private!!! lol It's all noise until such time the RNS is released and yes, it may well be something to do with the lender requesting Sjoberg to sit on the board, but seeing as its an un-secured loan one wouldn't had thought they would have that much power given, apart from initially giving the monies, they have no say in the running of the company. Are you suggesting that the Cayman lenders have such power with an un-secured loan that they can literally insist upon putting one of 'their own' on the board as, if Bill Wells said no, what can they do apart from jump up & down and cry out loud, welcome to the world of being a Tethys investor. We shall all know in the coming days of what is happening behind the scenes so I would rather suggest we stick to what we actually know as factual right now, and not try to second guess anything as, if we could had 12 months or more ago, none of us would be posting on this bulletin board. I'm not saying your right or wrong, but lets just wait for the facts to surface first. | dorset64 | |
28/11/2016 00:29 | The lien would only be created once the Olisol deal completed. As this didn't happen the lien did not take effect and the Cayman's loan remains unsecured. Unless it has already been renegotiated otherwise, of course. It seems to me if the Cayman's lender is keen to get their money back, they can't squeeze TPL too hard. If they put unreasonable liens in any renegotiated contract it may put off 3rd parties from investing in TPL. They will probably prefer a scenario where TPL remains a going concern. Having their own guy on the BOD could have been a compromise. | casual47 | |
28/11/2016 00:13 | Quite the find, what amazes me is that they seemingly have pledged all their assets essentially to this lender so they (Tethys) can't have much wriggle room left at all if they have no income. What a mess. | naimanka74 | |
27/11/2016 10:39 | The Cayman's loan could have been renegotiated with as conditions 1. It is now secured and 2. Mattias joins the BOD so he can keep an eye on things. The Caymans loan has already been updated once, earlier this year, where the loan was going to be secured against 20% of the gas revenue once the Olisol deal completed with Caymans having the right to seize assets if no payment was forthcoming. Obviously that has fallen through on two counts: olisol and the gas contract. The reason it got updated was because one of the defaults specified in the original loan was a change of ownership, which would have been triggered with the Olisol deal. So TPL had to renegotiate the loan in order to be able to proceed with Olisol. Something similar may be going on now. The Cayman guys may well think "once bitten twice shy" hence the new arrangement. The only reason we know the Caymans loan was renegotiated is because they published the contract on SEDAR. Here it is: hTTtp://www.sedar.co Note the new addition "Section 3 Lien" | casual47 | |
27/11/2016 09:33 | I personally see it as a positive that Mattias joint Tethys not only as an advisor, but actually fully upon the BOD's. With the post comes responsibilities as previously mentioned. Bill Wells is, for me, a positive to have him on the BoD's as he too needs the share price far far higher than it is today. In fact and although others keep bemoaning the current loans situation, I don't as in effect if TPL went bust, which I don't believe it will, then as ALL of the loans are UN-SECURED not one person will get any monies back, not a penny. The only way for them, and us to get a payback from this share is for the company to be trading, drilling shallow wells & selling its production in order that, in turn, the share price rises and everyone, including us, gets paid. | dorset64 | |
27/11/2016 09:25 | It certainly makes more sense that Mattias is there to help or indeed protect an investment (former or latter) rather than oversee a fire sale | 1399peter | |
27/11/2016 09:20 | I read that the Cayman lender is an investment fund. I find it incredible that an investment fund in Cayman should ask Sjoborg/Plena, another investment fund, to get involved in order to protect its $8.5m in Tethys. In any case let us lay down the big third party loans to Tethys: Cayman Investment Fund ( Khan ) $8,5m AGR Energy $7.5m Oliosl W/C $5.8m ----- $21.8 plus interest say $23m In contrast, PAM with ALR may have invested at least $30m The value of Tethys proved reserves in KAZ, based on the Gustavson Report in 2012 could have a value of at least $50m at current prices. Olisol has paid $6.3m for 63m shares. It also has a great deal to lose if Tethys goes to the wall. Based on the above analysis and Sjoborg joining the Board on 16 Nov knowing all the facts about the Tethys financial issues, I am very surprised that a few articulate PI observer/analysts are suggesting that Tethys is on its last legs and that PAM and Bill Wells are going to abandon ship without a fight. While I appreciate that the delay is causing even more frustration among PI's and that the prophets of doom are creating a sense of heightened uncertainty about the future of Tethys, I would hope that Bill Wells and his team are actively involved in a plan to resuscitate the patient with a welcome dose of cash infusion based on its assets !. | hguess16 | |
27/11/2016 09:04 | My two bits without any prior knowledge: Mattias Sjoborg – Senior Advisor, Investments Mattias Sjoborg began his career at RMC plc where he led teams in the restructuring of group operations. He joined Plena Group in 2001, and has led teams through due diligence, negotiation and the restructuring of a large Eastern European privatisation. Mattias has nearly 15 years’ investment experience in origination, due diligence and structuring cross border transactions related to privately held companies and privatisations, in predominantly emerging markets. He has an MBA degree from IMD Lausanne, Switzerland. ==================== First of all, Plena have two types of managers, one are the operational team and the second is the investment team. Matters Sjoborg above is situated within Plena's investment team and, in being so, the investment team appears to only be involved with investments made BY Plena, not investments made by OTHER co's or investment firms in the Caymans UNLESS, that investment firm is indeed Plena itself. It quite clearly states upon their website that, as a senior advisor he sits on the boards of companies in order to strengthen their team and to take the company forward in order to make a profit. Further, it goes on to state: Active Ownership: The synergy between operational management and shareholders is fundamental to the success of the business. Our ‘hands on’ approach means we cultivate strong and respectful relationships, so we can better understand and support the business. And finally: Our operating companies are run by professional management teams, which report to the supervisory board of operations. The supervisory board always consists of a Plena member, an industry expert, and a local businessperson with local insight and knowledge. The CEO or managing director, as well as other main company directors, also take part in meetings when required. Plena Group is 100% private and does not publish any of its financial performance information. I have then, given they are a private company and do not post any financial information to find out if they themselves hold corporate or accounts in the Cayman Islands, thus i can find nothing out. Could it actually be that the 'mystery' Caymans investor is actually the Plena Group as, being private it would not be a surprise to me to find their accounts held in such a place given the favourable tax conditions etc. Just a thought to discuss but it would add up to me given all of the above and, even seeing as there is a tie-in between Bill Wells and these guys, there is no way that I can see the Plena Group allowing one of their top advisors and a son of the founder, to simply be sat on a BoD babysitting someone else' investment, unless it was actually their own money. Who knows. | dorset64 | |
27/11/2016 07:27 | I suppose we have to look at all possible scenario's. It's very hard to second guess these situations. Casual could well be right about Mattias but on the more optimistic side he could also be there to make sure that the next injection of cash actually gets things movings, instead of just paying wages. Also it doesn't make sense to me to allow Tethy's to go bankrupt as it has a Market cap of £4.2m I doubt you would get much back on $10m already invested. Any business person worth their salts would be able to see that with the right investment Tethy's has a very bright future if of course it can hang onto those incredible assets. | 1399peter | |
26/11/2016 21:18 | The contribution he can make does not necessarily align to the interests of us PIs. That's why it's useful to try to understand what his motives are. It is right to obsess about the Cayman lender because their loan amounts to nearly 10 million USD and matures this March. They may even be within their rights to trigger a default given the recent developments. So they may have quite a bit of say in the immediate future of the company. Let's hope at the end of this PIs are left with something. Very rarely they are. | casual47 | |
26/11/2016 21:07 | Casual, You seem to be obsessed by the Cayman Lender !. Maybe it's time to move on to a more optimistic scenario and consider that a new non-exec director can actually be involved in getting things done for Tethys. Talking from experience in emerging markets myself, I see no problem in a new non-exec director coming on board to make a positive contribution to a company. I simply do not see any whiff of negligence arising here ! | hguess16 | |
26/11/2016 20:11 | I would assume so. If he is acting on behalf of Caymans I assume he is there to make sure that whatever happens to TPL his client gets his money back. This may be by already having renegotiated the loan to make it secured. I don't think this would require RNS even so we wouldn't know. | casual47 | |
26/11/2016 19:56 | So while we have no clue why Mattias has gotten involved, it makes no sense for him to have gotten involved if he expects a bankruptcy to be forthcoming... Is that fair to say, Casual? | benandemmiboo | |
26/11/2016 18:05 | Hguess, everything you said he can do as a consultant. Why did they make him a director? Being a director comes with responsibilities enshrined in the companies act. He could be sued together with all the other directors later on should there be a whiff of negligence. | casual47 | |
26/11/2016 17:37 | Casual, I hope Mattias Sjoborg has not got involved purely because of the Cayman loan. If anything, he may be involved in a broader advisory and possibly funding role for the whole Tethys business. With his cross border and emerging markets know-how, I would expect Sjoborg to provide Bill Wells and Ken May with constructive advice on a medium term strategy rather than a short-term solution related to the impending call-up of the Cayman loan. I would further speculate that perhaps Tethys is having second thoughts on the dilution of Tethys shares via the Soosaipillai/Kumar proposal because of the delay in agreeing to that deal, which should have been concluded more than two weeks ago. It is possible that Sjoberg came in with some new proposals on financing and that Bill Wells has decided that he should come on board. Let's hope we have some news early next week !. | hguess16 | |
26/11/2016 12:54 | The question is....what has Plena got to do with it, apart from having one of their directors on board? Plena is an investment company and the reason they are successful is because they are able to raise money for themselves, so unless they are putting money into TPL having the new guy as director is not going to help much in the immediate future. If he became director as part of some deal between Plena and TPL you'd expect the sequence of events to be: 1. deal is agreed, 2. deal is announced by RNS, 3. Plena are allowed to nominate a director to the BOD.....and not the other way around. Sure, the new guy may have experience and connections but he is not going to do it just because he's mates with Bill Wells. If the new guy is critical to TPL's success then there must be something in it for Plena or himself personally. This is why my previous posts on the subject speculated on the Plena guy being perhaps "forced" onto TPL by one of the lenders, most likely the Caymans lender to make sure they get their money back. As the Caymans lender is big on his privacy (the contract of the loan was published with their details blanked out and TPL only refers to them as "Caymans lender") it would make sense for them to nominate someone who can act on their behalf. E.g. perhaps Plena are managing his money on other projects already. | casual47 |
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