We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advance Energy Plc | ADV | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 0.155 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.155 | 0.155 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 16/12/2022 12:56 by sweet karolina2 So we finally know - it's tiny. It's loss making, it needs cash. No date on when the prospectus might be out, but a CPR still needs to be done and that costs money ADV does not have.We have some % but not what % ADV/BCE will hold and more importantly what overall no of shares will be and the price the £6m net of costs placing will be done at as none of those are known by anyone at the moment. A long way to go still and lots still to go wrong, including Rhein pulling out and just doing an IPO on its own as happened at 3 of the 5. With the clock ticking on AIM delisting - 9 Mar Rhein hold all the aces and a gun to LB's head. "In the event that the Proposed Transaction does not proceed the Company's share will remain suspended from trading as Beacon Energy has been a cash shell on AIM for more than 6 months." Love the bit about 0p warrants - how many of those go to current BOD? |
Posted at 14/12/2022 16:39 by oilbuy Firstly, there are projects out there that needs a home as a PLC. The board have no experience with markets and prefers to take an RTO. A lot of O&G , junior explorer companies in Africa and other countries far off , do not have a great command of English and do not know the system but need a listing as they may not have the money to do an IPO. The cost of an IPO / RTO is now far greater than 500k , I can assure you of that.However, we are where we are with ADV. Let see if that can complete on time. If they can raise and more importantly at what price.This could be the one that makes it ! |
Posted at 06/12/2022 21:41 by sweet karolina2 Chesy,You object to being called a mug, yet you applaud someone who has no interest in and knows nothing about ADV and is only here to stalk me because he got it badly wrong and has lost money elsewhere, but won't learn the lessons from it. Instead of mug, what should I call someone who has been repeatedly warned, but still got themselves trapped in a suspended share that has an at least 80% chance of losing them all their money and a less than 20% chance of just losing them some of their money? I tend to agree mug is not really enough. Does being repeatedly being proved right, as I have been for the last 6 years about this uber dog with fleas of a company, not afford me at least some credibility if not superiority? Maybe you would like to make a coherent argument backed by real world evidence why getting trapped in ADV is a sound investment on a risk / reward basis. That way maybe you might have at least some credibility. |
Posted at 29/11/2022 15:34 by sweet karolina2 I do understand the nature of the market and the rules it is supposed to operate under and that it rarely does operate under those rules always to the disadvantage of PIs. I also understand the various processes which go on behind the scenes. That is why I don't lose overall because I understand the risks and the rewards and don't invest unless the balance is heavily in my favour.When you invested you had at best an 80% chance of losing everything. It does not matter what price you bought in at when it goes to 0p you lose everything. The only AIM Rule 15 shell since Covid, which starts trading on the Standard List (it was delisted from AIM because it could not complete in the 6 months from suspension) on 5th Dec has provided an on paper reward of 50% for those who got in at the very bottom, for those who bought in on the peak of hypes they have a paper loss. I will be watching the first day's trading to see how well the paper gain actually holds up when trading starts. My stalker Boxerdoz is upset because for very sound reasons which I have explained and he can't provide a counter argument, my opinion is it won't hold up well and the paper gain would be best turned into a real gain sooner rather than later. He does not agree, which is fine, however rather than counter the argument he just calls me a troll and stalks me - his loss he is a coward and a fool. All the shells when they announced the RTOs gave the name of the target. ADV has not done that and still has not done that. Why do you think that is? Let's find out what you really do know about the processes you are relying on to get your £150k+. On what basis do you expect to get back £150k - pure pipe-dream based on: it is incredibly high risk so the reward must be incredibly high too? You got the first bit right but you have the second bit badly wrong. |
Posted at 29/11/2022 07:21 by sweet karolina2 AIM Rule 15 shells are toxic, uberdogs with fleas like ADV are toxic they just send shareholders' money to money heaven ($27m as ADV). They are what you should be keeping a clear path from. When you see that skull symbol on a bottle it is not the label that will hurt you, it is what is inside the bottle.People who go around cowardly stalking and abusing other people because they don't agree with them are the scumbags and trolls. Idiots like TCE who think they are clever when they are not, who run around ramping toxic uberdogs should be avoided too as they can be harmful to your wealth. Those that don't learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. Will you learn this time? Time will tell, it always does. |
Posted at 15/11/2022 18:20 by sweet karolina2 Well it looks like the only one of the 5 real world examples of AIM Rule 15 shells since Covid still standing is going to make it all the way back to trading:UK SPAC has been suspended for well over a year. It lost its AIM listing, but should come back on the Standard List on 6 Dec (still a few hurdles to clear but it should not fall like MTFB did). At 0.3p most, but not all, people who bought into the shell have theoretically got their money back and some have made a reasonable profit <50%). However to realise that they will need to sell when it returns to trading. That would be fine if the market wants to buy. If the market does not want to buy and lots want to sell then the share price will crash and those theoretical profits will disappear very quickly. Time will tell, but my view is the share price will tank and the company will run out of cash and be doing discounted placings within a year. The question is was it worth it? Money tied up for over a year. All the anxiety as delay after delay occurred and still no guarantee of being able to bank the profit. That is the reward for the one that worked, the reward for the 4 that did not is 100% loss. Factor that in to a risk reward balance. There are 2 key differences between UK SPAC and ADV: UK SPAC started with a decent amount of cash. That went down but there is still a decent amount left on relist. ADV will have none and may well be in a negative cash situation ie it is not a cash shell but a debt shell. UK SPAC got rid of the old BoD of the business which failed and brought in specialists in doing this sort of thing, who promised and then kept that promise not to trouser the cash for themselves. Both these factors have been critical in UK SPAC making it back at all and the theoretical profits being there. Effectively the RTO target (a Greek pot company) has paid about £5.5m for about £1.7m in cash and a Standard listing which should cost about £200k. The issue is the Greek pot company probably would not have got a listing if it had not been for the hard work of the specialists on the BoD. The Greek pot BoD could have screwed UK SPAC over and gone for an IPO once the major hurdles were clear, but they did not and again I would see that as being down to the professionalism of the specialist BoD. The specialist BoD resigns on listing leaving it to the Greek pot boys. That; the amount paid for the listing; the obvious lack of cash on listing and how many hurdles, which will need cash and time to over come, before the Greek pot company could become cash generative at PLC level is why I expect the share price to crash on actually starting trading. Time will tell. I have asked before why would any decent cash generative company want to RTO rather than IPO. The answer is they don't, it is only those that would have major issues doing it alone that see RTO as a better route for them. Companies with major issues that are over priced having paid too much for a listing won't fair well. Hence whilst the most likely (80%) outcome for ADV is no RTO and 0p the 20% case is the company is still an uber dog with fleas no matter what it is called. |
Posted at 28/7/2022 19:57 by sweet karolina2 Run around ramper has got it WRONG again because he is just so arrogant and opinionated and knows sweet FA about the process.The Chairman Elect28 Jul '22 - 09:05 - 2712 of 2712 0 0 0 On the assumption that everyone who frequents these BBs is over 18 then any of the risks associated with shells and RTOs aka @ LSE:ADV are taken as read [He has no idea what they are because he knows Sweet FA but he thinks he is clever - the most dangerous kind of fool]! Of course LSE:ADV is high risk [RIGHT] but also extremely high reward [badly WRONG] - you pays yer money yer and you take yer chances! [only if you are a total mug punter] Good luck to all REAL shareholders @ LSE:ADV It costs about £500k to get an AIM listing (about £200k for Standard list) ADV just raised enough to get through the readmission process, which will take at least 3 months from Heads of Terms, when the shares will be suspended. What does ADV have that adds any value over and above its listing? - any cash not swallowed up by the directors and that is it. It also comes with a lot of baggage. Why would a company want an AIM listing? - the answer is very very simple - to be able to raise money by issuing shares. So whatever RTOs in will do a placing at the RTO price to raise whatever it needs. How is the RTO company valued? - that is what most of the due diligence and other stuff ADV has said it has raised the money to do is about. The RTO company will also do DD on ADV to make sure there are no nasty surprises lurking - there are examples where skeletons have come out of the closet after the RTO and screwed the RTO company. So how much to pay for an RTO into ADV as opposed to an IPO? - the timescales are about the same and the costs are about the same. Pretty simple £500k plus any cash left when you get there - any more than that and you are paying more than it is worth (not a good idea to do that when you want to convince new investors to invest in you). If the RTO company pays much more, the RTO company is screwing its own existing shareholders and is less likely to be able to raise the money in the placing. The RTO company does not have to do an RTO at all - it can IPO or it could use any shell if it still wants to RTO. ADV HAS to do an RTO or it delists and goes to 0p. The RTO company therefore holds all the aces and a gun to ADV BoD head. An example to make the maths easy. The RTO Company is worth £10m and wants to raise £9m before placing fees (normally 5%). It agrees to value ADV at £1m. With 1.5Bn shares already in issue that is an RTO price of 0.066p and that will also be the placing price, but if the Brokers can't get the placing away at that price then it will come down or the whole thing falls apart has happened plenty of times before. In this example there are 30Bn shares at the end and will probably do a 50 or 100 to 1 consolidation. Assuming 100 to 1, shares start trading agin a 6.6p and this might be where run around ramper thinks money has been made but he would be WRONG yet again. So where is the REAL reward for REAL ADV shareholders? There isn't one. Ahh but what if the share price shoots up after the RTO. Entirely possible but not inevitable as it depends on what is RTOed in and whether the market likes it or not. If you like what is being RTOed in and want some then, when you know what it is and decide you like it, just sign up with the broker to take part and get all the readmission documentation CPRs etc and DYOR before you decide to part with your cash at 0.066p. Far less risk that way and far greater reward too. So the run around ramper who knows sweet FA is not really bringing anyone good luck but is putting a curse on anyone daft enough to blindly buy in on his mindless run around ramping. |
Posted at 30/5/2022 18:07 by sweet karolina2 Provide proof that an England and Wales company can reverse into a SHELL and use historic losses as credits - it would say that in the guide I posted if they could so prove me and the guide wrong if you can and admit that this is irrelevant to ADV as it is an IOM company so why post about it on the ADV board?The risks are obvious but the reward is purely imaginary. A decent oil and gas asset won't pay much for the shell. Admit that now ADV is a rule 15 company it is REQUIRED to do an RTO and that is its only option, or are you trying to claim that the rules will be waived for ADV if so explain why. I am just pointing out the obvious flaws in the investment case and in your arguments, which you cannot rebut with facts so you try to accuse me of being something you have absolutely no evidence to support, because you are wrong. Just as I have clearly demonstrated with facts and links to authoritative sources you are wrong about just about everything to do with ADV. You may believe that the BoD that brought shareholders the B10 disaster (95% COS of oil in the attic, shame we missed the attic, whilst taking all the financial risk for 50% of the reward!) will find a really great new puppy (as opposed to another clapped out old dog) and convince it not to worry about the fleas. In the unlikely event this does happen, they still won't be paying much for the shell (good, well run companies do not over pay for things) and when you know what the puppy is (you won't know until after suspension) you can always contact the broker (they will most likely want you to become a client, which is easy enough) and take part in the placing. DYOR and punt all you like, just don't expect to be able to go unchallenged when you mislead the mug punting morons for your own benefit by telling them what you think they want to hear. |
Posted at 30/5/2022 11:51 by sweet karolina2 I do love it when an uber dog proves me right. Back to being a dirty (very little) cash shell. Will anyone put their beloved puppy into a flea ridden shell like ADV or will it be like PPG (another one which proved me right, but still managed to suck in a load of mug punters before it suspended).There are a lot of fees for the advisers in an RTO and the BoD will get opportunities to line their pockets out of it too so, at this stage, it is odds on that something will get RTOed in. However there is a significant risk, which will grow over time, that nothing will happen and the shares will go to 0p - it does not matter what your average was, when it goes to 0p you lose 100%. Make you own judgement on the odds -mine is currently 70/30 in favour of an RTO happening. What is the value of the dirty cash shell? - you only find out what is going to be paid well after the share has suspended, so if you don't like it - tough your only other option is to get enough shareholders together to block the transaction at the GM and that will result in 0p as there won't be enough time left to do something else. The company reversing in knows it holds all the aces and a gun to the BoD's head so won't be looking to pay any more than it needs to (they have their own shareholders' interests to look after and won't give a monkey's about ADV holders). "The key benefits of cash shells: • There is a transparent amount of cash already in the shell ready to invest in the right target company [Yes at the point of RTO the "target" will know exactly how little there is] • When compared with a conventional IPO, the cash is already in the shell meaning the success of the transaction does not rely on attracting new investors to support a fundraising [not true in ADV case, the money left will not cover all the costs of the RTO. There will not be anything left over and it will all need to be raised in the accompanying placing] • A reverse transaction into an existing cash shell MAY be quicker, and therefore a less costly method of achieving an admission to a stock market and, at the same time, accessing cash to grow a business [cost and time difference between AIM IPO and AIM RTO are minimal, indeed it can be worse with RTO due to problems in the dirty shell - cf New World Oil and Gas (NEW) as an example] Legacy cash shells (Dirty shells) Legacy cash shells are listed entities that have disposed of their trading business. What remains is cash in its bank and perhaps one or more directors. Because of this many are referred to as ‘dirty shells’. However, this does not necessarily mean that they are unsuitable for consideration. Because these shells have had a past trading history, it’s important to understand what has happened to the company, why it became a shell, and what, if any, liabilities your company will inherit if a reverse transaction is undertaken. It’s important to use the services of a specialist to investigate the shell company and also to undertake satisfactory levels of due diligence [which take time and cost money] to establish the extent of potential liabilities which may include: • Contractual obligations with suppliers • The debts to previous customers • Agreements with banks and other lenders • Ongoing contracts with existing customers • Employee contracts • Potential tax liabilities [how many skeletons from all the previous failed management could there be to come back and haunt the new business?] Legacy cash shell companies may have an existing shareholder base that has been built over a number of years. That does not necessarily follow that shareholders in the shell company will be prepared to remain investors in the new company following the reverse transaction." There are some who believe (or at least want others to believe) that the historic losses this uber dog has made over its tragic history have value as future tax credits. I don't believe that is the case for UK registered companies being used as shells, however the debate is irrelevant as ADV is incorporated and registered in the Isle of Man under Company Number 010493V and therefore does not pay corporation tax anyway. So with Net Current Assets currently around the £600k mark (about half of current market cap, but we won't get a better figure for months until full year results to 30 Apr are released) and diminishing daily due to ongoing PLC costs (including directors' fees) that is about enough to do all the readmission paperwork and cover a few more months of PLC costs. There will be no net cash for the new company to use - that will all have to come from the placing - so what is the point of doing an RTO Vs an IPO? Very little and that is why very little will be paid for the shell. Some may believe that the BoD that brought them the B10 disaster (95% COS of oil in the attic, shame we missed the attic, whilst taking all the financial risk for 50% of the reward!) will find a really great new puppy (as opposed to another clapped out old dog) and convince it not to worry about the fleas. In the unlikely event this does happen, they still won't be paying much for the shell (good, well run companies do not over pay for things) and when you know what the puppy is (you won't know until after suspension) you can always contact the broker (they will most likely want you to become a client, which is easy enough) and take part in the placing. In short the share price will drift down in the run up to suspension as the risk of 0p grows and the small amount of cash dwindles. Suspension will definitely occur, either on announcement of heads of terms for an RTO or on 27 Nov 22. At this point you are trapped. There will almost certainly be some pump and dump attempts along the way which might present a better selling opportunity - definitely don't buy just remember what happened when Dave Whitby started ramping about CEB doing RTOs (those that bought at 1.2p and held ever since have lost 99.98% of their money (500 to 1 consolidations since)). DYOR, make your own investing decisions because you are the only person responsible for whatever outcome you get from them. |
Posted at 13/2/2022 13:10 by sweet karolina2 The mistake made by all investors (II, SI, PI) here was the failure to assess the risks properly and then balance them against the genuine potential rewards.At a project level the risk / reward balance was marginal: BHP identified the attic as a target but did not drill it. The people BHP sold the field to did not drill the attic. CVN said it could fund drilling itself but then went out to find someone to pay for the drilling. Only ADV was interested because they were desperate to do something and CVN were happy to let ADV take all the financial risk, not just of this stage but for the whole development: RNS 17 Dec 20 "Assuming drilling success at the B-10 appraisal well and, among other things, the parties agreeing a field development plan, Advance Energy has agreed to source and arrange development financing up to first oil, which is expected to be primarily in the form of debt [70:30 is the best they could have hoped for but with something like this 60:40 would be more likely which would have left ADV with a lot more equity to raise]." It was obvious to anyone with any experience at all that the risk assessment in the CPR was nonsense - 95% chance of 1C when the definition of 1C is 90% of that volume being there, if you hit it at all. To stand any chance of funding development in the manner proposed, 2C volumes being demonstrated as recoverable would have been needed: definition of 2C is 50% if you manage to hit the target at all and there aren't then complications with parts of the reservoir being trapped or having insufficient permeability - very few reservoirs can be recovered from just one access point - look at the number of holes BHP drilled to bring into productions the parts of the field that were brought into production. The structure of the deal made a marginal risk / reward into an insane risk / reward balance for ADV, but a great one for CVN. Further the existing equity and the admin costs made the readmission investment even more insane: Pay £20m for less than 80% (Mcap at placing price was £26m) to enable $20m to be put into a marginal project for only 50% of the potential reward, whilst taking all the funding risk up to first oil! Having raised the money ADV could not have pulled out and done something else [Dave Whitby was a crook who did not drill the well he raised the money for but instead squandered it on paying himself and doing related party transactions]. This BoD are not as good as they claim to be, but they are not crooks like Whitby. All the talk of acquiring a non operated stake in producing and already cash generative assets sounds great, because they are clearly far lower risk. But then so are the rewards. With the running costs of the company taken out of any dividends paid back to ADV, $20m would not provide any return to ADV shareholders - those shareholders would be far better off using the money to buy shares in BP and Shell in the market. The idea that ADV could now get debt, when it has no assets on which to secure it, to fund a non operated stake in a producing cash generative field and that would provide returns which covered the running costs of ADV, servicing the debt and creating returns to shareholders is completely ludicrous. Yes there are such stakes available, but they are not given away and ADV has nothing extra to offer so any deal would favour the vendor (exactly as the B10 deal favoured CVN). If ADV did manage to raise some money then it would again do a bad deal, because it would be desperate to do a deal to keep the mugpunters believing so more discounted bucket shop placings could be done to keep the gravy train on the rails for the BoD and the advisers. Those looking to blame someone else for what has happened here are failing to learn the lessons from their own investing mistakes. Investing is all about risk / reward balance. What investors did here was gamble on a single spin of the wheel and when it did not come up as a winner try to avoid looking at themselves as the cause of their losses. Put yourselves on trial. Why did you put your money in here? why did you not work out that it was a bad investment?: Everything I have said above was freely available info in the public domain at the time you bought in. Find yourselves guilty because you are, then sentence yourselves to either learning how these things work and how to do proper research before investing or to investing only in FTSE 100 or through established fund managers who have a market beating track record over several years. Nobody who did proper research would buy shares in ADV or any of the other AIM uber dogs that destroy wealth whilst funding the lifestyles of BoDs and advisers until the gravy train finally hits the buffers and they move on to the next one whilst leaving PI's with nothing and no one but themselves to blame. |
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
