Aminex Share Discussion Threads

[greyingsurfer] 07/2/2016 11:48

Not really. The real damage done by Monday's RNS, regardless of whether any fault might lie principally with BLVN, was that it was just one more in a long line of AEX disappointments and all the more so in this case as the farmout was so loudly hailed by so many as providing the ideal answer to Ruvuma development and the debt overhang.

Of course the farmout falling through has caused real damage, no one has argued otherwise. And without doubt it would have been a good solution for both companies had they all agreed on a work program that would have met the licence requirements.

However, that doesn't affect the point I was making - the GSA has been signed on good terms, production will be starting soon. Neither of those were true 3 months ago, and many here spent a lot of time deriding management about the issue. Including suggesting 2017 as a possible date for the GSA and production.

Of course the farmout falling through is a problem, but, whatever may be the case with BLVN's apparent casual signing of the initial deal and then deciding they couldn't meet what was required, the facts are that it did get to that stage. That in itself indicates that there is potential interest, where many have denied it.

Also the fact that TPDC and importantly the lenders appear to have been in agreement about rejecting BLVNs work program suggests to me that those in the know believe something better is still possible. If they didn't there's no real mileage in them not pushing for an acceptance, which would have bought cash to AEX, even if it would have meant consequences for the company from failing to meet licence obligations further on.

None of that guarantees a workable deal (or set of deals) but it certainly suggests to me that something may well still happen.

Peter

[itsonlyme2] 07/2/2016 11:14

likely looking take over now

[warbaby43] 07/2/2016 08:35

" 3 months ago we'd all, ngms included, have been pleased to be in the current position."

Not really. The real damage done by Monday's RNS, regardless of whether any fault might lie principally with BLVN, was that it was just one more in a long line of AEX disappointments and all the more so in this case as the farmout was so loudly hailed by so many as providing the ideal answer to Ruvuma development and the debt overhang.

The reactions on Monday morning on this board said it all.

[bunbooster2] 07/2/2016 00:32

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] 07/2/2016 00:30

"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.

[blackgold00] 06/2/2016 12:02

horse-racing transparent. LOL

[gerryjames] 06/2/2016 11:42

The Panto may be over but the Greek Tragety continues behind unreadable masks. I'm off horse-racing much more transparent.

[blackgold00] 06/2/2016 11:40

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




"The completion of the proposed transactions with Bowleven and Solo will enable Aminex to reduce its outstanding corporate debt substantially, delivering on its 2015 stated objective. Aminex will remain the operator of all its assets in Tanzania following close of the transaction (and is in discussions with Solo and Bowleven to accelerate the work programme at Ruvuma. The Company will announce an updated work programme once concluded.)"

and maybe the discussions with TPDC regards the further drilling commitments with the possible consequences of not meeting the obligations, also had a barring on the decision not to proceed with the farm-out.

from last IMS
"While there are further exploration drilling commitments required by December 2016 in addition to the current drilling plans, Aminex is currently in discussions with the TPDC to facilitate and accelerate the development of Ntorya and meet the remaining obligations."

[bunbooster2] 06/2/2016 11:06

"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)!

[greyingsurfer] 06/2/2016 10:56

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

[stepone68] 06/2/2016 09:38

Because a rights issue doesn't dilute your stake in the asset.

StepOne

[gerryjames] 06/2/2016 07:36

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.

[bunbooster2] 06/2/2016 03:05

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?

[greyingsurfer] 05/2/2016 17:58

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

[warbaby43] 05/2/2016 17:21

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)

[greyingsurfer] 05/2/2016 15:40

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

[ngms27] 05/2/2016 13:33

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.

[vike1] 05/2/2016 12:57

Anyone else worried about another rights issue being announced to pay for Ntorya drilling?

[warbaby43] 04/2/2016 17:59

Interesting to see and contrast the sums Orca can talk about:



A Tanzanian view on Shell/BG:



It was IPTL that was at the centre of the notorious Escrow scam: