Bahamas Petroleum Share Discussion Threads

[benamara] 06/1/2021 18:00

some figures for discussion
Possible oil production from T & T and Surinam by end 2021 as claimed by BPC
2,500 BPD at say $50 less extraction costs of $20 per barrel = $30 per barrel
Therefore gross cash generated per annum there after 360 x 2,500 x 30 = $27,000,000
Assume taxes and overheads say $10 per barrel 360 x 2,500 x 10 = $9,000,0000
Then free cash flow $18,000,000 per annum
Assume shares in issue by then 5 billion.
Cash generated per annum per share = +- $3.5/1.4 = 2.5 p per share.
If the above stands up to scrutiny then on a year or two view, the current price is
is valuing Perseverence at zero.
Feel free to tear the above apart. Just to change the subject from the tree huggers.

[linton78] 06/1/2021 16:17

Yes, hopefully the case falls at the first hurdle.

[ride daice] 06/1/2021 16:13

Lets see how far we get on the security for costs issue.

[thatsmart1] 06/1/2021 16:07

I bet the environmentalist lawyer is rubbing his hands with glee as this could be a most lucrative case for him.

[linton78] 06/1/2021 15:55

From 4.30m... a VERY interesting video regarding oil drilling... key message is the contracts are airtight that BPC hold.

[grandwood] 06/1/2021 15:51

Apparently the media can't even agree on the name of the judge!

But I think this reader comment on the tribune242 story sums up the situation quite succinctly:

"So the end result of going to court is that the drilling can go ahead and the environmentalists can continue to look for documents and complain to the court. So... nothing has changed. I would call that exercise an entire waste of time."

[armatrading] 06/1/2021 15:49

So much confusion in the press. Both sides victorious. JR going ahead. JR application allowed.
Madness!

[armatrading] 06/1/2021 14:01

Meanwhile, in Trinidad & Tobago:

[...]

"7. The threshold for the imposition of the Supplementary Petroleum Tax (SPT) for small onshore oil producers will be increased to $75 per barrel, from $50 per barrel, for fiscal 2021 and fiscal 2022, in the first instance"

[smoothtrader] 06/1/2021 13:31

Err drill is currently happening mate. Seem like you've just woken up from your hibernation. Most creatures dont wake up until the spring.. Suggest u do the same and leave us to enjoy loosing our investment.

[specialistlegionsupercharged] 06/1/2021 13:23

No drill = no oil = Bankruptcy for my idiots in the dark = SAD 😢

[specialistlegionsupercharged] 06/1/2021 13:22

Are the water tight licenses like your 6p floor to financing idiot. Or are they like your $500m bonds to go to court.

IDIOT IN THE DARK 😀😀😀😀8512;👏Ԁ79;👏👏;👏👏

[specialistlegionsupercharged] 06/1/2021 13:21

Seems drilling might stop on 14 January. SAD FROM MY IDIOTS IN THE DARK 🥲🥲

[specialistlegionsupercharged] 06/1/2021 13:20

Seems drilling might stop on 14 January. SAD FROM MY IDIOTS IN THE DARK 🥲🥲

[whoppy] 06/1/2021 13:17

The reality is that BPC have water tight licences and legally binding obligations on the licences from the government. So long as BPC keeps to those obligations, then the government are also legally obliged to stick with it or face a claim for $100's million dollars. If the government felt they could have stopped oil exploration, they would have. The fact is they legally can't without breaking the terms of the licence..

[pro_s2009] 06/1/2021 12:50

Save The Bays “ecstatic” over oil drilling judicial review


LocalJanuary 6, 2021January 6, 2021 at 3:42 am Royston Jones Jr.


NASSAU, BAHAMAS — Chairman of Save The Bays Joe Darville, one of the environmental groups granted leave for judicial review proceedings of the government’s approvals to Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) to drill an exploratory well, said yesterday the organization was “ecstatic” over the judge’s decision.

“Recognizing the oil drilling is a matter of vital public interest to the Bahamian people, she granted us leave to challenge all the approvals given to the Bahamas Petroleum Company since February 2020,” he said.

“The judge also gave us permission to ascertain whether the Town Planning Committee should have required BPC to qualify for site plan approval, which, as far as we know, they did not.

“The Bahamas is a nation of laws. We believe in the rule of law. This underpins our democracy and our development as a nation.

“A key part of the mission of Save The Bays is to fight against the scourge of unregulated development and ensure that every foreign investor who comes here with a plan, acts according to the laws of The Bahamas and in the best interest of the people.

“We intend to hold BPC to that standard and once again we thank the court for recognizing the crucial importance of this national issue.

“Oil drilling should not proceed if it is not conducted in accordance with the law and not in the best interest of our people.

“We welcome the judicial review and look forward to presenting our evidence to the court and to the public.”

In her ruling, Supreme Court Justice Petra Hanna-Weekes said: “The evidence raised in the affidavits of the applicants and the second respondent on behalf of the respondents satisfies me that there are issues fit for further consideration.”

She granted leave to bring judicial review proceedings.

However, the court did not grant a stay of the “effect of the decisions” — drilling the exploratory oil well.

She said a stay on the face of it is tantamount to an application for an injunction and it is important to make such distinction because while the court has the jurisdiction, where appropriate, to do so, “such an order is only to stay the decision-making process, the decision itself and its implementation”.

Noting that the decision-making process has been completed, the decisions have been implemented and the drilling exercise to which those decisions we made has commenced “there is no decision-making process to be stayed”.

The judge agreed that the exercise is of great public importance, “albeit for different reasons”.

She disagreed with the applicants that BPC would suffer no prejudice if a stay was granted.

Attorney Fred Smith, QC, represents the applicants — Waterkeeper Bahamas Limited and Coalition to Protect Clifton Bay.

The respondents include Minister of the Environment Romauld Ferreira, Environmental Protection and Planned Director Rochelle Newbold and the attorney general.

The applicants challenged the approvals in February to grant BPC environmental authorization to begin an exploratory offshore oil drilling program at the “Perseverance #1 well”; the November 2020 approval to change elements of the project, including equipment; and approval that month to issue and new environmental authorization, among other approvals.

The government has opposed the application, arguing that the application for judicial review was delayed and is “devoid of substantive merit”.

Drilling of the exploratory well began on December 20.

The applicants have argued that the minister of the environment misled them in May 2018 into thinking the project would not go ahead and were unprepared when the February approval was granted and announced.

They said the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown measures introduced last March made the organization and fundraising difficult for the applicants.

The director of environmental protection and planning, who previously served as head of the BEST Commission, said the review process for BPC was undertaken and there was no objection issued for the project works.

She said BPC’s modification to the project had no relation to the impacts associated with the environmental impact assessment and “therefore no new approval was warranted”.

[soggy] 06/1/2021 12:50

I admire everyone's optimism that if JR is granted, and even if it finds there were irregularities, it won't have a material effect on BPC.

My impression over the years is that if any fault is found, a good legal team will use even the tiniest thing to build as big a case as they can for whatever their objective is. In this case, it's stopping oil development. So, if they don't back down, there is a cloud as there has been for the past couple of months over our prospects. And if they do get the JR there is uncertainty - even if we find a monster - over the long-term prospects of developing an oil industry in the country.

Of course I am hoping that it will all go away. I'm hoping that we'll find gazillions of good stuff down there, and I'm hoping that we'll come back in due course and make a fortune out of it either ourselves or by selling it on. But I'm pretty sure that, as is always the case in the stockmarket, ANY uncertainty puts a brake on the share price

Delighted to be completely wrong, but I think I'd be naive to believe we are completely out of the woods and that it's all blue sky for us now.

[pro_s2009] 06/1/2021 12:50

Save The Bays “ecstatic” over oil drilling judicial review


LocalJanuary 6, 2021January 6, 2021 at 3:42 am Royston Jones Jr.


NASSAU, BAHAMAS — Chairman of Save The Bays Joe Darville, one of the environmental groups granted leave for judicial review proceedings of the government’s approvals to Bahamas Petroleum Company (BPC) to drill an exploratory well, said yesterday the organization was “ecstatic” over the judge’s decision.

“Recognizing the oil drilling is a matter of vital public interest to the Bahamian people, she granted us leave to challenge all the approvals given to the Bahamas Petroleum Company since February 2020,” he said.

“The judge also gave us permission to ascertain whether the Town Planning Committee should have required BPC to qualify for site plan approval, which, as far as we know, they did not.

“The Bahamas is a nation of laws. We believe in the rule of law. This underpins our democracy and our development as a nation.

“A key part of the mission of Save The Bays is to fight against the scourge of unregulated development and ensure that every foreign investor who comes here with a plan, acts according to the laws of The Bahamas and in the best interest of the people.

“We intend to hold BPC to that standard and once again we thank the court for recognizing the crucial importance of this national issue.

“Oil drilling should not proceed if it is not conducted in accordance with the law and not in the best interest of our people.

“We welcome the judicial review and look forward to presenting our evidence to the court and to the public.”

In her ruling, Supreme Court Justice Petra Hanna-Weekes said: “The evidence raised in the affidavits of the applicants and the second respondent on behalf of the respondents satisfies me that there are issues fit for further consideration.”

She granted leave to bring judicial review proceedings.

However, the court did not grant a stay of the “effect of the decisions” — drilling the exploratory oil well.

She said a stay on the face of it is tantamount to an application for an injunction and it is important to make such distinction because while the court has the jurisdiction, where appropriate, to do so, “such an order is only to stay the decision-making process, the decision itself and its implementation”.

Noting that the decision-making process has been completed, the decisions have been implemented and the drilling exercise to which those decisions we made has commenced “there is no decision-making process to be stayed”.

The judge agreed that the exercise is of great public importance, “albeit for different reasons”.

She disagreed with the applicants that BPC would suffer no prejudice if a stay was granted.

Attorney Fred Smith, QC, represents the applicants — Waterkeeper Bahamas Limited and Coalition to Protect Clifton Bay.

The respondents include Minister of the Environment Romauld Ferreira, Environmental Protection and Planned Director Rochelle Newbold and the attorney general.

The applicants challenged the approvals in February to grant BPC environmental authorization to begin an exploratory offshore oil drilling program at the “Perseverance #1 well”; the November 2020 approval to change elements of the project, including equipment; and approval that month to issue and new environmental authorization, among other approvals.

The government has opposed the application, arguing that the application for judicial review was delayed and is “devoid of substantive merit”.

Drilling of the exploratory well began on December 20.

The applicants have argued that the minister of the environment misled them in May 2018 into thinking the project would not go ahead and were unprepared when the February approval was granted and announced.

They said the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown measures introduced last March made the organization and fundraising difficult for the applicants.

The director of environmental protection and planning, who previously served as head of the BEST Commission, said the review process for BPC was undertaken and there was no objection issued for the project works.

She said BPC’s modification to the project had no relation to the impacts associated with the environmental impact assessment and “therefore no new approval was warranted”.

[pro_s2009] 06/1/2021 12:40

Duster 0.5p

Oil 6p spike first...then fall back to 4.5p after loads of selling.

[walkermike1] 06/1/2021 12:36

Duster 1.5Oil 8

[jp2011] 06/1/2021 12:31

No it was a legacy holding and Schroders wanted out of fossil fuels, it was a buggar for CERP PIs

[fortune cookie] 06/1/2021 12:31

If there is a JR then we will either find out if the Government acted correctly and if not what they did wrong. Either way if oil is found it will clarify the procedure for the future to make sure everything is done correctly next time hopefully