Barryroe Offshore Energy Share Discussion Threads

[steelwatch] 10/10/2023 21:15

Cheers NAH. As at 28 Sept -

Full proposals to go before the High Court:



Seems clear enough to me. The outcome for all the "other shareholders" on record at the petition date, of course, depends on whether, or not, Barryroe comes to a profitable fruition within 10 years of the effective date. Cold comfort to those of us who will be pushing up daisies should the clock be beaten.

[northatlanticholdings] 10/10/2023 20:08

A few additional details on the homepage of the website i.e., voting process

[northatlanticholdings] 10/10/2023 19:28

There will be no further information on the 5% released this side of the creditors/shareholders meetings. The details of that will be circulated to shareholders after the meeting.

The scheme of arrangement does not require shareholder approval; according to the footnote on the website.

Shareholders can vote against in in person or by proxy and they can still progress it to the courts.

Only the courts can block it.

Amazing the lack of detail provided on the process. Pure contempt.

[pwhite73] 10/10/2023 17:43

The refused licence will not cause any delays. In fact it has probably speeded up the development of Barryroe as it has pushed BEY into administration, got rid of the useless directors and given the largest and richest shareholder a financial incentive to see the field developed ASAP.

[paulsavannah] 10/10/2023 16:02

And just ignore the fact the license was refused?

[jotoha2] 10/10/2023 14:28

The answer to this problem has been there for years , bring in a Global O&G company to develop the oil and gas field , it's still not to late , but are our BOD up to the task .

[hermana3] 10/10/2023 07:07

Yes it has come to this. Will need to see full detail of deal to see if Larry is sincere in cutting us into a future involvement.

[northatlanticholdings] 09/10/2023 20:33

Bar an intervention from the courts, or a meaningful intervention by all shareholders ‘no consideration’ per share means just that.

[ps200306] 09/10/2023 19:26

pwhite -- I'm not talking about transferring the losses to an existing business. "Barryroe Green Energy" would be a new business. I'm just saying that Larry might have the expertise or people available to make it hit the ground running without any initial loss-making years so he can start milking the tax write-offs early.

Re: oil vs. gas, a number of years back I calculated that 97.5% of the value in the Barryroe field was oil, not gas. Gas prices have risen since then, but not by so much that it would dramatically affect the calculation. In any case, the natural gas is "associated gas" -- it comes up with the oil. You can't exploit them separately, that's simply not an option. You could target the upper sands which are more gas rich, but there will still be associated liquids which, in the Barryroe case, need special handling and would be a big cost to incur when you are planning on leaving most of the liquids unexplored.

Years back PVR had the OPL/1 option on a panel adjacent to Barryroe owned by KEL. It was supposed to contain a large (0.5 Tcf?) gas deposit. But that option expired a long time back.

[hermana3] 09/10/2023 18:56

Larry probably has the instis in his pocket so should carry his proposals. Expect Pageant to be in cohoots too..

[pwhite73] 09/10/2023 17:02

ps200306 - "Basically do what he's already doing but with a big tax write-off vehicle"

I repeat you band the term 'tax write off' about but have no understanding how this works. You cannot buy or invest in a company to the value of £6 million as LG has in exchange for £270 million of tax write offs. The Irish government or any government would not forgo £270 million of corporation tax for an unconnected business. If you could transfer tax losses to any current business no company would ever go into liquidation. Other companies would simply pick them up for a nominal value of £1.00 and use the tax losses.

If BEY does go green I strongly suspect its to announce it will only extract gas at Barryroe and not oil. BEY stating its going green is the olive branch the DECC requires to reinstate the license without the expense and embarrassment of litigation whilst saving face.

Vote no to the proposals. The value of oil and therefore the worth of the Barryroe oilfield will only increase in value over the coming years.

[ps200306] 09/10/2023 16:14

pwhite -- Larry already has interests in renewables in the UK and some sort of vegetable oil recycling thing (presumably for biodiesel). Maybe he reckons he can kickstart something similar under the Barryroe label without the usual upfront costs. Basically do what he's already doing but with a big tax write-off vehicle.

I can't believe he'd be taking a significant risk with his own money just to fight a dodgy court case over the Barryroe lease. But even if he did, and even if he won, it would be no guarantee of any return for existing shareholders. The idea was that the Barryroe field would eventually hit peak production of 100,000 bbl/day with a field lifetime of 10-15 years. With everything going as smoothly as possible there's there's no chance the field would be at peak production within 10 years from now. When you hold shares there's a chance they will be valued in anticipation of future revenue. Larry's deal of cancelling the shares in return for 5% of profits from operations precludes that.

[pwhite73] 09/10/2023 14:31

NAH/ps200306 - For argument sake lets say he intends to turn BEY into a green energy business. The new enterprise has to be making a net profit for him to realise a single penny of the Barryroe tax write offs. Any brand new green energy business would incur heavy losses itself during the early years before it turns a profit. So any tax write offs would come from the start up losses of the new green energy business before it need utilise any tax write offs from Barryroe.

If you think a new green energy business will be profitable from year 1,2,3 or 4 then you might have a point. Otherwise its Barryroe the oil and gas field or nothing at all.

LG will initiate litigation against the DECC if the decision not to extend the licences is not rescinded.

[ps200306] 09/10/2023 14:03

The whole point of the exercise is most definitely *not* the development of Barryroe. Who in their right mind thinks Larry is putting up real cash money on the miniscule chance of being able to overturn the lease decision in court. The only avenue open to him is judicial review and that can only investigate whether proper procedures were followed, not whether Ryan "should" have granted the lease.

No, Larry intends to get his money back without developing Barryroe. His plan to turn it into a renewable business would allow tax write-offs to be used as it's an energy business that plenty of oil companies have gotten into.

The idea that he's going to develop Barryroe and pay out money to existing holders is for the birds. For starters, even if he got the license back there's no way the field would be developed *and* ramped up to peak production within 10 years. A sale to another developer/operator would be unlikely to be for much cash, but for an interest in future profits. Again, nothing for existing SH.

Larry intends to pay exactly zero for Barryroe. The only alternative is to make him pay at least *some* consideration to get his hands on the tax write-offs.

[murmurs] 09/10/2023 11:44

the most likely renewable products from Barryroe in the near future are hydrogen and types of solid carbon (carbon black, graphene in different forms).

These products are obtained by splitting NG (methane) into its chemical components using pyrolysis. The process uses electricity to create a plasma that splits the gas to create clean hydrogen and deposit the carbon in a solid form. The process is currently being used in several countries to provide the products.

Both products are valuable and in addition by capturing carbon could qualify for up to E100 per ton for removing and storing carbon.

The process can also be applied to biomethane

[messer2] 09/10/2023 11:40

If, optimistically, Barryroe really has 300 mln bbls of (easily) recoverable oil and these are valued at a discounted price of, say, US$5 per bbl then the Barryroe's 80% share of the field's net present value post a 50% farmout would be US$0.60 bn (300*0.8*5*0.5). Based on 1.145 bn issued shares, the NPV per share would be 52 cent and 5% of this would be 2.6 cent assuming Larry plays fair and there are no delays in getting into significant production. More conservatively, the 5% offer might be worth only about 1 cent, or nothing at all.

If the pre-examinership situation had pervailed with initial fundung from Larry and with a subsequent 50% farmout, the share value after 4x dilution might have been, say, 13 cent (52/4) for all shareholders including Larry. That's about four times the average share price (~3c) during 2022 and about 26 times the final pre-suspension share price (~0.5c).

Finally, if the examiner's proposal goes through and the field is developed then it could be worth up to €540 mln after same 50% farmout (300*0.8*5*0.5*0.95/1.06) to Larry.

So, we could be looking at 47c NPV per share (at best) for Larry as compared with (maybe) 2.6c for other shareholders or at 13c to all shareholders if the development licence had been granted and examinership avoided.

[murmurs] 09/10/2023 09:07

We know about the value of Norway's wealth fund. Australia is about to create a similar fund that will work to provide monies for social housing.

It will be funded initially by the government with $10bil and expected to return 9% per annum. The generated wealth will be used to build social housing with no further cost to taxpayers. $90mil each year could build a useful number of houses each year on an ongoing basis.

Ireland is expected to have a balance of payment surplus of E65bil in the next few years. E10bil of that in a financial setup for the purpose of providing social housing would give relief to homeless people and less tax to taxpayers in Ireland on a permanent basis.

One area for investment could be Barryroe, providing the necessary finance to develop the project. The fund could also take a substantial shareholding in the project. The fund would be a source that provides profits and return the cost of development funds with interest. The country would have security of energy supply, jobs, and taxes to use to increase the fund or provide the monies to create other funds (a long list).

A current political party in power could initiate a like fund. If they do not, another party (SF) surely will.

[swizz] 08/10/2023 19:58

Agreed PS, but you can understand the frustration from a number of Barryroe’s ordinary shareholders, which I am one, but I do wonder how many that post on here actually are?,

My main holding in the project has always been via Lansdowne and considering the position the BEY board and major shareholders found themselves in, I do believe the most tangible way of seeing the Barryroe project develop, is with the backing of LG’s financial muscle and that in turn, I believe will be the best outcome for Lansdowne, so my BEY votes will be heading LG and Vevan’s way, ..GL S

[murmurs] 08/10/2023 02:00

Yes NAH!

I would rather go down fighting. Reverse into LOGP. Embarrass the Govt. at a time they are going for election.