Bowleven Share Discussion Threads

[belo horizonte] 16/3/2017 08:04

Maybe smart assed lawyers advising them. Possibly the same as advises Sturgeon. This will infuriate shareholders even more.As you say Nigel, expect COC to buy another couple of % and call for another EGM.

[wshak] 16/3/2017 08:02

nigelpm,

I'd have thought so. Allan would have been far better off working with the new board and implementing the strategy voted on. He is simply wasting time and money backing his mates - which shows just why they all had to go.

[nigelpm] 16/3/2017 07:58

Presumably they just buy another few percent and then kick them both out?

[wshak] 16/3/2017 07:56

From that Herald article, it sounds as though Hart will continue as Chief Executive in a non-board level role.

It looks to me as though Billy Allan is refusing to acknowledge the wishes of shareholders for a change in strategy and so will need to be removed.

[kooba] 16/3/2017 07:50

Bowleven cut to underweight at Barclays

[jordaggy] 16/3/2017 07:24

Right, so only VOG can cancel agreement!... not good?

[winnet] 15/3/2017 22:01

Of course it wasn't published before, but i made the call as it seemed increasingly like the bod had lost, the Sunday time piece was the confirmation. Thus I made my call.

As it happens, all the noise was actually just that.

You live you learn. I made a mistake.

Won't be doing it again.

[ctc1] 15/3/2017 21:46

Those who speak with such authority about what will happen have been shown to be wrong. It was not a landslide victory as predicted. Moreover, arm chair opinion does not make fact no matter how emphatic it is stated. Posters simply cannot say with any credibility just how much input blvn has in the ongoing development of etinde. It would be pretty remiss of the operator not to draw on all of the available expertise and accumulated data from previous work done over the years, especially given the extent of the discovery.

[watfordhornet] 15/3/2017 21:22

RosWell I hope you are right.

[d1nga] 15/3/2017 21:21

Winnet you need to fully understand that blvn are merely riding on the coat tails of NA and lukoil , thats the plain simple fact of the matter, 20% remember they can kick and scream about what they may want and it matters not one jot

[winnet] 15/3/2017 20:45

No, my decision was nothing to do with being comfortable. I thought coc had control through a misinformed Sunday times piece. I wanted to be no part of their strategy. Completely my fault. I regret selling down the holding now as my votes would have made significant difference. You live you learn.

That said, i have got back a few today then when billy outlines the strategy i may buy the rest back. It's a pretty liquid market at the moment. Had no problem selling a large amount recently.

Log what goes on at these workshops then. Just talking shops eh?

[loglorry1] 15/3/2017 20:43

I fee more comfortable of successfull outcome of etinde development with him there.

BLVN have no say whatsoever in Etinde development. They pay the invoices and are told what's going on to some extent. Not sure how many times this point needs to be made.

[watfordhornet] 15/3/2017 20:22

Do you not think our main shareholders want to make a return.? Given I think we all can agree they do has anyone wondered why they unanimously voted against. They know more than anyone on here I am pretty sure

[yasrub] 15/3/2017 20:21

Winnet I think what is interesting from this forum - taking it at face value is that some private investors reduced their holdings significantly and are now reflecting they could have made a difference. I think I recall you reduced to a token amount but did not feel comfortable enough to back the BOD with your original holding. I tried to make an informed decision as I felt possible and in fairness to Kevin Hart I spoke directly to him like I guess many PIs and also received clear answers to queries I had from COC.

I suspect if Billy Allan decides to stay there will be alignment with the new BOD. Interestingly one of the promotional videos by Billy Allan certainly addressed the issue that tangible progress was required in 2017 so I think he as he should have been with his role indirectly acknowledged that the company needed to significantly address shareholder concerns.

[watfordhornet] 15/3/2017 20:20

I think the world has gone mad. Our main shareholders(other than COC) have voted against and no one is concerned.AIM is an unregulated minefield - there is very little preventing COC from doing very well out of this but small PI's walking away with nothing. Pretty sure all those who have been investing in AIM for many years have examples where they have been shafted.Although the BOD have not done well we now have a main investor who we know little about and has not clearly set out intentions.Am I barking mad or is anyone else concerned?

[winnet] 15/3/2017 19:44

yup good post Benj, I'd imagine he'd go nowhere unless forced.

Btw, reading some of these boards you would think that most Pis voted with the BODs would you?

Makes you wonder.