Bowleven Share Discussion Threads

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:51

le_comm can you explain how the "asset raiders" sell off Etinde on the cheap without shareholders voting for that?

[cyan] 17/3/2017 10:48

Good morning Le_com.
As I wrote before you could have made the difference if you had held. The implication from your post is that you may buy back in and support Billy.
So what is the strategy going forward?

[belo horizonte] 17/3/2017 10:38

Cyan
It depends upon what Allen has to say. I don't believe 22% gives anyone the right to do what it wishes with a company. We need more explanation from both sides. Hart and Crawford must go and costs have to be reduced but I am very dubious about COC's intentions. If it wants the company, let it go to 30% and then make an offer. I don't want the company disappearing into a black hole with no accountability.

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:38

That's OK winnet I respect your views even if I don't agree with them and it was much closer than I expected. First of all I thought it might be close because of all the phoning, emails, google ads, paper letters sent out by the company. Most people will be flattered to be called by a company director and they no doubt had a good pitch.

Once CoC went to 22% though I thought it was a huge uphill struggle because I've never seen such a high PI vote turn out. Also almost all the PIs I know would have voted FOR so I extrapolated that wrongly across the silent majority.

[ihavenoclue] 17/3/2017 10:37

Winnet... Billy may still yet resign as it's only been a few days since the RNS. I think COC increasing their stake may force his hand.One thing I am sure I of is that if the board won the share price would be sub 25p by now.All IMHORegards IHNC

[winnet] 17/3/2017 10:29

I'll admit though winnet we didn't think it would be as close as it was first time and I got that wrong.

---

I wasn't criticising you personally log. Just making a general comment. You couldn't know!

It's hard for anyone really to know given the diffuse [becoming less diffuse lol] shareholder base.

BTW - Martin only lost by <1% - so it works both ways!

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:26

by the way Log and Shak are talking as if this new vote is a foregone conclusion.

I think we are assuming that CoC will be buying stock in the market now and increasing their stake. It's a logical assumptin. Billy only won by 0.6% otherwise it would have been a clean sweep.

I'll admit though winnet we didn't think it would be as close as it was first time and I got that wrong.

[cyan] 17/3/2017 10:22

"it will lose the next round."
Why would COC be doomed to fail?. Enough reasonably large holders have already signalled their willingness to remove Billy if needs must.

[eddiew] 17/3/2017 10:22

Am i right in believing that if you excluded CoC's shares then the vast remaining shareholders voted to keep the BoD in place. Why should anybody trust CoC ?

[winnet] 17/3/2017 10:19

by the way Log and Shak are talking as if this new vote is a foregone conclusion. I don't agree.

For a start they have to persuade the some of the 70% of holders who didn't vote for them to vote with them this time. IMO they will likely lose more votes than they gain.

I wouldn't be sure, i recall a few weeks ago people saying XYZ is inevitable.

Lets see what the company says.

Billy will hopefully will have a plan. I'm certainly not getting any more shares until i see what the plan is.

[billytkid2] 17/3/2017 10:19

Winnet. Kevin lost the vote, they can't just ignore it and have all the directors stay in their jobs and continue with same strategy. I know you would prefer that but it's not right. Coc will push this through and us share holders will be paying the bill for all this lost time and expensive PR from the bod.

[belo horizonte] 17/3/2017 10:16

We need a statement from the company clearly explaining what the conversation has been with COC since the EGM and why it feels it should continue to employ the likes of Hart and Crawford when it was clearly in the spirit of the recent EGM that these people be sent packing. There may be good reasons why they have been kept on temporarily but we need to know. If COC is simply bullying to take full control by removing all independent director oversight, it will lose the next round. If it wants the company, let it make an offer.

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:15

BTW I think the appointment of directors with involvement with Afren and Petroceltic will be a bit of an own goal by CoC in the eyes of some private investors. A lot of money was lost in these two companies.


Despite that the two proposed directors have impressive O&G CVs so the allegation of no O&G experience has been removed. Maybe they'll find a good use for any "surpluss" can and keep winnet happy :-) Personally I think it's unnecessary because Etinde is non-operated.

[wshak] 17/3/2017 10:11

Ok, winnet, if you say so - Billy is just doing the "right thing" in forcing BLVN shareholders to waste more time and money to remove Hart and his crew from the premises.

Unfortunately for him, people who actually own shares in the company will decide what the strategy is moving forwards.

WShak

PS. The honourable thing to do if he didn't agree with COC's strategy would be to resign, not hang around in a powerless role, causing unnecessary expense.

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:10

winnet it is moronic because it is not at all practical. It just causes delay and the loss of Clarkson who presumably was worth keeping. If he was so principled as you say he should have resigned.

[loglorry1] 17/3/2017 10:08

Allan is being daft. I doubt even if he rolls over now COC will let this go now? So what's he achieved. A small delay and its cost him his role and also David Clarkson's role.

KH as an awkward back-seat driver is a no no.
He can't be fired from his employment by resolution. A new board has to take control then make these decisions. Even then he's probably written himself an iron clad employment contract so it will cost a lot of money to get rid of him. If it was me and I found any evidence that Hart had acted with self-interest against stake holders I'd sue him to recover some of these costs.

Log

[winnet] 17/3/2017 10:05

Billy could have stayed if he hadn't been so moronic.

------

Why would Billy stay and pursue a strategy that he fundamentally disagrees with?

Sometimes in life you have to do what's right, not what's in your own self-interest. Yes he could have rolled over and done as hes told. But he hasn't. Bravo i say.

I wouldn't call this in any way moronic. He is protecting the interests of all shareholders, just as he has a fiduciary duty to do.

This guy has earned my respect by not looking after his own salary and benefits.

He can't be painted as culpable for BLVN past failures because hes new. This time the same arguments cannot be used.

This is an asset strip - not shareholder activism!

[cyan] 17/3/2017 10:05

The few of us who have already declared our willingness to vote have enough between us to remove him . That is if everyone else votes as they did last time; can't see why there would be a rush to support Billy.

TW has his say. Will Billy 'do the right thing'

[wshak] 17/3/2017 10:00

winnet,

COC are simply doing exactly what I'd have done in a similar situation. Do you suppose that they haven't secure extra votes to make sure that Billy goes this time?

Billy could have stayed if he hadn't been so moronic.

[kbrook] 17/3/2017 09:58

Really disappointing that they could not get together and work out a compromise. Looks like neither side are willing to give an inch. It seems like BA wants to carry on exactly like before and COC don't want to move either.
The only way they can guarantee success is to buy a hell of a lot more. I suppose BA could also dig into his wallet and buy a few also but seeing as he has yet to buy any that seems unlikely.
I was happy with the result of the last vote as it seemed like a good compromise deal, but intransigence by both sides seems to have scuppered what could have been a fresh start for the company.

[cyan] 17/3/2017 09:57

If we have to vote again we really need to completely extract the roots.
Not only do we need a resolution to remove Billy from the boardroom ; we need a resolution to let him and KH go completely. KH as an awkward back-seat driver is a no no.

[winnet] 17/3/2017 09:44

I guess it's not his money being wasted ...

--------------------

its depends on your definition of wasted doesn't it Shak. All this is about value and who gets it.

COC are going to have to try much harder now to convince "reasonable" shareholders that they have anyone's interests but their own on the line.

This was always about getting hold of Etinde to sell on.

I await a BOD statement with interest.

[tradingmyplan] 17/3/2017 09:44

Disgraceful behaviour from the chairman here. How can someone who doesn't own a single share in the company block the wishes of the majority of the shareholders?

If Billy Allen insists on throwing more money down the drain to fight this then I hope we chase him to pay it back when he fails.