We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gold Oil | GOO | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 1.45 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.45 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 01/7/2013 16:02 by cockney sparrow Here's a list of things that Gold oil / Baron oil need to sort out.1.) Website. Gold oil PLC should have a simple redirect to the new Baron oil website, having a website as goldoilplc.com that referes to baronoilplc is stupid and looks naff. 2.) Get the presentation online. 3.) Cancel the GOO.gb listing on plus. Buying Baron oil shares that are then pumped through the plus market blurs the picture and confuses investors. |
Posted at 27/6/2013 15:35 by boomorbust2 Oildon, I guess that those who attended are already investors and they aren't selling up so that's a good sign. Lets wait for the presentation on the new website tomorrow. |
Posted at 17/6/2013 23:05 by nlmbidc I think changing our name will entice some new investors and give the company the fillip it needs.Once new investors cotton on to the near term potential they will buy in and the share price will rise. That's my take on it anyway, for what its worth. nlmbidc |
Posted at 10/6/2013 23:57 by nlmbidc Pem,As we saw from the link that Gattaca put up at the week-end the production is down because of the work-overs at Burdine - averaging around 360 bopd - so that's only about 25% up. Not enough to excite new investors. Maybe higher rates from Burdine 1 and 5 will be announced this week, which will help. We need a license extension on NBM and plans to drill Nancy 2 - then there will be some interest from new investors. nlmbidc |
Posted at 09/5/2013 10:49 by joetricky Ok. I've just spoken to UG investor relations. There wasn't much to glean from them but here goes for what it's worth.Q. Where are you currently exploring for oil? A. Uruguay, Paraguay and now offshore Peru. Q. How aggressive is aggressive? A. Our geology team is on task now looking to take up where Gold Oil left off. Q. Does the contract include any drills? A. We have the option to complete either siesmic or drills. Q. Are you going to drill? A. Our geologists will determine that. Q. When will your geologists determine that? A. That is something that can't be answered until the geologists have completed their current work. Q. Will anything be done this year? A. We haven't made a decision on that yet. Q. Next year? A. We haven't made a decision on that. Q. Are you seeking to farm out part of your 80%? A. A decision hasn't been made on that. We are a junior O&G company but we are part of a company with substantial resources. Q. If a decision is made to drill will you have the finances to go it alone? A. We are part of a company that has substantial resources. Q. Are you going to drill? A. The decision on that will be made by our geologists. The investor relations guy then suggested that as an investor in Gold Oil I should refer my questions to them. One thing that I do find confusing is that UOG would have had full access to the data rooms where their geo's would have done their due diligence so why no decision to drill?????? Or are they just being guarded with info ???? |
Posted at 02/5/2013 10:18 by joetricky Pem, I agree with what you say. I'm trying to understand why we have a damp squid here. I am very pro RB and I believe that this company will make me a richer man than I am now. One day. The fact that we were trading higher on the rumour would suggest that people were expecting more. I think it's a great deal but to be honest I was hoping for more cash and perhaps a return of previous costs.When we produce a time scale of future works on Z34 then people will realise that this is for real. Regardless of whether or not we like it or approve of it people these days are short term investors or traders and they won't be interested until we are close to a spud. As for value of drills etc there would appear to be too many get out clauses in the scenario that TG has managed to glean. Too many if's and buts. I'm not knocking it I'm only trying to find an explanation on why we aren't around the 10p mark just now which is where I think we should be on the back of that deal IF it involves siesmic and drills with time frames that the works will be completed. Think about it. When we announce that further seismic will be completed by Q? and that the first drill will commence Q? that will be a lot more exciting than what we currently have. The only question that traders/investors should ask themselves right now is at what price do they want in. Todays prices are a real steal but it won't be at these prices as soon as the current deal is put into plain English in black and white with dates. |
Posted at 10/4/2013 17:24 by 555zakzak How pathetic and ridiculously childish a BB can become!Seriously what on earth is that all about... if you leave my play ground alone I will leave yours alone. 1. It shows what the t&*ts motive was which we all knew anyway and we also knew it would have little effect and the looser should be ignored as his life, simply put, is visiting BB's and trying to be something he has never been and never will be! AND 2. It shows what a complete shambles people like him bring to investing and BB's. No wonder AIM sucks the life out of investors. I feel sorry for the poor investors that get sucked in by such rubbish! RB... throw us a bone with some Z34 meat on please?? |
Posted at 25/1/2013 08:05 by 555zakzak TG,See below from CHesty1 CHESTY1 25 Jan'13 - 07:38 - 24 of 27 0 0 I don't hold BUT used to so thought you would all like to read this comment.. You never know folks you might make some money out of this one yet. Should I buy shares in Gold Oil? By Darshini Shah | Thu, 24/01/2013 - 16:50 Shares in Gold Oil (GOO) almost halved on Thursday, its first day of trading on AIM in six months, as the company announced it had placed 278 million new shares at 0.75p per share to raise £2.085 million. The net proceeds of the placing will be used "to strengthen the company's balance sheet and for working capital", with any remaining balance "used to consolidate Gold Oil's position in the Nancy-Burdine field and for optimisation of the field". Trading in the shares was suspended at the end of June after chairman John Bell, exploration director Ian Reid and non-executive directors John Charlton and Guy Cowan were not re-appointed to the board. Nancy-Burdine field "essential" The company's strategy remains focused on stabilising production at Nancy-Burdine in Colombia, currently in line with historical rates at between 450 and 600 barrels of oil per day (bopd). In November, a suspension was lifted at Nancy-Burdine four months after operations were put on hold by a local judge acting on the request of indigenous communities. That decision was later ratified by the Supreme High Court. However, the order was reversed and the wells were being returned to production. Gold Oil is now hoping to consolidate its holding from 60% to 81.6% by buying out most of the minority partners. "Cash is always king, but right now, it [has] never been more important, hence the focus on stabilising the Nancy-Burdine production is essential; managing the cost base to be able to at least keep the lights on... using that cash flow is also an important step," pointed out analysts at broker FoxDavies. Elsewhere in Colombia, discussions were underway with a national investor group to undertake exploration activities in the Rosa Blanca block. Peru "prospective" Over in Peru, the Latin America-focused company said discussions for a potential farm-in for Block Z-34 had been "generally well received" and discussions with potential candidates were ongoing. Gold Oil is working on a new permit for additional seismic and future well locations. "Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) permits have become quite a lengthy process in Peru as the Ministry of Energy and Mines is understaffed to cope with the large amount of applications by various companies," the firm explained, adding that it had presented a Force Majeure letter to PeruPetro last week to achieve a "stand-still situation" of the contract, which is a mechanism provided by the Peruvian licence contract. Gold Oil is endeavouring to extend the third phase of the exploration contract to the end of 2014. And an increase in exploration activity in the area could have a positive effect on offshore development costs. In Block Z-38 (north from Block Z-34), operator Karoon, an Australian company, has recently announced a programme to drill two wells with an option of one more by late 2013/early 2014. Gold Oil believes that Karoon's drilling campaign, if successful, should add value to Block Z-34. The company added that Block XXI, located onshore in north-west Peru and close to oil and gas producing assets, was "prospective". Gold Oil has a 30% interest in the block and is the designated operator. It is carried for the first $10 million (£6.3 million) of exploration work. The company has already started the EIA permitting during the fourth quarter of 2012. Management due credit "[Thursday's] update marks the end of the suspension in the shares, and along with it, there also appears to be a change in the company's fortunes, there deserves to be a lot of credit to the incumbent management for actually maintaining its motivation during what has been a difficult time," acknowledged analysts at FoxDavies. However, they pointed out that the modest successes reported did have a root with past management. "We haven't yet had a chance to meet the current team, but now that the cloud surrounding the shares has lifted, we look forward to being able to discuss their future plans in more detail," they added. "Ahead of that, there appears to be a realistic understanding of where the company is at, what it can do now, what it needs to do next, and what it has to do to be able to achieve its goals." Takeover or sale? Shares in Gold Oil have lost about four-fifths of their value since the shares hit a high of 7.1p in May 2012. This has fuelled investor speculation that the company could be a takeover target. FoxDavies said: "It is clear that there will be a strategic review, which may include selling the company, but at the very least, there needs to be a route map forward, which will give investors confidence that the management team understand the issues facing the company, and provide at least an indication as to how much money will be required." Investor reaction Interactive Investor discussion board user 'Mayflower27' commented: "Looks like they [are] after looking to extend the drilling timeframe for Z34 until end of 2014 now, so don't expect to see any movement on the ground there this year. Not much in the short term", although 'nlmbidc' argued: "Agreed Mayflower, but if there is success in the neighbouring blocks the farm-in interest could rise quickly." 'The Guradian' voiced: "The [funds] raised is insufficient to pay off our debts and increase our share of [Nancy-Burdine]. "Reading between the lines, there must be more news to come." This article is for information and discussion purposes only and does not form a recommendation to invest or otherwise. The value of an investment may fall. The investments referred to in this article may not be suitable for all investors, and if in doubt, an investor should seek advice from a qualified investment adviser. You never know folks you might make some money out of this one yet. Be lucky to all & good luck. |
Posted at 14/12/2012 20:36 by gattaca Pem, we have days left to save this company. If we haven't found a Z34 partner, we are left hanging out to dry. There is no indication of an imminent deal.Investors in Gold Oil are about to lose their entire holding. Somehow, I don't think a lot of investors have quite grasped the seriousness of the situation. We need quite a few million quid and we need it now. As TG says, desperate times call for desperate measures. The options seem to be very limited with such a short timescale. I would love to think Berends could talk Vale into a rescue package if they were to receive a large slice of Z34 on very generous terms. That's if they want it. They pretty much have most of XXI. We must retain Nancy to keep the lights on. Karoon seem to be tied up with Z38, such a pity we could not have see a way to incorporate Z34 into a joint bid for a partner. If investors were faced with a choice of accepting a deal on Z34, a deal which saw us having to accept poor, even dreadful terms, or failing that being delisted with a vague possibilty of a relisting or then again maybe not, they would take it. I would give away 80% of the block and accept money, 30-50 million which would keep the company solvent for the distant future and give me a chance to claw back or even gain on my investment. It's not the dream I once had but we are not in any way able to dictate terms to any potential partner. I just hope we are not ripped off completely if we have to go down this road. The block could be Peru's saviour and worth billions. A bidding war would be nice but Berends would have to pull this off very quickly indeed. We have to sell our assets to survive. We have to swallow that. The share price will suffer. But we live to fight another day. As TG says, any other ideas? Got about a day to get them out there. |
Posted at 09/11/2012 13:50 by charlie81 slightly off topic, but do you remember this mob.Criminal investigations have been launched into tax schemes sold by a key shareholder in Rangers Football Club, The Times has learnt. Richard Hughes, the co-founder of Zeus Capital, the finance company at the centre of the Rangers takeover, also set up Zeus Partners, which created and marketed a £134 million film investment scheme that HM Revenue & Customs suspects may be part of an illegal effort to generate millions of pounds in tax relief. The Revenue is understood to be investigating 17 companies set up by Zeus Partners. Criminal investigations by HMRC are reserved for the most serious cases of suspected illegality including those where "only a criminal sanction is appropriate". Mr Hughes, who has more than two million shares in Rangers, a stake of 6.8 per cent, played a pivotal role in the purchase of the Glasgow club after it went into administration in February. The collapse came after Rangers' previous owners became embroiled in disputes with the Revenue. The club has been beset by tax problems that led to the new Rangers, who play at Ibrox Stadium, being forced to start from the fourth tier of Scottish football this season. The Revenue claims to be owed an estimated £73 million in tax and penalties after the club used a tax avoidance scheme to pay its players for nearly a decade. Rangers went into administration over a separate tax problem, when Craig Whyte, who bought it last year, failed to pay an £18 million PAYE bill. When Zeus Capital and the businessman Charles Green bought the club for £5.5 million in June, they presented their consortium of investors as a "new beginning". But a year before the acquisition, Revenue officials raided premises associated with Zeus Partners, two sources told The Times, as well as offices of Seven Arts Entertainment, the US film company that was counterparty to the deal. Neither Zeus Partners nor HMRC commented on the alleged raid. "They showed up, knocked on the door, and said, 'We want to come and look at the records'," one person said of the Seven Arts raid. "They took everything under the sun." Mr Hughes, who has one of the biggest shareholdings in Rangers, founded Zeus Partners as an offshoot of Zeus Capital, in 2006. It was set up so wealthy individuals could access "returns that Zeus Capital has been achieving for its corporate clients". Two other partners run the day-to-day business, although one said that Mr Hughes retained an "active role". Mr Hughes stands to make millions of pounds when Rangers floats on the stockmarket before Christmas. Three other Zeus Capital executives, who do not work at Zeus Partners, own stakes in the club, making the finance house collectively its largest owner. There is no evidence that Zeus Capital marketed schemes similar to those offered by Zeus Partners. The Revenue is not investigating Zeus Capital, the company involved in the Rangers takeover. Zeus Partners' controversial film deal attracted about 165 high-net worth individuals including Hugh Sloane, the hedge-fund mogul and Tory donor, and Laurie McIlwee, chief finance officer of Tesco. Individual investors are not being investigated by HMRC, however. Each investor was offered a "high-risk film production" deal to buy a total of eight new films and some library content from Seven Arts. The deal was structured so that, in the event that the films were "blockbusters", the investors would double their money. If they did badly, the investment would be largely wiped out and the cost could be written off against the investors' other income. Films purchased from Seven Arts included Knife Edge, a 2009 British thriller starring Hugh Bonneville and Tamsin Egerton, The Winter Queen, starring Milla Jovovich, and Autopsy, a horror film directed by Adam Gierasch. None appears to have achieved anywhere close to the "blockbuster" level that would have generated profit. American Summer made only $2,269, according to Box Office Mojo. Deal, a 2008 film starring Burt Reynolds, is said to have made $61,625. A year after signing the deal in May 2008, Zeus Partners declared that each of the 17 companies was worthless, their accounts show, enabling investors to claim tax relief. At the time, however, a number of films had yet to be released. One, The Winter Queen, had not been made. "One of the key questions is how would the investors have known the stock was worthless as early as 2009, when some of the titles had yet to be released," a person close to Seven Arts said. Up to 84 per cent of an investor's contribution was financed by a loan from Seven Arts. The loan was secured against the companies, so investors were not personally liable if films failed. An investor who put in £160,000 could borrow about £840,000 and claim tax relief on the full £1 million without being liable to pay back the loan. For a high-net-worth investor the tax relief would be between £400,000 and £500,000. Rebus Investment Solutions, a company representing several disgruntled Zeus investors, said their clients had been advised that the film deal was a "win-win scenario". "The deal was based on the notion that, if the films were successful, investors would see huge returns and, if they were unsuccessful, they would be able to claim tax relief on the losses," a spokesman said. "Such a bullish view failed to take into account the significant risks, including potential challenges by HMRC." A Rangers spokesman said yesterday that Mr Hughes was "one of a number of minority investors" and had "no involvement in the management of the club", and that Rangers had "no business relationship with Zeus Capital". However, in June, Zeus Capital said that it "worked in conjunction with Charles Green to complete the £5.5 million acquisition of Rangers". In the same month, Zeus Capital was described by Malcolm Murray, the new chairman, as "the primary advisers" on the Rangers deal. Mr Hughes is understood to believe that the focus of the criminal investigation is on Seven Arts, not Zeus Partners. He denied that the film investments could be illegal or amounted to tax avoidance. The investments had been approved by qualified accountants before being marketed. He also said that he had not been contacted by HMRC in relation to the film investigation since it began about 18 months ago. A spokesman for Zeus Partners said: "Zeus Partners provided a number of high-risk investment opportunities, backing highly successful entrepreneurs with a proven track record across a number of sectors. Individual investors had the option of claiming HMRC statutory relief in the event that the investments were unsuccessful. We are aware that there is an HMRC investigation into these and other investments under way at this time and Zeus Partners is providing its full co-operation to HMRC." Seven Arts strongly denied claims that it, rather than Zeus, was the focus of the Revenue investigation. Peter Hoffman, chief executive of Seven Arts, said: "There was nothing fraudulent about the transaction, it was perfectly valid. These were real movies we were intending to make money on." Mr Sloane said he had not claimed for tax relief on the Seven Arts investment. Mr McIlwee and the Revenue both declined to comment |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
