Gulf Keystone Petroleum Share Discussion Threads

[oliver666] 21/10/2016 14:21

Yes, kind of reminds you of the time a bloke with a beard sat in the excalibur case, yet we are trying to work out how he as a pipe company and some odd reason it has some $480 million in courtesy of the RULING FAMILY IN ERBIL.. Foreign name ducth or similar

Primed or not Primed , but maybe next week it will unfold a bit more

[broadford bay] 21/10/2016 14:14

oilver666,
the ability and the preparedness of PIs to invest/lose money in going after financial wrongdoers is more than questionable.

Specialist investors/funds, so-called Vulture Funds and Distressed Debt specialists, have the bottle and the money to do this.
They have a history of success in such matters and there may yet be one, or two, now lurking on the Register.

[oliver666] 21/10/2016 14:03

BB, I think a current case as some merit.As to its final outcome, who knows , but then it took some work to get it out in public.

A key issue is where sovereign law comes into play.

If one goes back to the Tanker that sat off the est Coast of the USA, the minute it was suggested its cargo was landed adn parties appeared in the Iraq Supreme court, the KRG MNR failed Hack from the GuArdian was spinning the line the US had no jurisdiction to rule on a case.Of course the buyers of the oil and landing company dropped it as quick as they could.

What many did not know was DANA had in place ruling agaisnt the KRG MNR since 2014, but the ultimate ruling came in London under the court of international arbitration, when Hawrmi and the failed hack from the Guardian attempted to pull the Soveriegn Immunity act , so as not to pay or making out the court had jurisdiction. The matter was the KRG did not have sovereing immunity, and lost again in that case, that ruling made a mockery of the failed hacks statements on the Tanker and Hawrmis.

Dana will actually list these issues under the ADX, but the ADX of abu dabi allows them to remove them from view, which kind of defaets the notion, that a stock market is regulated when news is issued. Lesson dont buy shares on the Abu Dhabi Exchange, as the regulatory news gets removed

Crucial point in comparing regulation and its govering bodys, the FCA cant not access all information or details and as to follow a procedure to get a search warrant even. SEC has in its armour a Subpoena, meaning it can walk into any company and take what it wants and freeze the company there and then, arrest directors adn others. the UK operates this FCA which the C refers to conduct, its toothless and was designed that way when it was put in place.

[misha_hitstinks] 21/10/2016 14:02

GKPhero,

Give us,

Amos Dubetta

[bigdog5] 21/10/2016 14:00

So quiet here, do they think its all over ?

I've had a look at the fake reverend's "top ten" over on one of the many bb's run by the village idiot. Yet again he's missed out some crucial points (on purpose, doesn't know or prefers to keep quiet about them) as it wouldn't fit with his continual ramping agenda?

I see 1waving and FE11 have become miffed at the events that have unfolded. 1waving now posting posts from GRH and his offers to help. I recall saying months ago the company had financial options open to them that shareholders wouldn't like but at least they would be in a much stronger position now than what the BoD has served up. When its all considered the company has effectively been "stolen" for around $250m or even less. Ferrier/Zouari should be held accountable for that imho. As should most of the previous BoD's imo.

Its not that long ago that there were interested parties willing to FI/put up money which would have left shareholders with a lot more than the original 5% and now 14.5%. So who was responsible for preventing offers of all shapes and sizes?

Perhaps if it became known when a certain negotiator sold shares and bought bonds, which may of course be coincidental, or could it possibly give rise to another conspiracy theory, who knows. The words "vested interests" come to mind though.

Then of course we only have to consider the "close period" as quoted by the BoD as an excuse not to purchase shares. Why would they if they knew the company was being handed to the BH's? Just find an excuse to match?

Then there's the money that the MNR could have paid but didn't. At this point we could ask why wasn't GKP allowed to market its own oil. Would that be construed as "too transparent" for those up the food chain?

Then there's the SA debacle, Toryboy's money, who allegedly advised against arbitration, and why the Senior bond holders weren't prepared to work with the company and re jig the bonds. Is 13% pa so bad currently?

Do keep your eyes open to see where the 3 "handed back" assets end up. There's oil in all three, just a matter of drilling in the correct place.

Shaicon, the con of the century. A Politicians dream?

Only mulling of course.

[lardner23] 21/10/2016 09:20

So when you hear 'my learned friend' at trial, you mean that's not genuine? Oh man, I'm gutted.

[nestoframpers] 21/10/2016 09:01

I didn't think Lawyers had real friends.

[1712notout] 21/10/2016 08:52

Huge buy
😡😠😠😱8526;😴

[lardner23] 21/10/2016 08:14

oliver666,

The fact that the BoD are still using MC, given ND is a friend of the Kozels, suggests the current directors are not looking to take any action against the previous ones, otherwise there would be an obvious conflict of interest.

[oliver666] 20/10/2016 23:06

lardner23
20 Oct '16 - 20:31
Any thoughts?

There was always a simple answer and still is. GKP lawyers could have at any time taken action in that case against all parties, but then GKP employ mickey mouse lawyers. Well know fact in the US, never claim what you know was gained by means that could be called FRAUD , claiming that money makes a person liable and all previous share dealings dating back to inception can be looked at. GKP hold that responsibility , there lawyers do and to brag about arranging debt swap, makes them mickey mouse, and one as to ask what CEO/CFO would even consider taking a position when the company as lawyers who have never done anything of useful means

[hearts2hart] 20/10/2016 22:39

Evening all genuines

[phillis] 20/10/2016 21:59

NOr
Never felt like that myself!

[lardner23] 20/10/2016 21:49

Nest, I meant can you describe what you understand by a claw back agreement in specific contractual terms?

[earlgreyhot] 20/10/2016 21:46

if nothing else the last couple of RNSs show who some of the noteholders were/are.

[nestoframpers] 20/10/2016 21:44

Rob Bee ‏@Rob_Bumble_Bee 14h14 hours ago
@gradecricketer Unless the umpire is stood at the other end with his finger up!!!!! #lbw

More
Cam Begg ‏@thebeggarman 14h14 hours ago
@gradecricketer and unless you were wearing ye olde pads, that lacked padding. A hit from their quick could almost drop you

[nestoframpers] 20/10/2016 21:43

Well it is meant as a fairness buffer , the BHs can make plenty but when it gets too much then the PIs that have had a 85% haircut then start getting cream off the top too .

[nestoframpers] 20/10/2016 21:41

Is this true Phillis ? wonder if it turns notout on ?

The Grade Cricketer
‏@gradecricketer

There's something erotic about being hit on the very middle of the pad and watching the ball roll directly back down the middle of the pitch

[lardner23] 20/10/2016 21:38

Nest, what do you mean exactly by 'claw back agreement'?

[nestoframpers] 20/10/2016 21:36

I understood that the junior notes had to take more of a hair cut than the senior ones , they went along with the restructuring as they know there is much more to come in value I think/hope.

Wish there had been a claw back agreement as someone suggested as I think the BHs are going to profit much more than they would have if GKP had been able to repay was intended.

Any way if this kicks off we are done for

[lardner23] 20/10/2016 21:32

The 'delusional ones' may simply come on here straight from am-dram central casting. There's something incredibly inconsistent in content at times. Script lines not learnt? Surely it's not that hard for the walk-on parters. Maybe just lazy. You know what it's like: you get a part in a soap, you get some audience approval and you think the role's yours for the rest of your career. Easy Street.

[bigdog5] 20/10/2016 21:26

Someone who is able to do so should warn those on the delusional rampers bb so they can buy a few billion tomorrow?