Hurricane Energy Share Discussion Threads

[senseman] 12/4/2023 17:52

DCUs and ISAs Today 18:51 SENSEMAN
I have read the Deed Poll Constituting Deferred Consideration Units. I am confused.
Can anyone explain in simple lay terms:-
1. Difference between Class 1 & Class 2 DCUs?
2. If the Scheme passes, which of the 2 classes do SHs receive? Or can they nominate which they receive?
3. If a SH’s HUR shares are held in a share ISA, will the DCUs remain under the ISA umbrella? Note: this will be a point of fact under UK tax law, not one of ‘broker opinion’
Page 1 (D) of the Deed Poll (DCUs) references both Class 1 & Class 2 but does not explain whether they are different in substance on nature. Nor what is the factor determining which an individual SH will receive. Schedule 1 Point 2.5 does not provide better clarification.
Regarding ISA - HLansdowne have opined several times DCUs remain under ISA umbrella. But a fellow SH reports his accountant opining that the Scheme refers to them as 'Special Documents'? and UK tax law excludes 'Special Documents'? from being held in ISA.
If someone could the time and trouble to explain the Class 1 & 2 distinction and which we would receive, I would be grateful.
If a couple of PIS holding a few million and an accountant could ask their accountant for something definitive, I would also be grateful

[marmar80] 12/4/2023 07:17

Oil is rising and so Hurricane's bid&ask.
From my observation, if we private shareholders limit the supply, the funds will be buying near or above 8p to secure possible 50% payout split in max 3 years, which is still a much better return for them than in any other investment.

[wbodger] 11/4/2023 18:09

Re 37263 .. "why not keep Hurricane listed for a couple more years" ... CA need to cash in. Maybe listing to 2024 might work if they are still around in 2024 but even if the listing carried on the share price would decline markedly as cash repayments are made.

(I still don't understand how the DCUs help CA. Perhaps unitise them in some reincarnation as a Trust?)

I think Prax are just unwilling to pay for the best possible outcome when it is uncertain. This is the best compromise: we might get 12.5 per share, but won't get less than 6.02.

[senseman] 11/4/2023 17:43

Johns on LSE has posed following question. does anyone here have explanation?
"Does anyone know why the court vote on the deal is being held before the vote on the resolutions for the scheme of arrangement to be voted Yes or no ??Any theories ??????

With the bit of research I've done it's normally the other way around but not stated it has to be anyway round as if agreed with all parties before hand.
It seems it goes in our favour this way round if enough of us vote on the court vote with our objections too, the whole deal could be denied and squashed by by a judge if they thought it to be an unfair deal for minority shareholders.

But why would Hur risk this ( maybe should be a question for the list Senseman ) it just doesn't feel right that they would risk it this way round, there must be a good reason but I'm struggling to come up with one. Thanks"

[kooba] 11/4/2023 14:28

They say this is around the takeover code..what is allowed to be published on the website looks to be constrained by that. The odd thing is that means that shareholders present may get answers that other shareholders not present do not get to be able to hear. AGM's are not under same rules if not in a takeover situation.

[marmar80] 11/4/2023 14:21

Wondering if the instructional accumulation will increase the share price to 8p+. Seems like this is to happen.

[marmar80] 11/4/2023 14:19

Thank you Sir.

[senseman] 11/4/2023 13:59

kooba/marmar questions in as Q15 as two parts
can anyone answer this - the GM presentation will be uploaded to HUR website. HUR say Q & A's following won't be (for legal reasons?). Are they correct? I remember live AGM incl Q & A's was broadcast one year - when RB of CA asked Trice if he would sell Linwick for $500 mill to derisk all and everyone immediately and leave HUR with LanFax. Trice said he wouldn't. Why was it legal for Q & A's to be broadcast then, but they cannot even be uploaded to HUR website now?

[laserdisc] 11/4/2023 13:06

average stock on loan for March 2023 .67% @12,366,944 shares
GB00B580MF54
HURRICANE ENERG OR
12366944.56
1837516004
0.67
fallen only slightly over the last 6mths
Any one know , Be interested to know ,how does all this play out come the de listing from AIM

Stats. 2022
Jan 10,790,194
Feb 13,494893
March 12,161259
April 18,749018 running @ 1%
May 18,114657 running @ 0.98
June 17,050579 running @July 16,064506 running @ 0.87
Aug 17076184.running @0..92
Sept17311779 running @0.94

[marmar80] 11/4/2023 12:34

Even now more sells and bid goes slightly higher.

[marmar80] 11/4/2023 11:59

I think some funds are still accumulating here. Bid bit higher every single day.

[kooba] 11/4/2023 11:13

37265 set some thoughts out but maintaining a listing and complying with AIM rules and advisors etc comes at a cost and as i said would make funding acquisitions problematic i guess. But i suggest its one of the many questions to ask the board at the general meeting.My main one is for Prax around their ambition to build a meaning producing portfolio , how soon might we see the first added production being brought into Hurricane?

[senseman] 11/4/2023 11:02

can kooba opine why Prax may not want/ can't keep HUR AIM listed till 2026?

[marmar80] 11/4/2023 10:54

Insaw that list. Thanks man. I would like to also know why Prax cant keep Hurricane listed.

[senseman] 11/4/2023 10:50

LSE folk are knocking together a circa 20 question list to email the BoD prior to 14 April deadline for GM questions. Will be finalised 13 April for folk to email HUR BoD. Also will be used as crib sheet for GM attendees to use on at 18 April AGM. Feel free to pop over and add - use copy & paste then add question as next numbered in lost. Try be concise & precise

[soilderboy] 11/4/2023 06:54

Best just sell and have done.

[agnabeya] 09/4/2023 11:52

marmar- I thought I answered yesterday-forgot to push the button :(
I wrote to the board on Thursday- but then remembered it was Easter weekend- so I might get something next week. Fingers crossed.

[kooba] 09/4/2023 07:42

Prax need to own 100% to utilise the tax losses was my understanding thats why there is no stump equity. Also if they use the company to make significant acquisitions we would quickly get diluted out of sight we would also be minority shareholders whose interests may not be totally aligned with PRAX.With the DCU's the revenue share is fixed and we get 17.5% of any acquisition they make to end 2026 up to the 12.5p ceiling without any dilution irrespective of what it costs them. I understand their ambition is to be a significant producer and could already be in talks. The EPL has left assets available on the cheap and so the 7500 bopd from well 6 could be a small part going forward. Unless someone else comes in i cannot see there is any real leverage to get them to change the deal and the board not in any position and go back and ask for a complete rejig. A third party making a move is the main chance of getting anything better but i can't see any split ownership type model ever working personally.

[marmar80] 08/4/2023 20:42

Email the board. I also cant see the point in this delisting. A lot of pain.

[laserdisc] 08/4/2023 13:33

Dont see why Prax could not put some further monies in the deal for Hur shares to remain on Aim for a few years. Could issue new type of HUR share b instead of issuing DCU'S this way private investors could
have any future dividends paid into their ISA's

[agnabeya] 08/4/2023 11:15

Whoever said -‘there is no such thing as a stupid question’ never met me.
So here goes.

If I have not sold my shares by the time this ‘arrangement’ is concluded- how can I sell them later, as PRAX is not listed on Aim? I’m presuming once the arrangement is concluded, HUR will be no more?

[senseman] 07/4/2023 10:21

kooba - the issue being important i raised it on LSE 11.11 today and opined PIs should visit ADVFN for your view. most won't bother. i think you should copy your ADVFN post to LSE. I would have but want to avoid any unnecessary handbags

[kooba] 07/4/2023 03:45

Last line answers your own question "The minority squeeze-out mechanism is not relevant to a scheme as the scheme will bind all shareholders when it becomes effective.""The main advantage of a scheme of arrangement is that, if successful, it will bind all shareholders (regardless of whether, or in what way, they voted). However, due to the High Court's involvement, schemes of arrangement are less flexible structures than contractual takeover offers."Same sourcehttps://www.burges-salmon.com/news-and-insight/publications/guide-to-public-takeovers-in-the-uk

[senseman] 06/4/2023 23:35

From Burges Salmon 'Guide To Public Takeovers in the UK'

3. Minority squeeze-out mechanism
Under the Companies Act 2006, bidders making a contractual takeover offer have the right to acquire compulsorily the shares of minority shareholders if they have acquired, or unconditionally contracted to acquire, both 90% of "the shares to which the offer relates" (i.e. the shares which were not held by the bidder at the time the offer was made) and 90% of the voting rights in the company to which the offer relates. This therefore means that any shares held by the bidder before it formally makes an offer for the target company will not count towards the 90% thresholds. The minority squeeze-out mechanism is not relevant to a scheme as the scheme will bind all shareholders when it becomes effective.