Serica Energy Share Discussion Threads

[bountyhunter] 09/9/2018 11:33

They have already said they have issued two waivers not yet publicised!

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 11:31

GG

I cant agree with that the US administration are not giving waivers out thats why the extension as been given by sqz and BP, its not sunk in with you but come 1st of Octo and you will agree, thats unless Trump is impeached or something else could happen to him

[arteespresso] 09/9/2018 11:30

True, it could, and I'd accept paying a higher price. It's all about managing risk!!

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 11:27

I am not desperate its just i hate it when i read a thread and the people dont see the wood for the trees. Dont forget when you guys are so bullish and other people are reading this thread you can effect there decision its good to get a balance and i think i have got my point across

[general george] 09/9/2018 11:27

The waiver RNS could drop at any time.

Imagine that.....

[arteespresso] 09/9/2018 11:25

All this conjecture, unfortunately we are not dealing with rational people, trump is a looney and unstable, no one knows what he'll do. If it were another president, there could be more logic applied to any argument. I have sold all my holdings over the last few weeks, on the basis of there may not be a waiver, however remote or not it may be. I believe long term, however, would rather get back in at a higher price than risk potentially risk loosing a lot, especially since I've held sqz for circa 10 years. Either way, will be watching and getting back in at some stage, regardless of waiver or not.

[general george] 09/9/2018 11:22

Chesnuts,

Why are you so desperate?
Hope ur not short.

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 11:09

I am here this morning because its raining and if it stops ni will go out on my MTB, thats all.

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 11:07

Fardel

There is a gap between 27 and 40 p gaps do get filled at some time, but its nothing to do with me there are thousands of share holders who will read that rns over the weekend who missed it on Friday and will read like i did . You guys read it but dont want to see the negative side.

[fardels bear] 09/9/2018 11:03

I'd I'll bet you he doesn't give us a straight answer.

[fardels bear] 09/9/2018 11:02

If it's as bad as that chestnuts then I'll ask you the question I ask ALL derampers...We know why we are here on a Sunday morning. But why are you...?

[bountyhunter] 09/9/2018 11:01

Delaying rather than stopping I think is the concensus.

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 11:01

Fardel

If this is Parliament the Mp would have to break a law not just disagree with the opposing party, or you would end up with just 2 MPs in the end.

[fardels bear] 09/9/2018 11:00

I think chestnuts smells the endgame. Potential 50% loss (but don't forget Columbus and Rowallan) against maybe 300% upside shortly and a desire to drop the price to load up more cheaply are his drivers methinks.

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 10:58

Bounty

At last it sinks in some one who can understand the political abortion which is going on thats stopping the deal on Rhum

[general george] 09/9/2018 10:54

Chesnuts, in his defence, stimulates debate.

And makes one or two valid points in amongst the rubbish and lies.

Anyone is welcome to post.

[fardels bear] 09/9/2018 10:44

Voting off people who don't agree with you is the entire basis of democracy. If a majority of those who can be bothered to vote decide something thing, then that's what happens.

[bountyhunter] 09/9/2018 10:31

It's simple really chestnuts, the field will most likely have to be shut down Sept.30 without a waiver, so (imo) the UK/BP/SQZ will do whatever it takes to get the waiver (temporary management scheme if required which could well explain the delay to the deal concluding) thereby ultimately leaving the IOC/BP/SQZ/UK better off than with no waiver. That's my view anyway and we should find out more 3 weeks tomorrow.

[almsivi] 09/9/2018 10:30

No, Azerbaijan got a waiver because they meet the same criteria for exemption I just laid out! It's at the top of my post in BLACK AND EFFING WHITE

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 10:22

Almsivi

Vote me off if you wish but we will see who is right in the end and if you think just because i dont agree with you , you think its democracy voting every one off doesnt agree with you then go ahead.

[almsivi] 09/9/2018 10:19

If this board were a democracy, I'd vote to have you ban-hammered. In fact, I move to place a vote of no confidence in chestnuts - if enough people agree, maybe the future will be a bit brighter.

[chestnuts] 09/9/2018 10:13

Almsivi

If its as straight forward as you imply , well since 30 th of Nov 2017 BP and Serica applied to renew the licence and not one whiff that the yanks will comply this is a kick in the teeth to the UK who have gone to War standing side by side with them, The yanks put Azerbaijan ahead of the UK and all because we are not putting sanctions on as part of Europe.

[almsivi] 09/9/2018 10:03

What most people don't appreciate is that the USA have had sanctions imposed against Iran a lot, lot longer than the Sanctions that caused Rhum to shut down. Rhum started production in 2005 and in that time, 5 UN resolutions were passed with respect to Iran Sanctions - none of the US sanctions or these previous 5 UN resolutions compelled Rhum to shut-down, until 2010 under UN resolution 1929 - which caused Rhum to shut-in in November 2010.

The re-imposition of EO's that BP are already compliant with does not bother me at all - but should the 1929 resolution be reenacted - which would occur should Iran crash out of the JCPOA - that would give me cause for concern.