Sirius Petroleum Share Discussion Threads

[chuffy1972] 07/9/2020 11:14

Drr Its real.
I received it couple of weeks ago.The reason I didn't post was I was curious to see if the cruise ship arrived.Since it hasn't well.....

[dr rosso] 07/9/2020 11:10

SRSP is not a private Company

[htrocka2] 07/9/2020 11:09

chuffy….now that we're delisted does that mean srsp are currently a private company and AIM Rules no longer apply?

[dr rosso] 07/9/2020 11:06

"our priority is to conclude another producing asset which is currently underway."


Dunno how genuine this Chuff stuff is, but I see that there is no denial of 114. Indeed quite the opposite if this is the additional producing asset as referenced in the AR.

114 looks done and dusted, simply awaiting MPR to give the nod, then it`s over to the shareholders to give the go-ahead, so completing the rto. Is that a shrimp boat on the horizon?

[chuffy1972] 07/9/2020 11:00

Vat👍

[vatnabrekk] 07/9/2020 10:57

Thank you for that chuffy.

[chuffy1972] 07/9/2020 10:52

Dear Mr Chuffy,

We would ask that before you make such accusations that you are in possession of the facts. At all times the Board has acted correctly. Here is the order of events:

• Yes - you are correct that we initially entered into agreement to suspend SRSP based on OML 109 and culminating in a Reverse Take Over (“RTO”).

• SRSP then entered into a farm in agreement on a second asset, which was producing at a higher rate and the proposed transaction constituted another RTO event in itself (which we disclosed but didn’t name the asset under conditions set out by the asset owners).

• There were two RTO processes running in parallel which our Nomad and lawyers were involved in at all stages and in addition both RTOs were conditional which was clearly stated.

• Aim provides for six months to conclude an RTO, and if another RTO event occurs during that period you still have to complete both transactions within the initial six-month period.

All of the above is announced in accordance with AIM Rules whilst listed.

With regard to OML109, we are unable to verify that these actions have taken place and frankly choose not to do so at this time given that our priority is to conclude another producing asset which is currently underway.

Finally, we would advise that you choose your narrative carefully when making accusations which are simply untrue.  You will find all of the related announcements to the above on the website.

Regards

Sirius Board


I still find it odd all 3 have perked up recently as Pig and Dr r mentioned.Something doesn't stack up.Why wouldn't they just categorically state we are no longer involved and be done with it.I suppose its the Sirius way to keep the veil of secrecy intact.

Vat you've been telling us from day one 109 would never happen because of the complexity.I think we could do alot worse than take Vats advice always logical in his pursuit of the truth.Welldone Vat.

[vatnabrekk] 07/9/2020 10:39

Dr. Rosso:
How about this one from MPL's web site? I didn't even know that they had a web site!
"MPL has commenced plans to carry out well optimisation in its Abana field in 2020."



Note that it says commenced plans, rather than commenced optimisation.

Thinking a bit more about your earlier link to Mayowa Abiola:


Despite my previous doubts I am now of the belief that the comment “Carried out the Contract process and Award of the (OML 114) Abana Turnkey Contract worth $40m” does indeed refer to SRSP.

Of course the award of a contract, and the signing/completion and execution of that contract are two different things. IMHO it is possible that Moni Pulo has indeed agreed to award the farm-in contract to SRSP, but that it cannot be signed off and executed until the DPR gives their approval, as I suggested in my earlier post 104950, for cash-flow reasons. If that is the case, then it is a question of how long do we have to wait for DPR approval.

Another point I should make is that looking at the AIS system on MarineTraffic.com I see no marine activity on OML 114. If any optimisation work was going on, then surely some of the vessels would be transmitting on AIS, so I can't believe that work has begun yet.

[dr rosso] 07/9/2020 09:54

Vat. No, it was an Upstream article quoting MPL and I`m sure it said "well optimisation".

Dr Rosso - 31 Aug 2020 - 20:28:07 - 104767 of 104998 SIRIUS PETROLEUM - CASHED UP AND READY TO ROLL - SRSP
Seems an almighty coincidence to me that Sirius, having drawn down a $10m farm-out fee to go in on 114, seeking a further $40m to develop the block, whilst a recently recruited Contract and Procurement Specialist at Moni Pulo announces that she has successfully pulled off a $40m deal, the Co. itself stating that well optimisation is going ahead on the largest field within that same block. Note that the prolific Abana oil field has a gas cap which has not been exploited yet

"the Co. itself stating that well optimisation is going ahead on the largest field within that same block"



Possibly this....

[vatnabrekk] 07/9/2020 09:52

Dr. Rosso, ref your post 104984 "edit: Not sure now about july, can`t find article from Upstream". Could it have been this enhancement event in July 2005?

[dr rosso] 07/9/2020 09:50

Along with the fabled (mythical, imaginary) cruise ship ie does not exist, never has existed

[rpat2] 07/9/2020 09:43

Yes vat you are correct

[htrocka2] 07/9/2020 09:36

So what happened to the 'promised' RTO?....it ended up as just yet another discarded pipedream.....The RTO was a 'red-herring' to prevent them from sinking into oblivion.

[vatnabrekk] 07/9/2020 09:10

Yes rpat, the suspension was at the request of the company, but having done that and then failed to complete the RTO the stock market rules meant that they had to delist after 6 months. So the actual delisting wasn't at the behest of the company, which was my answer to HT.

[htrocka2] 07/9/2020 09:07

They suspended voluntarily under Rule 14...however, this Rule only lasts for 6 months....then they were delisted under Rule 41.....because they did not comply with Rule 14.

[rpat2] 07/9/2020 09:03

25/02/2019 7:30amTEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF TRADING ON AIMSIRIUS PETROLEUM PLCAt the request of the Company trading on AIM for the under-mentioned securities has been temporarily suspended from 25/02/2019 7:30am, pending an announcement and publication of an admission document.At the request of the company

[bestdeal1] 07/9/2020 08:49

Surely delisting was not voluntary, AIM threw them out because they did not complete the RTO

[vatnabrekk] 07/9/2020 08:48

Yes HT, but that was a different situation. That wasn't a voluntary decision by the company, the stock market rules meant they had to be delisted having been suspended for 6 months.

[htrocka2] 07/9/2020 08:39

vat..

'and as approval has not yet been received from shareholders, then completion cannot have occurred'

I'm not sure how they do it, but they seem to circumvent that rule... I wasn't asked to vote on delisting?...yet they delisted anyway.

'A delisting that is of voluntary nature can only occur if shareholders holding up to 90% of the share capital agree to the delisting offer made by the company..'

[vatnabrekk] 06/9/2020 22:36

Dr. Rosso: Please clarify your statement in your post above:
"MPL states, July 2020, that well optimization is going ahead on Abana."

Where did you find this info, and what exactly does it say.

I note the statement in last year's accounts "Completion, would occur once all remaining conditions are met... once the Group has secured approval from shareholders"

and as approval has not yet been received from shareholders, then completion cannot have occurred.

[dr rosso] 06/9/2020 22:11

Gas monetization there for the taking on 114. Fits with the aim of optimizing oil flow at farm-in, then take up the option to proceed onto gas production. Gasol was lined up as partner but went bust in 2015.





"the Group would acquire an initial 40% interest, (reducing to 30% after
cost recovery), in the oil assets on the licence in return for the payment of a $10m farm-in fee and by committing to provide funding for the redevelopment of the existing producing field, estimated at $40m, and exploration, appraisal and development of other oil prospects and discoveries on the licence.The FOA also includes an option, but not an obligation, for the Group to farm-in to the discovered and appraised gas assets on the licence. The licence contains a gas discovery which GCA ascribed recoverable 2C contingent resources of 541 billion cubic feet in its 2017 CPR. Completion, would occur once all remaining conditions are met, approval from the Minister of Petroleum Resources is secured relating to the transfer ofthe interest and once the Group has secured approval from shareholders"


And we know that Moni Pulo has done a $40m deal with somebody. MPL states, July 2020, that well optimization is going ahead on Abana. That suggests that MPR has given approval.

Seems a perfect fit for SRSP. Get Abana optimised to 5k bopd, from present 3k. Generate instant revenue. Develop the substantial gas cap which sits untouched on the same field. Proceed to acquire further assets, with collateral in place.


edit: Not sure now about july, can`t find article from Upstream

[captminion] 06/9/2020 20:28

Well Pig appears to have rattled a few cages ! Certainly provoked Serl0ck into action never seen so many posts in a single day (and no I’m not Pig)
Although if history serves me right we appear to be getting set up for more disappointment (is there any thing of significance due in, annual accounts perhaps?).

It’s clear that in his opinion there’s nothing of any significance coming our way anytime soon however hard others try to make their theories fit their hopes and aspirations.

I would argue that until they clarify their failings on Ororo their credibility is shot. Although I do wonder how they can raise capital over a 10 year period specifically for the Ororo project only to have a spat with one of our partners who subsequently 12 months later carries out the task to which we’ve contributed. What would have been the mood if they had been successful and how come they were so quick to attempt it where we’d failed after 10 plus years ?

In any event truth will out in the next annual reports and we can make a judgement call based on them. Maybe we can finally all come to the same conclusion on this whole debacle.

But one things for sure they’ll return in one guise or another sooner or later with a begging bowl as the pickings are to great to let be.

[vatnabrekk] 06/9/2020 20:22

It would seem that the problem (or one of the problems) with Ororo was that SRSP had difficulty finding funding for the first stage of the operation prior to first oil, as they didn't have anything to offer the lender as collateral. Perhaps this project would have been more suitable for a company that already had producing assets.

Nevertheless, there may still be potential for SRSP to be involved in Ororo in the future, if they can arrange a farm-in with Owena, and if there is anything remaining in the reservoir by the time they put out the fire!

Similar situation with OML 109, in that the would-be lender of the £45M required SRSP to provide collateral, which it could not do. There was a suggestion (perhaps more a hope) that the lender might accept the cashflow from the operation as security against the loan, but presumably that didn't work out. (I certainly wouldn't have lent $45M on that basis, if I had $45M that is!)

I am convinced that the work currently being carried out on Ejulebe with the Lacie Bourg is not being done by SRSP, and that this contract has gone.
(Ref. the link provided by Dr. Rosso to Wellberg Energy's "Experience" web page, they list the wellhead work done for TPOS as SN1 and SN2 out of 35 jobs, and if that is in chronological order then these surely cannot be recent jobs, hence at some point prior to SRSP's involvement with TPOS.)

Regarding the OML 114 farm-in, it is my belief FWIW that SRSP have indeed been awarded the contract by Moni Pulo and that there is no problem regarding the funding, but that the farm-in will not be completed and executed until they obtain DPR approval, for the cash-flow reasons that I explained in my earlier post. We may have to wait some considerable time for that approval.

All IMHO of course, but based on what we know plus the application of a bit of logic.