is working (too hard) for a living
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Hey, big --
I had assumed your commentary was about the facts of the post; FYI, there are posters on this board who have said they WILL subscribe to the RO even if the pps is lower, to support the company.
We can't argue about z's post anymore anyway, someone has removed it; what rule it violated, I don't know, maybe a mod will tell us.
Fully agree with you that MB doesn't have to do anything on the RO, or lend the company money, or ..... But he has, as he believes in his dream, great. Other CEOs take $1 in salary, great for them.
End of day, he has to bring financing to the table. Note that if this is a $10 stock as has been independently validated per letter, and we give up 90% in dilution to a financier, we still end up at $1, and I betcha MB has a whole bunch of shares that would leave MB wealthy. And $1 is a thirty bagger over current price.
I do share the apparent view of posters that IF EEGC could bring SOLID financing to the table, they WOULD have a chance (we can argue if probability is 10% or 100%) of license approval.
Unfortunately for all, EarnestDD seems to have data on his side: no lease, no financing = no drilling, no improved pps. Stock stays above $0 (but at 0.3% of independent valuation value) 'just because.'
For disclosure, I am long hundreds of thousands of shares -- no point in selling at this point, unfortunately I have more than enough tax loss carryfoward.
Not sure what your complaint is with Z's analysis in message.
She simply says that IF the stock is below .07, and a shareholder of record from December wants to increase their ownership, they are personally better off buying stock on the open market than through the RO -- end up with more shares, always a good thing.
Particularly since MB has stated he will buy all shares not subscribed by other shareholders.
The only potential issue is that MB won't do that until the end of the thirty days, while individual shareholders could subscribe earlier.
But, there will be no 'rush need' for the money (other than debtors or 'flare gas' technology development) unless the lease application is granted, in which case the stock will likely go over .07 and the problem goes away.
Note that NOTHING (at least disclosed) has prevented MB from lending the company the amount of the RO, and then getting paid back for whatever amounts are subscribed by other shareholders.
The dump happened over the last year, as things looked increasingly bleak.
The market saw this coming.
With less than $10,000 of EEGC shares changing hands at this writing, the market is clearly underwhelmed by the registrations, absent context.
Right now it looks to me that MB needs to sell his existing shares to buy his portion of the rights offering; but, selling at .025 to buy at .07 is nonsensical. Would be better to simply lend money to the company.
Hopefully, there will quickly be a PR which explains the company's plans. Meanwhile, market clearly doesn't believe the stock is going to go over .07 in the 30 days of rights offering effectivity.
The law speaks to 'granting an application.'
I have not even seen a PR indicating that a retention license has been applied for; don't you have to apply before you are granted?
Granting application for retention licence
53-(2) The Minister may only grant an application for a licence if satisfied that -
400K shares times .03 equals $12,000. Somehow, doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Malcolm has said he will exercise all of his -- plus all else which isn't subscribed by shareholders.
For the rest of us, most will make our decision based on share price on 'day 29.' If the stock is at .035, for example, and I care to further invest (I now average at .10) I will buy twice as many shares at .035 rather than subscribe.
For the others who have said they will subscribe regardless of share price, thanks! And Malcolm FOR SURE says thanks!!
d
The answer as to WHY Malcolm is pursuing funidng:
- Because without funding, Malcolm has no hope of being the prevailing party when new applications are received for 13/98.
- He is hoping that MRT allows completion of Bellevue, and he needs funds for that.
- For the gas flare technology?
Note that 'qualifies for licensing and expanded permitting' is different than 'will receive licensing and expanded permitting.'
Put another way, 'qualifies for' is a necessary condition for permitting, but not a sufficient one.
What is sufficient? Don't know, that is logically up to MRT. 22 days and counting.
Interesting documentation. Is the first document the agreement between MRT and GSLM related to 13/98?
I have read company press releases that state EEGC met all work commitments of 13/98. But, Attachment A of the first document clearly shows a schedule for exploratory and production drilling.
Maybe there is a reconciliation between this document and company statements.
Still need to understand MRT requirements for a production license, does anyone have that? Absent a lease, having money will not cause drilling.
Malcolm advises that EEGC has met the conditions of the exploration lease.
I have not seen any EEGC statement that the company has met the conditions for conversion of the exploration lease into production lease.
I thought I remember reading that such conversion required demonstrating that producable oil exists, and it is hard to do that without drilling a well. Certainly, seismic studies create a high expectation, but there is a reason why exploratory wells don't always produce.
Maybe someone on the board knows the requirement for award of a production lease?
IMO, the single most important factor in pps is lease extension/conversion. If sufficient time is allowed, without onerous conditions, financing should be available and then drilling can happen.
It is likely not coincidental that the rights offering is finally being filed such that it's 30 day duration ends after September 30.
IMO, no one (other than Malcolm) would invest in the offering without confirmation of lease extension.
PS. Looks like 80M sales are also being offered by 'selling shareholders,' as part of the Resale registration, anyone have any idea who they are?? I wonder if they will sell before the MRT situation is finalized?
If they in fact did not file until 7/23, then another question.
EEGC's 4/24 PR said they were filing; why did it take three months to file, this is not a difficult document to create.
And is it completely filed now, that is EEGC has no open action items it is all up to SEC??
Why does invest2002 say game is over?
Maybe because there is no indication of SEL 13/98 lease extension or funding, and this new technology feels less than real.
Why does invest2002 say game is over?
Maybe because there is no indication of SEL 13/98 lease extension or funding, and this new technology feels less than real.
I don't see the information about the technology, only information about the business drivers for use of the technology.
It would be good to know patent position, competitive advantage of the technology, date when rights will be owned by EEGC, whether there is additional development work to be done to commercialize it and who will do it, when it will come to market, etc.
$20M on the bottom line would be great.
Now all we need to do is to raise the funds to pay off the company's liabilities (so the technology isn't seized by creditors) and then hire/obtain the human resources to patent, complete development, market, sell, and support this technology.
Hope it is easier than raising funds to drill.
On the rights offering, what has to happen to make it effective -- and why hasn't it happened so far? Who or what is on critical path? All 10Qs are current. PR does not address.
Note that even if registration were effective today, 30 day period would end a week before lease expiration, too late to help operationally.
Malcolm could lend EEGC money with repayment from what he doesn't have to subscribe from the rights offering (which he has committed to fully subscribe), from his $50M LOC. But he hasn't, why not?
My own view is that the recent flurry of PR activity is an attempt to 'goose' the stock price so MB doesn't have to fully subscribe the offering personally -- but I am hoping that data will prove me wrong.
Meanwhile, most recent PR says nothing about what are sufficient conditions for 13/98 extension, and whether EEGC has met them. Talks about money spent, and EEGC 'qualifies' for extension. but nothing on what is sufficient and what EEGC is doing to achieve extension.
When does EEGC expect to hear from MRT?
I understand the concept that Malcolm's personal well being is connected to EEGC success, but again that is a necessary (at this point) but not sufficient condition for EEGC success, IMO.
BTW, my attempt to access the August EEGC PR from EEGC website (press release button) has been met with 'link broken,' anyone had better results?
It is certainly true that rights offerings above market are generally not successful.
However, in this case Malcolm Bendall has personally -- and quite publicly -- committed to buying all shares that are not otherwise subscribed, so we will not have that problem, even if 'public' investors elect to forego the offering and buy stock at the current .024 PPS.
If the proceeds can't be spent on drilling wells in 13/98 due to lease expiration, they can be spent on developing and marketing the definitely needed and hopefully easily operational gas flare capture technology discussed in recent press releases, so Malcolm should have no trouble getting at least $9M out of the discussed $50M personal LOC funded.
Meanwhile, wonder what is delaying the effective date of the rights offering, so EEGC can collect funds and get on with either drilling or development of the gas flare technology?
Agree, Doc.
The PR did not address whether ALL of the conditions for lease extension have been met. Expenditure level is likely a NECESSARY condition, but is it SUFFICIENT?
To me, it continues to look as though Mr. Bendall is trying to get the stock price sufficiently over $.07 such that someone other than himself will invest in the rights offering. If he really had the cash available to invest, he could lend it to the company so drilling could start, and then convert it to stock at .07 when the rights offering became effective.
Agree.
IMO. Unless we have more time to find oil on 13/98, we have nothing. And this PR did not address that issue.
The PR stated facts.
Our question as investors: can EEGC maintain rights for 13/98? What has to happen for that to occur, and what are the probabilities?
Up 74% -- On 15x average volume.
Classic sign of 'front running' good news. Perhaps Howard's predicted positive PR is soon upon us!
dirk
You are probably right about existence of commercial (even enormous) quantities of oil and gas.
The question for this board is whether EEGC shareholders will benefit from that. With a market capitalization of under $4M, the 'efficient market' is saying no.
It would be informative for someone to review MRT regulations and/or pronouncements regarding lease extensions/renewals and advise; it had been my understanding from postings earlier this year that exploratory leases could only be extended once, and that EEGC had already received that extension.
Further, that to turn into an operating lease, there had to be proven reserves.
The only way EEGC will receive financing for drilling is if they can arrange a lease extension. And after seeing $40M spent with no drilling taking place, we can expect a healthy level of skepticism from MRT IF they have any discretion in the matter.
IMO the only chance is money in the bank; it is now almost two months since the 'approval' of the LOC, seems like enough time to move funds if there are funds to move.
Anyone heard whereabouts of the Hunt rig of late?
Doc Metz: What you have stated the next pr will say -- lease extension, new leases, funding, Hunt back to work -- is what all of us want it to say.
But the key is your words, 'it is only my opinion.'
The stock market reflects the collective opinion of everyone, and right now your opinion is not widely shared or the stock would be in the teens, where it was a year ago when there was a year left.
Lots of money to be made by those who share your opinion -- and act on it before real news comes out.
A separate comment on any proposed lawsuit -- certainly a potential, if the current $50M continues as elusive as the February and Smart Win 'financings' -- but where are the deep pockets for collection?
Perfect analysis, IMO, freddy.
A bit of chicken and egg. No-one will invest unless they can drill multiple locations.
And the ONLY way MRT will extend 13/98 -- if then -- is with financing in place. If EEGC has a funding source, then hopefully they are introducing them to MRT.
In response to a Doc Metz post:
I haven't invested incremental funds on the basis of postings here, but I HAVE invested based on company press releases regarding funding availability. If there were any visible deep pockets here (O&D insurance?), there would be potential lawsuits, but in fact the pure dollar amounts which have traded hands have been so small, I doubt there is sufficient opportunity for any contingency based attorney to become involved.
I'd prefer funding and drilling, as would we all. Those who believe there is an eleventh hour miracle coming can make a LOT of money.
Lease expiration of September 30 is public knowledge, set when the initial lease extension was granted. If EEGC had somehow negotiated an extension, that would be a material event and would need to be publicly disclosed.
Similarly, existence of real funding would need to be disclosed.
That's why I think lease expiration and lack of funding are CURRENT facts.
Certainly, we all hope that those facts will change, but with a current market value of <$5M, the 'market' is betting against such a change. So certainly, money to be made if/when these facts change. And we all hope they do.
Responding to: What makes you think there is no funding and that the lease is about to expire?
I understand the emotion.
But with no funding and an expiring lease, hard to know where the value lies.
Good analysis.
Sole opportunity at this point is lease extension, and only opportunity for that is REAL financing (as measured by dollars in an accessible bank account with transparent, non-odious, conditions) plus someone friendly in MRT.
Only disagreement is that I can't imagine someone lending -- or MRT accepting -- money for a single well. This is clearly an exploratory program, need more than one bite at the apple.
Seismic data is valuable, likely why the stock is not $0.00
Unless the exploration lease is somehow extended -- and there is no obvious basis for that happening, based upon published regulations as previously described here (I haven't read them) -- only the seismic data has value.
No one will lend money unless they can get it back, and a single (Bellevue #1) well exploratory drilling program, with demonstrable results required within two months to create an operating lease and likely only for that location, is a very high risk.
I would guess that those who bought stock upon the LOC announcement -- which upon retrospect would appear to have been intended to push the stock over .07 so that the rights offering would have subscribers other than MB -- are contemplating legal action, but I don't think there is a deep pocket in sight.
This stock will not go up unless MRT extends the license, which is likely not to happen but for sure will not happen without funding (see separate declined license per last PR), which in turn will not happen without an extended license.
Catch 22?
Have a hat, need to pull rabbit out of it.
I thought the lease could not be extended -- clearly PPS assumes that it can't, and arguably potential lenders have reached the conclusion that it can't.
What are the requirements for lease extension?
What are the requirements for turning the current exploratory lease into an operating lease for the entire tenement?
Disagree.
Note Malcolm's $50M line of credit is substantially more than is needed for the drilling program, or what the rights offering will generate; all the rights offering does, if successful, is to reduce Malcolm's personal exposure, but that only happens if the stock is over .07, and IMO that only happens with drilling, and maybe not even then depending on likelihood of having rights post 9/30.
If Malcolm's $50M is real, then the rights offering is not necessary, since he said in the PR he would release money to the company for drilling, in advance of the rights offering.
Someone earlier wondered if the LOC announcement was an attempt to get the stock price over .07 so that rights holders would exercise when available; the longer we go without an announcement of cash in the bank, the more that sounds like a viable explanation of the two week ago PR.
You have said he is working on a PR; hopefully it announces money in the bank, a drilling commencement date, and the way forward post September 30.
Then the stock will move sharply higher, followed by further moves as drilling actually begins, the second well is started, oil is found, etc.
But a PR simply announcing SEC approval will do nothing by itself.
Disagree.
We all have high confidence that there is oil in the ground.
The debate is about Bendall/Callaway's ability to monetize:
- Drill enough holes to demonstrate what is needed in order to receive an operating lease so that the oil and gas can be harvested on behalf of EEGC stakeholders.
To do that, he first has to obtain financing (which I consider to be dollars in EEGC's bank, not press releases of which there have been many), which again requires that he demonstrate (to financiers) that he will be able to receive said operating lease, since that is the only way the loans could be paid back.
Does anyone know what is required to demonstrate such 'proven reserves' for the entire tenement such that an operating lease -- or a magical extension of the exploratory lease based on worldwide financial conditions, which may not be viewed as applicable in light of the $40M (or whatever) raised without getting below 600 feet -- will take from the day of first drilling?
We can rest assured that potential financiers are asking the above question, and the terms of any investments are dependent on the answers. And quite frankly, IMO time is not our friend on this one.
Arguably, EEGC current market value is based on what the market thinks the next tenement holders might be willing to pay for EEGC's seismic studies to enhance time to market.
99 -- or 98, in Aussie -- days and counting.
PS. To the response to my earlier post, you are right.
Congratulations, young Vincent, upon graduation. And belated thanks for taking your holiday to travel to Tasmania and advise this board on your findings.
PPS. I have not sold my position, but adding to it is very speculative, given uncertainty on the likelihood of achieving the required milestones between now and 9/30 to achieve operating lease or exploratory lease extension.
I hope the market is wrong, as clearly it disbelieves -- but based on efficient market theory, it does reflect collective belief.
Market capitalization is under $6M.
IMO, this represents the market's opinion that EEGC will not be able to prove reserves as required to convert the current exploratory lease into an operating lease at the end of September. Recall previous postings that exploratory extension is not available.
$6M might be what a successor lessor would be willing to pay EEGC for their seismic studies.
We are all interested in EEGC pps increasing, but to understand the likelihood of that, we need to understand EEGC's position with respect to the exploratory lease which expires September 30, and must convert to an operating lease for EEGC to have any value relative to Tasmania.
I am hoping that someone on this board knows the facts:
- If EEGC drills one well (Bellevue) which hits oil, can it make the entire leasehold into an operating lease, or only the portion of the leasehold related to Bellevue? This question, of course, extends to multiple wells being drilled.
- There must be a deadline for submitting an application to turn the current exploratory lease into an operating lease. What is that deadline, and by when must 'proven' reserves be demonstrated as part of that deadline?
- What are the criteria for 'proving' reserves?
With a current market value of less than $10M, the 'efficient market' is clearly assuming negative answers to these questions, but it would be helpful to share the facts on this board.
With regard to the time line, do we know that we have 2.5 months -- depends upon what evidence has to be presented, by what date, to obtain the operating lease.
Seems to me at least two considerations on the way to the operating lease, which IMO will be the only thing to really increase PPS to the levels we all want.
- a 'quality of evidence' criteria (anyone know what that is? and how long it takes to amass that evidence once drilling starts, particularly if more than one well is required), and
- a date barrier (have to present said evidence by by 9/30, or have to apply sooner with a decision made by 9/30, or ???).
Maybe someone does know this information, and doesn't like it -- given the heavy selling over the past two weeks. The overall timeline between now and operating lease achievement is my current concern.
Also, I would advise young Vincent NOT to talk with the newspaper -- they aren't meeting with Vincent so he can get information, I'm guessing they want to write a story, and right now it would likely not be positive. EEGC needs POSITIVE press as part of the operating lease approval campaign that we hope we can have!
PS. I too bought additional shares during the last ten days based on the 3/24 press release and the contents of the video.
Meanwhile, time for a Tall Cold One. or Two. or ....
On March 24 we were advised in a PR that the the lender had 'officially informed' EEGC that the $2.53M was 'in hand,' and all that had to be done was some legal work related to the collateral.
Does your post suggest that this funding has now fallen through?
The issue isn't 'two more weeks' on its own -- although many have said 'two more weeks' since I started reading this Board last fall.
Rather, the issue is getting sufficiently advanced to obtain an operating lease in a timely fashion.
Agree on opinions; what are the facts?
Worthwhile to review the data we have:
- On 2/20, Mr. Callaway's arrival was announced. He is personally quoted in the PR regarding $10M in financing: $2.53M in a note, the remainder in sale of stock (price per share not stated), and the PR said that 'proceeds ... (from the note) are expected to be available in ten days.'
- On 3/24, a PR announced that the lender had the funds in hand, and the closing was expected to be in 7 to 14 days, with collateral documentation as the only publicly stated 'to do.'
It is now 21 days since the 3/24 announcement that the closing would be in 7 to 14 days -- and 50+ days since a PR release which said that 'funds would be available within ten days.'
Similarly, a video filmed at the end of March with Mr. Callaway and Mr. Bendall spoke to drilling in two weeks -- and no drilling has been announced to date.
Unfortunately, this series of events does not enhance the credibility of Mr. Callaway as it continues the Company's unfortunate habit of announcing funding and drilling which does not materialize in the time frames stated.
I share Jim K's concern about whether the Company is proceeding in a way which will assure an operating lease post-September -- without which EEGC has little value save its geological work.
I agree with all that there is a high probability of commercial oil in the leasehold -- but the Company has to drill and find it.
Requirements to transition from 'exploratory' to 'operational' lease.
My first post -- please be gentle.
I have had a stake in EEGC for two years -- not as long as some, but long enough to watch the stock go up to .20, down to its current level.
I've been reading here for six months. There is a lot of focus, appropriately, on 'when drilling starts.' Without drilling, nothing happens -- and it has certainly been frustrating to watch the process.
BUT.
The current lease is 'exploratory,' as I understand it, and cannot be renewed as such. Has to become 'operational.' So, to better understand our risks -- and maybe EEGC's share price -- we need to understand what has to happen to make the lease operational.
- Is 'finding' oil enough, if so how much has to be found and how is that verified?
- Do we have to pump a certain amount by a certain date?
- If we find in location X, does that mean that we can make the entire lease operational, or only so many miles from location X?
- What is the timeline to be declared operational? If it takes six months from discovery, hypothetically, then we would have a steep hill to climb from today!
Hopefully someone on this board can educate us.