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.
Got a copy of this, it should be passed on.
ALAN BROOME, A.M
13 WILLOW STREET, LUGARNO
SYDNEY NSW 2210
Page1
9 July 2014
Mr Patrick O’Connor
Director
Buccaneer Energy Limited
c/- Level 9, 25 Bligh Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000
Re: Public Statements by Buccaneer Energy Limited
Dear Mr O’Connor
As you are aware I was the Chairman of Buccaneer Energy Limited (“Buccaneer”) from the time of its initial public offering in late 2007 until my removal as a director on 2 July 2013. My removal was as a result of the actions of Meridian Capital, Buccaneer’s 19.9% shareholder.
I write to you after being contacted by a number of Buccaneer’s past directors and some of its largest shareholders. We are concerned that the recent announcements by the Company are not accurate and have the tendency to deflect responsibility for the recent Chapter 11 filing and the destruction of any value to shareholders to past directors and officers of the Company.
We are also concerned that statements within these releases may be false and misleading.
What cannot be argued is the fact that the current board of Buccaneer have been in control of Buccaneer since early December 2013, a period of 6 months prior to the Chapter 11 filing on 31 May 2014.
I think it worthwhile to recount events as evidenced through public filings and what I have been told by various parties.
Southern Cross # 1 well and West Eagle # 1 well
In your ASX Release dated 16 June 2014 you are correct that the costs of both of these wells were to be borne by EOS-Petro and the decision was made to proceed with each well prior to the confirmation of funding from EOS-Petro. However what is also evident from that release is that you have not disclosed the existing board’s involvement in the decision to proceed with both wells.
Mr Alan Stein joined the board on 6 September 2013. The Company mobilised the Endeavour jack-up rig on or about the 2 September 2013 and due to mechanical difficulties at the sight remained on location for a month before a decision was made to abandon the attempt and to demobilise the Endeavour.
ALAN BROOME, A.M
13 WILLOW STREET, LUGARNO
SYDNEY NSW 2210
Page2
I understand that at no time did Alan Stein express any reservations regarding staying on location while EOS-Petro closed its financing.
At a board meeting prior to the Company’s 2013 AGM on 29 November 2013, I understand that management highlighted the high risk nature of the West Eagle # 1 well but a decision was made to obtain quotes to mobilise the Glacier # 1 rig to location and to spud the West Eagle # 1 well. At the same board meeting a resolution was approved to formally terminate the farm-in agreement with EOS-Petro and an ASX release was made to that effect.
The Glacier # 1 rig did not mobilise to the West Eagle drilling pad until after the appointment of both Mr Gavin Wilson and yourself to the board.
I now highlight your statement on 16 June 2014 made to the ASX:
“To solve the Company’s funding problems at the time, and despite warnings from senior management, the previous Board placed an unreasonable degree of reliance on securing funding via a farm out transaction with EOS Petro Inc., a counter party that itself had no funding. As a consequence of the failure of that transaction the Company was forced to carry 100% of the cost of drilling two wells which were unfortunately both unsuccessful”
Your statement shifts the responsibility to others whereas the current board partly or wholly contributed towards the decisions to proceed with the expenditure on these two wells. Given the facts, elements of your statement to the ASX appear to be misleading and should be corrected.
Termination of Curtis Burton
I have reviewed the public statements in respect to the suspension, termination / resignation of Mr Curtis Burton. I understand that on or about 3 March 2014 Mr Alan Stein and yourself visited Houston and informed Mr Burton that shareholders representing in excess of 30% of the Company’s shares would not support additional capital injections whilst he was CEO and his position was terminated. I understand that Mr Burton’s Company email account was suspended and he was immediately escorted from the building – to me that sounds like a termination.
I understand that shortly after, you conferred with Mr John Young of Conway MacKenzie and it was realised that Mr Burton’s termination gave rise to a substantial liability to the Company. A decision was made to retract the termination and retrospectively suspend Mr Burton, on full pay, pending an investigation.
ALAN BROOME, A.M
13 WILLOW STREET, LUGARNO
SYDNEY NSW 2210
Page3
I understand that Mr Alan Stein and you terminated Mr Curtis Burton without receiving prior board approval or legal opinion as to the liability of such a termination would have for the Company. Mr Burton’s termination in the circumstances may have unnecessarily exposed the Company to a material liability.
I understand that there are video recordings which document the manner in which Mr Burton was terminated which is likely to reveal the true circumstances of his termination. I now highlight an ASX release made on 10 March 2014 where it states:
“…Mr Curtis Burton, Chief executive Officer and Managing Director, has been suspended with pay allowing for a review to be conducted.”
Given what I understand to be contained in these recordings it would appear that this statement may be misleading and as such in contravention of the ASX Listing Rules and Corporations Act.
Executive Contracts
The contracts with Mr Curtis Burton and Mr Dean Gallegos were entered into in July 2012. The remuneration packages set in those contracts were set after consultation with an independent Sydney based remuneration expert who conducted a peer comparison. The selection of the peer comparison was undertaken by the independent expert.
The contracts were drafted and reviewed by both the Company’s Australian and US attorneys, the termination provisions within those contracts were amended from the original drafts so as to comply with relevant regulatory requirements.
Effectively those termination provisions required shareholder approval for any termination benefits which were in excess of the maximum allowed under the Corporations Act. All issue of share options to executives who were considered a related party, including those two executives, were always approved by Buccaneer shareholders.
As you are aware there is no Corporations Act, ASX Listing Rule or Corporate Governance Principal that requires or recommends that executive contracts be approved by shareholders. In fact it would be considered unusual if executive contracts were voted on by shareholders of any company.
The execution of those contracts did not give rise to any immediate liability to the Company and as the contracts were executed after 30 June 2012, and were consistent with previous arrangements, there was no requirement to disclose the specific terms of those contracts until 2013 Annual Report that would be released in September 2013.
ALAN BROOME, A.M
13 WILLOW STREET, LUGARNO
SYDNEY NSW 2210
Page4
So as to maintain transparency the board at that time disclosed the terms of these contracts in both the 2012 Annual Report and 2012 AGM Notice of Meeting. During my time as a director, the Company was transparent with shareholders in respect to all matters concerning remuneration. Until the emergence in late 2013 of a Singapore based shareholder, the approval for the Company’s Remuneration Report at all previous AGM’s was in excess of 90% of shares that voted.
I now highlight your statement on 16 June 2014 made to the ASX:
“It also became apparent to the new Board that the Company had entered into new employment contracts with certain members of the executive management of the Company on terms that were, in the new Board’s opinion, imprudent, and in some cases appeared to have been constructed so as to avoid the need to seek shareholder approval. While this in itself is not the cause of the Company’s current financial distress it is indicative of a culture that existed in the Company at the time of the existing Board’s appointment that, in the Board’s opinion, was not conducive to good governance”
Given the facts this statement is false and misleading. It also defames the non-executive directors whose task it was to ensure that the Company operated within the law and complied with the ASX Corporate Governance Principals.
Current Board’s Contribution
Since the appointment of Mr Gavin Wilson and yourself on 6 December 2013 the only material transaction initiated, negotiated and concluded by the current board appears to be the refinancing of Buccaneer’s secured debt facility with Meridian Capital (the “Meridian Financing”), also Buccaneer’s 19.9% (and largest) shareholder.
It is not clear to me whether the various relationships between the board and Meridian Capital have been fully disclosed. Mr Gavin Wilson is a board representative of Meridian Capital. I now understand that Mr Alan Stein had a prior relationship with Mr Gavin Wilson of Meridian Capital and you were nominated to the board by Alan Stein.
As evidenced in US Bankruptcy Court Docket # 95 there are other significant Singapore based Buccaneer shareholders (the “Singapore Shareholders”) who are of the opinion that the Meridian Financing was in fact a loan to own and they appear to want the matter considered by the US Courts. This assertion is especially poignant given that Meridian Capital and the Singapore Shareholders collaborated to remove directors at shareholder meetings held on 2 July 2013 and 29 November 2013.
ALAN BROOME, A.M
13 WILLOW STREET, LUGARNO
SYDNEY NSW 2210
Page5
On refinance of the secured debt by Meridian Capital on 25 January 2014 the Company effectively had until the 30 June 2014 to repay Meridian Capital.
I understand that after the 25 January 2014 Company management and the board made a number of proposals to Meridian Capital which were rejected. However I also understand that in early February 2014 management also recommended to the board to approach Credit Suisse to refinance the Meridian Debt with a new long dated facility. Credit Suisse had previously provided a Term Sheet, but when asked the board chose not to pursue this as a viable option to repay Meridian Capital.
Retraction
Your statement to the ASX on 16 June 2014 in respect to the Executive Contracts has defamed me as a former director and Chairman of the Company.
I, along with the other former directors, demand a retraction (in a form to be agreed) be issued to the ASX. As you mailed the ASX Release dated 16 April 2014 to all shareholders I will also require that the retraction be mailed to all shareholders at the Company’s expense.
Alan Broome, A.M
Well after abandoning all hope, it looks like Curtis Burton is starting his own P/R campaign.
http://www.deepwaterconcepts.com
And he posted all the documents associated with his lawsuit and the claims of the company against him.
Very interesting.
Oh I have read the releases and even made the trip down to Hotcopper to read their threads.
However, it strikes me as odd that once Alan and the new board joined a cascading effect has occurred with the share price tanking. It started with that very odd announcement of a rights issue, that was then retracted.
Alan has known Meridian for a very long time, is this a coincidence that he is added to the board after Meridian becomes a major shareholder, Dean is voted off by Meridian and things go down hill from there.
EOS is also related to this crowd and had several meetings with Meridian, they probably jump in after Meridian forecloses on the assets.
The very short period of time this all occurred should make us all question the relationships. If I were Alan and found myself in a shitstorm I would have resigned and not bought those shares.
So again, where did that money come from? Is he getting a sweet heart deal from Meridian or did they funnel the money to him so that he would gain the credibility to get this done.
I find it hard to believe that the previous board would be able to run the company for 7 years and then suddenly have it collapse without a little help.
Just an observation though, someone who just joined the forum a few days ago might be better informed, perhaps even being part of this little adventure?
You know what really doesn't look good.
What do we really know about Alan Stein and Patrick O'conner the newest board members. I got to talk to one of the Buccaneers, a land guy, and he said that Alan has known the Meridian guys for a very long time, perhaps even known Gavin for at least 15 years.
Where did Alan get the money to get his shares and why has this thing been just going straight down ever since those guys got on the board?
At least you could talk to Dean and Curtis was approachable, now everything is hush hush, and Meridian not only has a 20% equity stake they also own the loan on KL.
While share holders lose if this thing goes south, Meridian doesn't. I wonder what Alan gets out of making that happen?
Fishin, no it doesn't look good.
But not much has changed except that they spent 5 million to drill a dry hole. Southern Cross was a much bigger hit and West Eagle wasn't a high priority until after they left it.
Reserves still the same, production rate still the same, loan with Meridian still the same as last month.
Not really even sure why they would suspend trading in Australia.
I notice the link to Cook Inlet Keeper, he's a blow hard and his facts are squishy at best.
The most important thing the company could do now is decide how they are going to handle the Meridian loan coming due and announce next plans for onshore and offshore drilling.
For anyone that doubts operations are difficult in Alaska, even onshore this article aught to be an eye opener.
http://homernews.com/homer-news/local-news/2014-01-22/truck-driver-killed-in-east-end-road-crash
Our prayers should be for this man helping us get this project done and for his sacrifice. May he rest in peace.
On the upside they are obviously drilling at West Eagle.
Good article, lazy reporting
http://peninsulaclarion.com/news/2013-12-18/homer-gives-show-of-support-for-buccaneer
Talked to my connection, he says all the permits are ready and he assumes after "management" get tired of doing tours for people in suites in they will get started drilling.
I guess the reporter was just letting us all know what permits were required, and forgot to add that Buccaneer has them.
Ok, I think we can see what the delay really is at this point. Reading what GreenOil posted by Alaskaman is interesting. My question would be why as soon as Dean is off the board does Jim get taken out?
Why is Allen gone after all this time, when we have never seen anything from him? Interesting that Fitzgerald get's added and now Allen is gone.
How many others are going to fall. Do we really know when "senior management" was appointed? It could be that these changes were all ready underway and just needed a rubber stamp from the new board.
I guess the proof will be in the results, if West Eagle gets started and something happens on Cosmo, maybe a reserves report, we will begin to see some results.
Well lets see, my contact says that he has been at the drill site last several days and the rig is arriving every day.
As to Konstant, something weird must have happened there. Either he wanted to get control of the drill, the company or he found another shiny bobble to play with. It is not like him to jack around with something for so long and then just walk away.
I notice that nothing has been announced by EOS or GEM so there might still be something there.
Maybe he and Curtis couldn't come to terms on how things were going to get done.
Well it looks like things are happening, just talked to one of my contacts that has been hired to start on the West Eagle Project he has been told he needs to report in 10 days.
So that means that something must be moving, unless he is being hired to sit on his hands.
Great news on Kenai Loop number 4.
It seems that yet again this company surprises. I have also heard about the spacing exception and I am surprised that anyone is concerned. Having been up in Alaska for a while with different companies you should know that the pissing match between native corporations and the rest us is not unusual.
Think about this like trying to get through the border crossing in Tia Juana Mexico. The more you pay the faster you go.
Buccaneer will have to make some sort of deal with them, but it is not unusual. My sources say they have all ready struck the deal because the regulators through out the objection.
Business as usual in Alaska. The more important thing is that they found gas and they are drilling ahead.
Today, Buccaneer buys Apache leases, anyone else think it is interesting that Apache is willing to give up leases next to a proven structure for something that is not "material". My guess is Apache is out of the inlet, leaving more opportunity for Buccaneer. They probably decided that it was too much hassal when you can do Egypt without interference.
Well, I think it is pretty obvious that with EOS on board and no way to vote against the farm in, and being on the record that farming out was the right move, the new appointees bailed.
If the goal was to get control, no control was possible with a farm-in all ready done. At the same time, by giving them access tot he data room they would have known how complicated the structure is and how much time it was going to take to unravel it.
Since the Singapore crowd was not going to put more money in, and Meridian was obviously not going to vote in favor of the new directors, they bailed.
Question is, why did Meridian vote for them in the first place? Was Meridian promised access to more capital if they did? Did that deal fall through when Dean and Curtis stayed on the board?
Who knows, what we do know is what is going on now. We drilled Cosmo, we are going to drill SC and we are drilling KL 1-4.
With all mystery it seems things are getting clarified.
Ok, now I am slightly amazed.
I have been in the oil and gas business for the last 30 years and I have run across Konstant 4 times. Each time he comes across as a newbee, yet each time he comes with expertise and real value. I have never seen him do anything in the USA.
Wow, who knew that these two would come together. Perhaps the whole board thing was a distraction, but Konstant never does anything he doesn't control so expect a take over offer really quick.
Anyone else see this article on Fuel Fix?
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/06/24/small-oil-companys-shareholder-fight-has-international-reach/
I love the fact that the CEO of Buccaneer Energy and Founder of the company is complaining about "Fat Cat" Chinese. I know what he means.
Wikipedia’s DEFINITION of Fat Cat is: a wealthy person. I think some have also said it is a wealthy person who profits disporprotionately from the work of others. that accurately conveys his concerns that the shareholders are potentially going to be denied the fruits of their investment and years of work by opportunists who are well funded and capable of gaining undue control over these assets.
It does raise questions – where does a company like Dart get its funds? Are there connections to CNOPC? Are we, in fact, dealing with legitimate Asian private investors here, or is there a larger game afoot? I don’t know the answers to these questions, but it does appear a bit odd that a floundering company (Dart) has a seemingly bottomless pit of funding.
Davo,
If you say so, they don't look all that well known. Had you heard of them before they were nominated? Also how can you say they don't know the investors, the investors were working with Republic and Republic has has worked with these guys a few times. Arrow, Acer, and now Dart. Each one doing worse than the other.
Nope, I don't see them coming in and making things better. I see them coming in and quickly finding out the limitations of being a board member on the other side of the world and having to deal with Alaska. My bet, they try to sell it as quickly as they can.
I doubt they will have as much patience for current management as Curtis appears to have, and I am pretty sure they won't be pulling deals out of their @#$$ to save the company.
I'm not too worried either way because I am pretty sure their will be a bounce. If they come in I'll sell on the bounce wait for them to announce their "plan" and if the shares crater I'll probably buy back in and wait for a "for sale" sign.
Here is where I am going with GreenOilMan. Never thought I would say that.
Davo, I think we can assume that the only reason an 8% shareholder would see full board control is because they have a plan. Probably not the plan you and I would like, but it is a plan.
No one takes over a company and continues the current plan without "butt loads of money" and no one accepts a take over expecting things to remain in place. (like management) If you want that you need to come with money.
These guys come with a "maybe", the current board have shown time and time again that they are willing to do whatever it takes (including diluting themselves) to get money. That says something about tenacity. It also says that the situation has often been more dire than they were willing to let on. So they have done whatever was possible. Good thing when failure means end game.
Now we have a new board proposed, and they are going to speed up the day-to-day operations. That means they are going to find the holes in the current boards plan and heads are going to roll. Whose head, we know the Alaskan team thinks that they are doing great things. Yet nothing is getting done. Hume, I wonder who roles next.
This leaves us with a real mystery. Is it the board that runs the day-to-day or is it the "Alaskan team" that isn't performing and fear of a shakeup is causing the board to keep them in place.
I did see a piece from one of the Hotcopper favorites on this. Alaskaman (whoever that is) went after them.
My point is I think GreenOilMan is right, delays, delays, delays.
Or current management is maintained and dead weight is cut off. (after they raise money)
Or the whole thing is screwed and then nothing will help.
I think the performance speaks for itself. The shareprice is sitting under 4 cents. The assets are apraised at 350 million. The analysts say that the stock should be at 10 cents and that this is undervalued. I think if Cosmo hits and these issues with the shareholder meeting are resolved, this stock shoots to 10 and maybe 12 cents.
That’s why I am watching. If the others get ahold of it, it goes to 2 cents, becomes very cheap and goes private.
I guess there is always a risk, that’s why they call it speculative investing!
Greeny, I agree but in the land of the ASX all things are possible. I am on board with the upside but if a shareholder can come in and throw the breaks on, it ain’t going to happen.
If I am this takeover group, I'm loving this. The shareholder base has been beaten up and are willing to believe that a shareholder with 8% of the company is doing this out of the goodness of their heart. Yea right. Give me a break. They put their pupets in and take over. Pretty soon the Alaskan team is no good (they have taken a really long time to do anything anyway) the capital markets are not conducive to equity raise, the local governtment is not helpful, the “other guys” screwed this up beyond saving. Then it is a fire sale. All shareholders fail, but these investors get a big upside to their personal check books by brokering the assets.
Takeover?? Hey, has anyone else been reading what is going on in Australia. Apparently a couple of investors that own 8% of the company are getting serious about making a run for the company. Pretty amazing that that is even possible.
In reading the Hotcopper blog, which covers Buccaneer Energy extensively, I can really tell that they have Buccaneer Fatigue. One poster was suggesting that they shut down the Houston and Dallas office and sell all their Texas assets.
I had to chuckle, since the entire first and second level management team live in Houston and the new GEO team lives in Dallas and only the rough necks are in Alaska. This shows me that the blogosphere are missing the boat when it comes to Buccaneer.
All the history aside, all the issues with the economy, all the issues with the financing are finally coming to an end and the guys on this blog want to chuck the current management and replace them with a group that has never been to Alaska.
If you do that you will put the company into “freeze” mode. If the plan is to close the Houston office and move everyone to Kenai Alaska you probably lose most of your local management. For goodness sake, even Dave Duarte lives in Houston. So does Mark Landt, Jim Watt, Curtis Burton and Andy Rike, head of operations all live in Houston.
No one would be that stupid, that is why buying now makes sense. They are about to raise more money at 4 cents, the price is 3.7 now and the analysts think this could be a 10-cent or better stock.
History is good, but it is no indication of future performance, everyone remember that one. Now is the time for BCC, the offshore program has begun, KL is being proved up, other projects are about begin (west eagle) and this one is about to light up.
Or the shareholders are going to vote in a new board and this one is going to go to zero. We will see more delays, people leaving the company and a world of hurt. So not to beleaguer a point but we either have a winner that is just leaving the gate or we are going to shoot the nag for breaking her leg before she is put in the starter.
Well, that is debatable. First those prices only occur in the winter months and it remains to be seen the affect Hilcorp will have on the gas market now that they own the Marathon assets. Second, anytime you are encouraging independents to come and drill you must provide a robust market.
Alaska currently provides the initial incentives. Strong local market, ACES rebates on exploration, an ever improving permitting situation. But to make the market truly stable a robust future market needs to be planned for.
The maritime highway needs to be converted to natural gas, the LNG plant must remain a viable option, the Fairbanks natural gas situation needs to be solved with a Cook Inlet solution instead of a North Slope solution. The fertilizer plant needs to be brought back into operation. With lots of market, incentives become less important and stable long term profits assure a robust local market.
So is LNG important, yes. Does it need to be working today...probably not. Is Parnell making the right moves, yes. Is he moving far enough, fast enough. Probably not.
Permit expired, yes, mothballed not quite. COP is paying to keep the tanks cold and for a full staff to man it. Doesn't look like they have given up on it just yet.
They had to be pretty ticked when Hilcorp was told that they couldn't sell any gas to the LNG plant for five years after they bought Marathon.
There is even some talk out there that the state may step in and help renew the license. Bodes well for Buccaneer.
Actually, the Cook Inlet is the home of the United States' only export terminal and it is owned by ConocoPhillips and services Japan. There was an article recently about Resource Energy having confidential agreements with Buccaneer and others to supply natural gas to Japan.
Just another reason that this stock looks good.
It seems others see what you see.
BBY http://www.bby.com.au/ just initiated coverage on BCGY BCC:ASX with a strong buy with a target at .14 cents My comments in parenthesis.
Valuation - with no placement, no drilling lease obligations, nor drilling assets we value BCC at .04share on current Kenai Loop production,(so basically if they stop now) and .06/sh on higher production post the next three fully funded wells. (drilling should commence shortly) The offshore drill rig hits the account in two ways, as Kenai Drilling, a business with exclusive use of the rig and obligation to pay the lease charge, and 50% of the rig owner (KOV). We see KOV as worth .02/sh to BCC and Kenai Drilling is worth another .O2/sh assuming on 250 days of drilling per year at 175k/day.. (so KL gives us .06 and KOV and KD give us .04 which equals .10.)
Add on Cosmo and they are off to the races. The report also acknowledges shareholder fatigue as being an issue. This means that buying at anything under .04 is a steal.
Agreed, shit happens, but assuming the management stays as is, as the company moves forward they are going to get some drilling done, that is going to increase their reserves and thus increase their borrowing base which will enable them to keep on drilling.
Maybe the company could then initiate a stock buy back program if the market doesn't take notice and reward them accordingly. That still puts upward pressure on the share price and that is good for anyone who gets in now. I like the analyst view that this is a 10 cent stock because at these prices that is a 3x your money.
Imagine what happens when the company really begins bringing in the cash. Then again we are trading in Australia and they obviously have other ideas about what success is. I like the Steve Ferris quote.
"we have a great company and have done a great job, but we have not done what we said we were going to do."
I hope the Buccaneer team can relay to the market now what is going on and how important it is, and then continue it - instead of making big promises, getting derailed, and then delivering after a year or two.
This happens, while they are doing lots of great work behind the scenes to stay alive and move forward that doesn't fulfill expectations. You would think they would be getting tired of the bad press by now.
If you look over the past, every time the economy or the industry shifts Dean has to go out and raise more money. If they can get these dollars in now, either from a placement or a cornerstone investor, they should be able to push this little oiler down the road a considerable way. If you look at the assets in place, the permits in place, the equipment in place, with that funding in place this one takes off.
Without it, we are great takeover prospect, so a new shareholder wins either way. Really why I am bothering at this point.
Yea, I hear you OilPatch can you imagine being told after you buy the leases that now that you have bought into the Inlet, great, but to make it work we need to go buy more stuff. Oh yea, we are going to need to source an offshore rig and we are going to need an onshore one as well. And by the way, we still really need to get more permits and spend more money.
Can you imagine how hard that must have been on Dean, constantly having to raise more money, working with AIDEA, working with EZION and now to have the EZION investors trying to take it away from him.
I saw in their presentation that have now spent over 100 million just getting to this point. They are not getting any credit for getting this far and this is the tipping point. That's why now is the time to get in.
It is hard to see how you are not going to least get your money back in a take over or get a significant upside if these guys get to continue. Over 340 million in reserves and they have only spent 100 to get there.
Jack up is drilling and Glacier Rig is getting ready.
Fishin100 thanks for the advice earlier, I am getting set up to do so.
Very aware of Hotcopper, have not posted anything there but those guys sure do like to write up the bad stuff and ignore the good. One thing I really like about BCC is that they never give up. When natural gas went bad in 2009, they jumped over to oil, when Lee County didn't work they went after Alaska. When the stuff they bought from Steller didn't work they bought Kenai Loop. When they didn't have a drilling rig they bought one without any money of there own. When their funder pulled out of Alaska they replaced and did a bigger deal. With all the negativity in the market comes the time to snap up cheap shares.
At this point and 4 cent share has only a potential of dropping by 3 cents. And while that is a lot percentage wise it still means that with a very small amount of money you can get a ton of shares today. A raise in price by 1 cent gives you a 20% return. That's pretty good in my line of thinking.
Also, the proposed guys are running something called Dart Energy and they are working hard to push that share price down so they can take it private cheaply. They did that at ACER I believe. It the case of BCC they don't have to go through that, they can just do it at this price. I am not sure they understand the asset base though, they are unconventional oil and gas and probably have never been to Alaska.
One of the guys that I am familiar with is close to Buccaneer and tells me they are close to a cornerstone investor that would need board representation, could be good to see another Oil and Gas pro on the board.
OilPatch, you are aware that some of the shareholders are trying to oust the board, aren't you? After a very slow 2012 some new investors entered BCC and decided it was a take over target. There was a board resolution to up Curtis' and Dean's salary at the end of the year that either got defeated or was pulled before it could get defeated which really highlights a lack of understanding on where the company is and where it is going. It seems that after the funding got tight in early 2012 the company didn't update the market on how that would affect the drilling schedule. But anyone reading the releases should have been able to pick up on that.
I'm pretty confident in the source. Interesting read, this article gives us a lot of back ground on Curtis Burton the CEO of Buccaneer. I find it interesting that he decided to launch an oil and gas company focused on the Gulf of Mexico only to find himself running a producer in the Cook Inlet of Alaska. Turning the ship that dramatically couldn't have been easy.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/05/20/curtis-burton-takes-buccaneer-energy-into-alaskas-cook-inlet/#12451-2
Also looking at the staff pages it seems BCC is growing on the financial and operations side of the business.
I have been buying on Market the last few days, as I see it they may have had delays, still are having delays, but the platform continues to progress. Now the offshore well is drilling, soon the onshore well begin drilling and then it's a matter of capital where they go next.
Let's hope they just keep getting it done.
I understand that Dean is traveling from Dubai back to Australia and one of my sources said the Glacier rig was being prepped to move into position for KL 2. So that adds to Cosmo being drilled currently, a recent deal with Conoco and production up by over 100% since the beginning of the year. If Dean is heading home already does that mean he has found his prospect to pick up the short fall?
Since one offer has been tendered and rejected by the company and the shares are still trading at sub four cents, this is probably as low as it is going to go. Once the capital is squared this one should take off (assuming all goes well with the drill bit.)
Well lets see, so far this year they have doubled production at Kenai Loop, they have Spud their first offshore well, doubled their monthly income from last year, done a deal with ConocoPhillips, and launched a new website. They do seem pretty busy this year.
This company just keeps trying...hard to see a downside here.
This one really is a find, they have a new analyst report on their website that suggests that their Kenai Loop project more than justifies their current 4cents. Cosmo could add 3cents or more and the next offshore drill might add 6-9 cents. This one should just keep going up, unless Pioneer moved the oil when they weren't looking.