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.
MINUTES for 10/21:
----------------
Looks like a new representative for the current owners, and the previous arrangement didn't materialize. The way I read the first sentence indicates that the court was disposed to award the custodianship, and the only reason for the delay is that Chasey is willing to work with what appears to be the second representative.
I am just speculating, but sounds like Chasey has the momentum in this situation. My impression only.
===========================================
10/07/2020 Status Check (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer Allf, Nancy)
10/07/2020, 10/21/2020, 11/04/2020
Status Check: Motion for Appointment of Custodian or Dismissal of case
Minutes
10/07/2020 9:30 AM
- Appearances made via the BlueJeans Videoconferencing Application. Mr. Chasey stated they have reached a settlement agreement and payment will be received on October 12, 2020. Mr. Chasey requested matter be continued for receipt of payment and he will either file a dismissal if payment is received or move forward at the next hearing. COURT ORDERED, Status Check CONTINUED. CONTINUED TO: 10/21/2020 9:30 AM
10/21/2020 9:30 AM
- All appearances made via the BlueJeans Videoconferencing Application. Court stated it had granted the motion previously as unopposed and had intended to vacate matter. Mr. Semenza stated he was retained this week and he and Mr. Chasey have agreed to continue this matter to try and resolve it. Mr. Chasey agreed. COURT ORDERED, Status Check: Motion for Appointment of Custodian or Dismissal of case CONTINUED. CONTINUED TO: 11/4/2020 9:30 AM
11/04/2020 9:30 AM
Speculation based on
page 5. Dec 2018
Someone took their toys and went home. Guess the party is over.
Banked my profits. Gonna leave some freebies in play and see how this shakes out on the houses dime. This mystery climb is intriguing; mid teens break could see 002's based on the history.
From the PR:
There is the one-tick flip. smh
Now there is some buying action, I hope the bid stays thinned out now!
Been flushing since last week. Far to much supply, can't get any demand going here. Feels like those 400 million shares are getting retired right onto the bid.
I wonder if the disposition of the series B shares is a problem here. There was mandatory conversion that has past tied to them. If they weren't previously addressed, the AS could not accommodate them as is. If they had to negotiate with those holders (to not increase AS and flood), maybe they felt the shell was less profitable and desirable to continue restoring.
We have no idea their state since 2015, pure conjecture on my part.
If this goes much into the trips I may grab a lotto and see what plays out lol
The custodian withdrew on that ticker also? I'll have to look into it. Do you recall the cause, or what played out after? I've not seen this situation play out before on any plays I had a position in.
Disappointing to say the least, but explains the lack of update. On to the next opportunity
Highlighting Passalaqua's name in red does not make him part of the Kropf/Mower scam. Your literally linking to a story narrative and trying to paint the victim as a bad guy with some red marker and "It gets even worse!".
Think he meant to have a comma there lol
"that Prophet, and some"
Agree, especially with the fact that the custodian is motivated to get the shell to sale.
Point I was attempting to make about obstruction was that judge is open to an expanded window if needed, so arguments that we are somehow out of compliance don't hold water.
I am happy to wait and see what comes down the pipe here considering the potential upside.
Essentially, once the judge grants custodianship of the shell, they (custodian) are supposed to file paperwork with the Nevada SOS to update the status of, and custodians plans for the company within 10 days.
I our case custody was granted on 11/19. However we ended up having a "Status Check" for "Clarification of Court's Order" on 11/26. There was alot of speculation about that Status Check and those who called the court and spoke to the judges judicial assistant (Lynne) were told that it was to clarify the requirements of, and due date for, the 10 day paperwork.
The specific language in question here is that the judge wanted the paperwork in 10 days, or a proposed date of compliance. This would indicate that there was some obstruction to completing it in the normal timeframe, and that the judge seems to be agreeable to an expanded window for that to happen. This is all based on feedback from the judicial assistant.
10 days from the 26th would have been earlier this week, hence the chatter on the board regarding it, as there is some hope for a Christmas payday. It is essentially a waiting game now as we watch for updates from the company.
Ok, thanks for confirming
Investment Reserves or Embarr? Don't see any change on either at https://esos.nv.gov
You looking on another website?
The fact that you have a "Clarification of Court's Order", indicates that there was an order given.
For an example of what to expect for a granted, checked, and discharged custody process on the court site, you can check out the following case for CNH*:
A-18-780964-P
----------------------
10/31/2018 Hearing
Judicial Officer
Johnson, Eric
Hearing Time
10:30 AM
Result
Granted
Comment
Application for Appointment of Custodian
-------------------------
11/06/2018 Order Approving
Comment
Order Appointing Custodian
--------------------------
01/09/2019 Status Check
Judicial Officer
Johnson, Eric
Hearing Time
8:30 AM
Result
Matter Continued
Parties Present
Petitioner
Attorney: Dixon, Stephen M.
My understanding is "status checks" or "status reports" are a normal, recurring part of the custodian process and we should expect them to continue. It is part of the courts oversight that eventually leads to their satisfaction with the custodian and the eventual discharge to ownership by the custodian.
The unclear thing at the moment is that the motion for appointment on the county court site does not list a result, leading to speculation that something (like a objection by the former owners) has caused the petition not to be approved at that meeting.
The fact that a status check occurred seems to be a good sign though, since that is the kind of thing you are supposed to see as the process continues, which makes me think that the motion was approved.
My 2 cents just from what I have read up on about custodianship, not an authority on this by any means.
Have a Happy Thanksgiving everyone.
Long or swing, can't see anybody complaining about being up 100% from the lows at the beginning of the month. Those buys are rock solid green now.
That was a potential 10k in profits for whoever bought them. 50% discount, 100% gain.
So in your opinion do you think they would need to expand the crude storage capacity at the site beyond the 150,000 barrels? Or do you think they will be moving the crude in and out regularly enough that it will suffice? You said tankage is no problem, as in they don't need more, or they can easily add more?
Thanks
Correct, that's my point. Moving 400,000bbl a month means cycling their storage 2-3 times and about 550 railcars. They currently have 150,000bbl of storage in the schematic. I am curious if they would have to expand the storage if that kind of turnover is problematic.
The current design had called for 2 75k bbl crude tanks. The shareholder letter points our that they expect 400k bbl monthly volume of crude. Without increasing the storage capacity they would need to cycle the crude 2-3 times a month to meet that flow. To get an idea of that, you would need about 200 or so rail cars to off-take the 150k bbl tanks, so about 550 rail cars of oil a month. I strikes me that the original schematic layout is out the window unless that kind of volume can be achieved with 150k storage capacity.
New Shareholder Letter
https://www.mmexresources.com/pdf/180709_MMEX_Shareholder_Letter.pdf
A 75-100MW source would need 400-500 acres. This cannot be more efficient or cost effective than just getting a substation installed and connected. If there is any suggestion that the CDU be reliant on or delayed because the solar 1MW install, that is foolish. Its over complication for no real reason at this point.
Apparently planning to add a solar farm...
https://seekingalpha.com/pr/17210435-mmex-resources-corp-enters-solar-power-plan-refinery-project
For those whose investment timeline here is long, I think these articles talking about investment in the Permian and the current boom in crude production underscore an important fact for MMEX:
The sweet spot is now, while the glut creates discount. The extra padding supplied by a lower crude price is helpful to the Phase I CDU. Until they complete the full refinery and have more refined outputs and can capitalize on more per barrel that extra margin will be important.
To quote an article I read:
I don't think anyone is suggesting they are a potential partner or something. No poster here has suggested that this is directly related to MMEX.
The original poster simply said that O&G companies are continuing to expand facilities and acquire assets in the the Permian and pointed to Delek as an example. Their point was that he believed there was a case for another refinery, and from their perspective, worth a gamble.
They are allowed to have an opposing opinion.
Delek acquired Alon (Big Spring) in 2017. They also hold El-dorado and Tyler.
http://www.delekus.com/about-us
That is what has been being analyzed here since June of last year. I am well aware of the risks, and well aware of the potential finance structure. We will know more if and when financing is completed and the terms are public. Total debt, debt payment schedule, share structure in MMEX, etc..
If they can't get financing its all moot anyway. I will make no bones about that. If they can attract the financing, we can move on to the next analysis. If not, we can all move on.
You may be right. We have had ample chance to observe different MMs dilute; I just notice that VFIN's behavior is different, and they seem to play the box unlike some of the others we have seen. All I know for certain though is that I don't want them around.
VFIN may be just looking for short attempts. The sole reason I entertain that idea is because it has been stalking the bid recently. Today they were sitting just below the action @ .0025, Also if you notice, VFIN seems to like to sit its icebergs right on the supports whenever it moves down. My thought is that they might see an opportunity to short if they think the support is weak. If they hop in and sell on the support, if it breaks they might get a bit of a dump (or a big one) and then they are positioned on the bid to cover a little.
Just a theory. If they were solely dumping converted shares, then they would likely not be on bid (they would stay way back like VNDM in trips) and they would just sell until they reached their limit for the day. VFIN has seemed more selective.
Again just my thoughts, I could be way off, but its a suspicion I have.
I'm not sure why you are talking about control over the SPV. I didn't suggest or even hint at that. All I said was that the class B shares were intended to allow Maple control of MMEX. That is not related to the SPV at all.
Also as you point out here and as many have pointed out since the inception of the multi-phase build, this is not a typical SPV. The full phase 2 project will be by necessity, but this CDU phase is clearly not traditional. I frankly don't even know if phase 1 so far can be called an SPV. MMEX originally called the full refinery project traditional SPV.
I believe that MMEX is proposing that they will raise the equity sum themselves, via MMEX, and those funds and any in-kind or asset contribution will comprise their equity percent. Hence the only equity raises discussed to date talk about raising the equity sum through MMEX. There appears to be no other equity raising going on that is directly being raised for Pecos Refining and Transport. This so far has only two contributors to the project, the lender, and MMEX. Once MMEX has transferred any assets and funds, its value will literally be its equity value in the CDU.
If MMEX intends to raise the full $12mil remaining according to them, then MMEX will be the one offering something of value to the investors. At this point it seems that thing of value is portion a 20% stake in a CDU. And the potential value that those shares represent in an operational CDU. The shares potential value(be that preferred stock or common) seems to be the enticement.
That is what MMEX has suggested so far. Other than that its all speculation, there has been no other contributors identified for the Phase 1 project.
It depends on how they raise the equity privately. If they issue shares to the investors as the recompense, then they will do it one of two ways. They will either issue new shares out of the AS. This would have a dilutive effect depending on the amount and type. They would issue them preferred stock, or possibly common stock.
The other way is to possibly give the investors shares of class B shares? I think the language on the class B allows that (something about affiliates), but I think it unlikely. It would give them voting power, but those shares are the same price as common shares and hence I imagine it would be a large quantity needed for the sums we are looking for. The class B stock exists to ensure control of MMEX, and is issued to Maple. Overall I think it seems unlikely to go that route.
I think the best scenario would be preferred stock, which act kind of like a bond. If they went class A, then it depend on the value they make the conversion at. At current prices it could be a few billion shares. If it's done with a par value of say .05 then it would be a a few hundred million shares.
That's why the method of the equity raise is important. it will make the difference between a share price of .05 or 0.10 and higher.
I suppose there could be other arrangements to get the private equity, but these seem the most normal/likely.
Also you would expect to see a registration of shares, or a transfer of share ownership filing as part of the process I believe.
Let us agree to disagree. We are both looking for success here.
You make my point, things don't always happen on time as desired. Hence the telegraphing is good but not compelling to me personally. No one said the sky is falling, just that I think its not a guarantee, so a less compelling point for me.
Yes, at completion in 2019 they would be directly effected by the spread. My point was that 6 months ago the spread was $5bbl less than today. In another 6 months, with new pipelines as noted in the "Energy Indicators" pdf, it can very well fluctuate. Maybe higher than $10, maybe back to $5. So the value added is fluid and wont be realized until we are in operation. Like I said, great news, awesome, but my focus remains on the success of financing. The crack spread will grow in interest for me as we progress and a more concrete construction timeline develops.
I was adding a couple weeks ago =) I like my insulation to be green if possible. Been loaded here since Jan'17