You fell into a trap here, the bookbuild date is the date of the ANN which is the 23rd of October, so I think it is you that needs to make apologies.
As for you not namecalling or rubbishing others, have you not read back in your posts?
I recall statements you made around others questioning psychological issues and whether they need help, clearly you have forgotton the many people that have left the thread entirely after similar debates to which we are having.
At what point do you realise the majority of the thread have had enough of your rubbish? As suggested by someone else, why don't you start an email thread with those that actually want to listen to your dribble, then ask then to subscribe.
If the bookbuild date is the date of the ANN which was announced on Friday the 23rd of October, as an edit I believe the ANN date Oil price is actually $47.99. 90% of this is $43.191.
I can categorically state that the price was neither near to, or below this amount as of yesterday. Which means your entire post is either inaccurate, misleading or plain right infantile.
Yesterday's post below, reposted with the edited date and amounts.
I am happy to start working through many of your other inaccuracies and surfacing them for the thread to dispute your outloud thinking;
I sit back and just read the thread and don't post very often. However your downramping and pessimisim in general is discerning to the point of frustration.
Yes it would seem that clause 1.6 (g) could already be used by the underwriters as an exit trigger if they wish,
bboys - granted this could be the case.
also 1.6 (d) (ii) *for which the oil price is now close could turn into another avenue. However, in their recent announcement FAR again indicated that the entitlement issue is fully underwritten and one could be forgiven perhaps for thinking that the underwriters are still intending to support the issue.
*Firstly, legal frameworks do not provide for 'is close' avenues, this is a completely ridiculous statement and consideration. You should know better.
Clause 1.6D;
(d) the Brent Oil price (as shown on Bloomberg) falls to a level that is 90% or less of the level as at 8.00am on the day the Bookbuild opened and is at or below that level either: (i) as at 8.00am for two consecutive business days; or (ii) at any point on the business day immediately preceding the settlement date of Entitlement Offer;
(i), the Oil price has not been below this for 2 consequtive business days. (ii), the Oil price was not below this on the day preceding the settlement date either.
Therefore not only is your "close to" statement completely absurd, both by legal intepretation as well as not going below the price..
I don't think an apology to those that have sold is satisifactory here pj. You really need to think hard about what you are posting, you flame anyone that states anything you find incorrect, however your posts are often full of inaccuracies.
You go on to say;
However, I also note the following from the offer document booklet:
"Under the Offer Management Agreement, FAR has agreed to indemnity (?sic) the Joint Lead Managers (and their respective related bodies corporate and representatives) against any losses they may suffer in connection with the Entitlement Offer"
Not sure about how such losses might be calculated, and I doubt whether any of this is material to the share price, but could this theoretically mean that if they choose to continue to underwrite the issue and then flog them off cheap and incur such loss, then FAR will have to compensate them for it?
bboys - It would seem this has already been addressed in the thread. To be honest, I almost fell off my chair laughing after reading the statement in bold. This is borderline infantile.
Although you state you hold, I am skeptical - why would anyone who proclaims to hold post such obtuse rubbish.
FAR Price at posting:
7.7¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)