WPL and FAR discussion

Originally posted by Mr.Hustler ↑

Hi Wolverine,

Would agree with most of what you say but a couple of things require clarification. I’ll address your post below.

PE is not a right to buy shares it is a right to buy the portion of the asset for sale, perhaps reading CN's belief she was entitled to buy COP Senegal BV is where you are going wrong? Correct – it is regarding the Asset i.e. The Share (poor wording from the poster ) is the 35% that was originally sold to COP by FAR/CNE. I have been told (poster from FAR AGM) that the Seller is meant to show the same information to all parties according to the JV agreements that have been signed but COP chose not to do so.

A correction for you, the opportunity was given but not taken, instead they disputed the notification. Correct. They disputed the notification because they believed it was not correct.
Whether you can afford it or not?? Joseph, I know you are serious but have a think about the last point. PE is not a mechanism to on-sell an asset and in the event it was attempted then the PE rights notification would start again for CNE. Correct – That is all it is. But a number of companies do on sell assets at a profit after they Pre-empt. The JV Partners still have the opportunity then to PE at a higher price – Round and round it could go like a pass the parcel game. It ends when nobody see’s value at a higher price.

It still makes no sense anyway since the "backer" could simply lodge a bid in the first place without FAR taking a cut (which FAR holders have bandied about). No – only JV partners can PE. Backers don’t always bid the original sale higher as they may have made an agreement with a JV partner to purchase the asset at a certain higher price of their choosing as it increases the chance of getting the asset. Nobody will ever find out if FAR had a backer at the time or not.

Instead there is uncertainty and massive time delay something no major would waste their time on. No Delay, that’s just noise. FAR will abstain from the operator vote coming up. Makes no difference to the Arbitration proceedings. Some may find it interesting that the Arbitration is not over whether COP have complied or not – that declaratory relief is being sought because COP is stating FAR never had rights to PE in the first instance (this has come out of the FAR AGM – make of that what you will). I won’t say what my personal viewpoint is on that matter or why COP decided to take that change of direction.

No more from me on the matter. Some are just getting too emotional about their investments.

Expand

Oh dear Hustler did you really post all that? No clarification required at all.

Point 1 I was correct.
Point 2 I was correct,
Point 3 I was correct,
Point 4 I was correct, they would lodge their bid with COP (derr)
Point 5 I was correct, the mystery backer you all claimed existed still owns nothing hence they are delayed in owning a stake (I didn't mention the project itself)