Yes, external events can cause things to not go as planned. But, when a company appears to regularly be at the mercy of external events, then the company has a serious leadership problem.
shoe, you mis-read my post. I was simply asking someone who obviously is pretending to know things he doesn't to stop.
Nothing to do with whether IFNY will make it or not.
Would you please stop pretending that you know anything about either the oil exploration business or IFNY's concession.
I guess you don't read very carefully. Not once did I even come close to suggesting that a message board poster influenced my investment decision. That influence came exclusively from the public statements made by IFNY. When made by a publicly traded company, those statements have legal significance. And when the expectations created by those statements are not fulfilled, an explanation is required. Yet we have not had one. That is what my post was about. Therefore your post, as far as I can see, is off topic.
Do you think this is some sort of game? This is a serious question, gentlemen. Unfortunately, a very serious question.
The PR, which had to have been cleared by both parties, indicated that the deal was anticipated to close on December 7, less than two months after the LOI was PR'd. The PR referred to a review of IFNY's 10-K and 10-Q filings. I assume your lawyers knew at the time they prepared the PR that the 10-K for 2104 would not be available on December 7, 2014; so it simply cannot be that Granada was waiting for the 2014 10-K. The three 10-Q's for the first three quarters of 2014 had been filed before the end of 2014.
On November 17, during the conference call, Mr. Ross stated that the deal with Granada would close in 60 days (at the outside). This moved the target date from December 7 to January 16. OK, slippage happens.
But it has now been six weeks more than what Mr. Ross stated in the conference call. And almost three months from the target date specified in the PR. And it has been more than three weeks since the filing of the 10-K for 2014 (the preparation of which, under the terms of the LOI, was not a condition to closing).
Under these circumstances, having created a set of expectations that have not been fulfilled, I find the lack of communication from IFNY at best just plain rude (yes, you do owe us an explanation), and at worst...I hope I don't need to paint a picture here.
So, in the absence of any explanation from IFNY, we are left to speculate as to the reasons for this delay. The theories being entertained are not very charitable. They range from sheer incompetence to grossly negligent or deliberate misrepresentation.
To the silly posters (the hand-wringers, Stan-bashers, and charlatans who pretend to be experts in oil exploration): go away. By that I mean do not diminish this post with your usual errant nonsense.
If what you say is absolutely true, and anyone with any understanding of this business would have known it (in the same dead certain way you are), then the conclusion must be that the letter of intent that was signed with Granada and then PR'd was never a serious document; and that means it had to be a deliberate fraud perpetrated on the investing public.
I recall that NBL spent 20m for that deep water rig. And IFNY does not need such an expensive rig.
I thought I recall Stan saying he thought we could get a well drilled for about 5m.
"For a bit". This implies the deal is still going through, but that there will be a delay. Can the deal still go through without Fleming? Was he a critical player? How long of a delay? We are already 2 weeks outside the time frame Stan indicated in the last cc.
Don't know about that "another" thingy, but this could be the week we hear something about the Granada deal. Just have to wait and see.
I have read a lot of analyses on that issue, and one extreme scenario has oil going back to about $75 in 2 years. The other extreme has it going back to $90 before the end of this year. Many analysts think the current market reaction to the imbalance between supply and demand (the current "glut") is overdone and a correction will happen in the second half of the year. I think Granada's investors are saavy enough to run the numbers for all possible longer term scenarios and to assign probabilities. I think they still make substantial money if oil gets to $60, and cheaper offshore sources are going to have an advantage.
Are we getting the drilling money from Granada or not.?
I don't think closing the deal is the issue; the timing of the expenditure of the funds to drill would be. If I were Grenada I would make the drilling of a well contingent upon the price of oil hitting some benchmark (say $55) and holding it for 3 months.
We are in a price war. But that war will end. I have seen serious projections indicating the return of $70+ oil in 2 years. In the meantime there will be a shakeout. A lot of the higher cost fracking operations will face difficulty. And OPEC will probably move to squeeze its own supply a bit in 6 months.
Bad timing for us; maybe.
Might also be good timing. Rigs are cheap. Prove up the resource now, then wait for the price of oil to rebound. Sell out to a major.
Based on what Stan said during the last CC, we should hear something either this week or the next. Of course, it has to be recalled that Stan unfortunately seems to have a habit of erring on the side of optimism, which is a very troublesome trait in a CEO of a publicly traded company.
That said, there was a serious effort to bring the SEC filings up to date before the end of December, which had to be done so Granda could complete its due diligence. So the question is: how long will it take Granada to complete its due diligence and finalize the deal. My guess is that it would take a minimum of two weeks. Assuming that the players began working in earnest on this on January 5, I think - as I said - that we should hear something this week or next.
I have been doing a lot of reading on the price of oil, and it certainly appears to me that the most serious analysts are looking for oil to return to $70+ in the next 24 months, but it is very doubtful we will see anything close to $100 for a long time unless there is a significant event that interrupts supply from OPEC. So it still seems that IFNY's shallow water concession remains economically viable.
OK, ocean. The bankruptcy bit is just standard boilerplate and has no special significance other than to ensure that it is clear that Granada's exposure is limited in the event IFNY files for bankruptcy. But I strongly believe there are enough sophisticated deep pockets (e.g., Amegy) invested in IFNY equity to ensure that that possibility is remote, unless - of course - three or more wells come up dry.
Why don't you just wait until January is over, by which time we should know whether Granada is able to keep its funding commitment.
You either don't understand or don't want to understand or are just pretending not to understand. Grenada was formed as a project company for this particular investment. It will have no resources until the deal with IFNY is completed. At that time Grenada's owners will make their required capital contributions.
Do a search for special purpose vehicle or project company.