Andrew Bell denies Horse Hill is a rampfest - I disagree

Comments

1. ---

   Pain Au Chocolat

   9 March 2016, 08:17

   Tom,

   Lenigas has stated he doesn’t want Bell involved, not least because RGM don’t have the money according to him. It is no surprise Bell is ramping this up as, as you rightly say, there will need to be a placing by the potless players and in RGM’s case this will be added to the infamous need for “working capital”. Bell is, of course, now an expert in the field and has taken a small slice of Elephant Oil at a ridiculous price for RRR. One of Gavin Burnells vehicles. Is that oil investment to do with the wonderful Gatwick Gusher or the Shoats Creek Spouter? The beleagured and decimated RRR shareholders would love to hear a similar extended explanation and justification for that oil investment. As you would say, “Placing Ahoy!”

2. ---

   wildrides

   9 March 2016, 08:35

   For whom the Bell tolls eh Thomas .

3. ---

   TROYSKA

   9 March 2016, 09:11

   Clarity at last!! Andrew Bell says it’s great – this is now firmly on my avoid list and I suspect TW has it bang on.

4. ---

   VINES

   9 March 2016, 14:27

   andrew bell the amazing technicolor turncoat

5. ---

   rigsby

   10 March 2016, 02:21

   Before the Angus HH deal RGM were languishing on a £450,000 Mcap and most shareholders thought RGM must surely be near to a placing and out of money. But then when the Angus deal was announced the rns said RGM paid Angus with £223,000 cash and in a later proactive investors interview Bell briefly mentioned that some of this cash came from recently winning a law case.

   There hasn’t been an RGM rns about this law case win and the amount of money won. Nobody seems to know what this law case was about. You would’ve thought when RGM were languishing on a £450,000 mcap then doing an rns to announce the probable few hundred thousand law case win (maybe millions win?) would be brilliant news and would’ve made the RGM share price rise but Bell as never bothered to rns RGM shareholders on this important news.

   No wonder lots of PI’s see Bell as a shady dodgy so and so when he keeps price sensitive information to himself.

6. ---

   Vipassana

   10 March 2016, 02:51

   The law case you mention could be in relation to the graphite tenements sold to Mark Caruso’s Gold Terrace pty ltd. For my sins, I’ve been a Regency Mines shareholder for many years and this is the only area of the business that I can think of where something like this may arise.

   I presume Regency’s nominated advisor hasn’t deemed the court case win as news that should be announced, otherwise we would’ve seen something …

7. ---

   Simon Hodges

   10 March 2016, 04:52

   All very curious. RGM disposed of it’s 5% HHDL interest in April 2015 for £300,000 to Alba realizing a loss of £84K in the process.

   “The investment in and subsequent sale for £300,000 of the interest in Horse Hill gave rise to an £83,900 loss.”

   http://www.regency-mines.com/files/4914/4890/5393/Regency_Mines_plc_Annual_Report_2015_hyperlinked.pdf

   Then after the phenomenal success of these flow tests which have materially changed the game we are told, we find that Angus Energy Ltd who have done all the drilling and flow testing at HH1 have disposed of 5% of their stake in HHDL to Regency for £400,000 which is more or less what Regency had paid to begin with. Of that amount, only roughly half was cash of indeterminate origin and the rest made up by diluting shareholders with an effective placing printing new shares for Angus.

   So when one considers the statement below.

   “The boundaries between what was known, what was probable, what might legitimately be hypothesised, and what was speculative were so changed – as were the target zones – that it was a quite different investment”

   Then why was this not reflected in the price that Regency paid to get back into HHDL and why did Angus sell so cheap or even sell at all? Regency paid the same for a now proven gusher resource as they did on a complete gamble years back.

   Angus have complete knowledge of what has taken place at these flow tests as they are the ones who have drilled and flow tested these wells and it is they who issue unregulated news to the PLC members – which the PLCs then re-release in regulated announcements a step removed from the actual source as they report merely what they are told. Angus didn’t seem to value 5% of their stake very highly it seems although they could have made a fair amount flipping the shares issued to them.

8. ---

   Pain Au Chocolat

   10 March 2016, 06:56

   And there it is as widely predicted. RGM does a placing. I’ll wager the discussions also included a little something for RRR later. You’ll know it is coming as soon as Bell appears on the dreadful pseudojournalism sites like proactivewankers et al. The money is for Horse Hill so Lenigas was right. The amount for “working capital” was not specified but the greedy directors will be enjoying a large portion for sure. That £400k will not last long. Lenigas will see to that. There seems to be an element of animosity between them.

9. ---

   wildrides

   10 March 2016, 08:13

   Errrrrr…………. That is the whole point of AIM ……….. to enable embryonic companies to raise money from shareholders to develop a business ………….. What the feck are you lot always complaining about . Nowt wrong with a placing in a young embryonic company with no income and no dividends so long as its at a suitable discount ( ie small or nil ) . I suppose you would rather have a bank loan like LGO ( Ah…… I thought not ) or go bust ( Ah ………. I thought not ) Grow up or feck off to the FTSE 100 where companies are mature and can expand from reinvesting profits . Placings come with the territory on AIM ………Thats what its for . No one said it was supposed to be easy and no one said all embryonic business are supposed to succeed . Your job is to support the ones you think can make it and let the rest fail . Thats how capitalism works so do stop moaning like a depressed French man .

10. ---

    rigsby

    10 March 2016, 09:19

    Regency mines is one of the old age pensioners of AIM its not a embryonic company: its around 11 or 12 years old.

11. ---

    Drunken Sailor

    10 March 2016, 10:55

    Wildes,

    The bottom end of AIM, and it is a rather large bottom, is a PIs market. There are some decent companies in that bottom end who are trying to raise money to grow and succeed. They may not make it, but that should be the chance PIs take. The problem is far too many shit companies are allowed to survive to pay crony capitalist fees and PLC costs with nothing actually going to grow the company, cynically using PIs as nothing more than cannon fodder.

    It is not just that PIs lose money, it is that the useless companies that know how to ramp and then slaughter PIs are making it more difficult for those relatively few decent companies to raise money.

    There are far too many directors, who demand ridiculous salaries, who really should not be allowed to be directors of public companies, because they never deliver shareholder value and have no real motivation to do so. Yet they are allowed to move from one train wreck to the next and as long as they can make money for the crony capitalists that is all that matters, whilst the hopes and dreams of ordinary people are sold down the river. Is Andrew Bell one of those shit directors who should just be struck off to clear the way for younger brighter people, who might have what it takes to deliver shareholder value, or is he just in a sector that has serious macro economic headwinds against it and is doing his best to keep his companies alive until better times arrive. I don’t know. I do know that it is good that that question is now being asked.