Big Banc Split Corp T.BNK

Weak Level II

[Shlinker_]

Bids/Asks dried up, no short-term catalysts here. Moving forward there isnt much they can report on either. Does anyone know of any possible news that can help me get my money back? A poor trading stock.

[braincloud]

You're kidding right? What kind of an idiot question is that?? One more moronic question like that it'll be off to the sheit heap for you!

[Shlinker_]

Sorry, come again braincloud? do you need more vitamin B12? moron. I didnt see you answering what the near term catalysts are. Your quick to defend your dwindled bank account i know. Its sucks.

[braincloud]

Aux contraire moron. I'm trying to defend yours. Let me see, what catalysts might there be? Hmmm, price of sugar goes up? Trudeau resigns? Obama comes out of the closet? Really? If oil goes up and they get a favourable audit would be the only catalysts I can muster. Did you need help coming up with those? What weak level 2 are you talking about? There's 250M on the bid to .70

[good40]

Braincloud, while I'm expecting a relatively favorable audit, the concern is the $57 million BNK is paying to the government this year. Even if it's applied to 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and beyond. $57 million takes all opportunity away for this year. With the lower price of oil, the guidance of a 15% reduction in production, plus the $57 million payment, how could 2016 be a good year

[Shlinker_]

Do you proof read what you type before you hit "send"...250K @ 0.70 cents hey. And whats the 50, 100, or 200 MA, or your cost? Thats called a weak level II. Again, Moron.

[braincloud]

Thanks, I needed that. Of to the S.P for you. LOL Before too long all you slugs will be talking amongst yourselves. That should make for some lively conversation. LOL

[wallop13]

The volume is a little low. People are waiting on the tax dispute resolution to finish. The stock is very cheap right now. Without the tax issue the stock would be double right now. Even if you factor in the production decline the stock is very cheap. So we just wait. I'm hoping oil has found it's bottom.

[Shlinker_]

Yes exactly wallop13, well said. It isnt the rose-coloured glass outlook here like some of the paid pumpers. Its a realistic view. There are challenges here, eom.

[braincloud]

It's going to be a wait as well. If oil keeps running like this I expect that BNK will lag behind until we get the audit behind us. Judging by some of the rhetoric out there there's a very diverse opinion and misunderstanding about the purpose and the potential outcome. In my mind, there's little risk , but for others they are contemplating a change to the whole tax regime.

[good40]

The risk is not attributed to 'winning the tax dispute'... it's whether they are required to continue paying the full $57 million in 2016.  Do the numbers, $65 million estimated capex, $57 million tax payable. $122 million is a very tough figure to recover with a 15% production decline.

[corvette67]

Maybe this helps. Bechtel from IR says the difference is being refunded per the agreement. GLTA

[braincloud]

Care to elaborate on what you mean by "the difference is being refunded per the agreement"? The difference between what and what?

[corvette67]

[corvette67]

diff between final assessment and payments--tried to copy and paste reply--didn't work-

[braincloud]

Do you mean the difference between the tax settlement payments a.k.a $53 million schedule and what is otherwise owed for royalty payments for the same period?

[corvette67]

no mention of royalties---read your messages

[wallop13]

Yes 57 million is a lot these days. However...... BNK has very very low debt. So if we assume they some how add 57 million to the debt it's still a very attractive value. The best thing at this point is to get this thing dealt with. The unknown is always worse for the stock price. I don't expect them to have to pay that though.

[braincloud]

"it's whether they are required to continue paying the full $57 million in 2016." Good40's statement is completely misleading. This payment schedule was a compromise to release funds, NOT tax payable. I suppose if it takes the whole year for them to complete the audit, I suppose they'll pay it. But, it's my understanding that the audit should be completed this quarter, so

[good40]

Let's be clear then. If the dispute is settled tomorrow, then it's your opinion that BNK will not continue to pay the $57 million in 2016, if the settlement is less than $57 million. As opposed to my contention that it's quite possible that BNK will pay the $57 million, even if it is allocated towards future liabilities. My reasoning is based on the governments needs, interviews and

[corvette67]

Hello, I apologize for the delay getting back to you. The funds are not in escrow, they are considered deposits to the tax department, with an agreement that the assessment would be redetermined by the third-party audit or if necessary the arbitration process. It is also within the agreement that should the Company overpaid in that time, the Company would be repaid the difference. Thank you, Laura

[casino]

exactly what BC has been saying all along

[dubsbs]

I what to take Laura out.

[braincloud]

Exactly. I just can't understand why some of the goofballs I put on the ignore heap can't understand this very simple concept. BNK may in fact face a liquidity crunch IF this whole audit thing takes us right to year end. That isn't likely. I expect that we will see something towards the end of February, not sooner. BNK will be in a holding pattern until then. I expect it won't

[good40]

On the other hand, the audit could show a much smaller percentage than $57 million owing... but could affect the four years following 2011, which haven't been audited. The government, which hasn't shown to be the easiest business partner... might want to keep this arranged $57 million pre-payment and allocate any refund towards future liability. In such a case, there still would be the

[Frostyfresh]

I imagine if the Albanians get too high-and-mighty there will be international consequences for bullying a company with has done a great job managing the resource.  It's fair for countries to want to make a profit from their resources. I totally support that. This has parallels to the royalties situation in Alberta though - how does anybody think this is the time to put pressure on

[LordIskander]

  : Okay. Just so I understand those last two points, Doug,   you're assuming no net repayment of the Raiffeisen loan, that you essentially   have as much access to that operating loan post the repayment in March. And   you're assuming that your fully-funded statement assumes a payment out of   some $52 million across the - whether it's for this notional tax or

[cashtango00]

Shlinkr,  word of advice:  when you are trying to catch falling knives, don't whine when you get bloody hands....this stock will turn eventually, but there is a reason its down here.