The way I see it, mostly will have dip in next Tuesday

Woodside made announcement today

https://www.woodside.com.au/

file:///C:/Users/User/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/IE/LTWORSB9/bumi-claim-dismissed.pdf

Anyway I think shorties and investors don't know anything about this and not aware also, so they only *dismissed*

Court said, I dismissed your claim for US 276mil, but only give you US 165mil, you want or not?

Armada claimed US 276mil, but being offered US 165mil, and asked for US 7mil, but offered RM 5.5mil

On 14 March 2016, ABPL filed a Writ of Summons in the Supreme Court of Western Australia (“Supreme
Court”) against WEJ for, inter alia, (i) a declaration that WEJ was in repudiatory breach of the Contract
and (ii) damages for WEJ’s breach of the Contract. Subsequently, on 20 April 2016, ABPL filed its
Statement of Claim in the Supreme Court against WEJ claiming for damages in general for WEJ’s
repudiation of the Contract, and the amount of such damages has been quantified by ABPL to include the
sum of USD275,813,698.63 (being the amount of the termination payment to which ABPL is entitled had
the Contract been terminated without breach) plus any additional damages for loss of bargain caused to
ABPL as a consequence of WEJ’s repudiation of the Contract. ABPL is also claiming for the additional
sum of USD7,700,000.00 for work done and materials supplied pursuant to the Contract. WEJ had, on 2
June 2016, filed its defence to ABPL’s Statement of Claim. The trial for this matter has commenced at the
Supreme Court on 18 February 2019 and the parties served written closing submissions and made closing
oral submissions on 26 and 27 March 2019. Judgement is expected before the end of December 2019.
The management is of the view that there are reasonable grounds to expect a favourable outcome in respect
of ABPL’s claims with regards to the said repudiation by WEJ of the Contract. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the award of damages in the event of a favourable outcome is subject to final determination by the Supreme Court.

Mikekim, honestly when I read dismissed, I already thought it's lost already, buddy hell, that's really misleading, really need to read in depth, otherwise got con again

Really need to read thoroughly and carefully then only know the report

That means is around rm 675 + 5mil claims

US 165.5 partial award for the suffering of the loss of incomes due to Armada by woodside

770 In end consequence then, I would, if necessary, under AB's less
preferred damages scenario, assess AB's loss of profits in US dollars by
reference to the Ashby Bar Graph - but with an excision of his capital
expenditure figure. Hence, the end calculation is $US172.3 million,
minus $US6.8 million, culminating in a net loss position for AB of
$US165.5 million.
771 That completes all my findings and conclusions on the trial's
secondary issues, should they be required

Us 165.5mil award

It's partial award la

However, at the end, I am left the more persuaded, as I venture
down this hypothetical lost income opportunity damages path, by the
logic of the conclusions as reached for AB by Mr Ashby, as seen
reflected under the Ashby Bar Graph - subject to one qualification.
767 In particular, I prefer and accept as the more persuasive,
Mr Ashby's methodological approach as concerning disputes over the
following items as between the two accountants:
(a) MPPT of $US33.3 million (which, as I indicated, is largely due
to its secure trial evidentiary foundations);
(b) accelerated costs of $US3.4 million;
(c) interest of $US7.6 million;
Page 231
(d) the milestone B12 $US2 million payment (a necessary
consequence of this wholly hypothetical alternate analysis -
which necessarily proceeds in this hypothetical environment on
the basis that practical completion would have been achieved by
AB for its FPSO Facility);
(e) tax of $US0.1 million;
(f) other cash flows of $US6.2 million;
(g) inflation of $US0.4 million;
(h) working capital of $US0.5 million;
(i) start date amount of $US2.7 million; and
(j) discounting of $US0.3 million.
768 The only calculation by Mr Ashby upon the disputed items that I
do not accept is his capital expenditure allowance of $US6.8 million.
769 Towards that item, I prefer as the more logical, the rival approach
of Mr Jaski for WEJ as to a likely future incurring of potential future
expenditure under circumstances, where there was no 'back-to-back'
reimbursement applicable for it. By contrast, Mr Ashby's instructions
had been to the effect it should be assumed by him no further capital
expenditure would have been incurred by AB from April 2016 to
August 2018. Mr Jaski was not in this realm conceptually fettered by
such an instruction and so, I prefer his overall approach to this issue.
770 In end consequence then, I would, if necessary, under AB's less
preferred damages scenario, assess AB's loss of profits in US dollars by
reference to the Ashby Bar Graph - but with an excision of his capital
expenditure figure. Hence, the end calculation is $US172.3 million,
minus $US6.8 million, culminating in a net loss position for AB of
$US165.5 million.
771 That completes all my findings and conclusions on the trial's
secondary issues, should they be required.

At least got 5.5m better than nothing

Tuesday we will see a lot of dumping already

No wonder EPF kept selling previously, they already knew the outcome of the court

Tuesday will have a lot of shorties coming in to short already

https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/eCourtsPortal/Decisions/ViewDecision?returnUrl=%2feCourtsPortal%2fDecisions%2fFilter%2fSC%2fRecentDecisions&id=8912903f-39c1-4d26-8c3e-6e1ea0b42e6a

Armada lost the case

This counter really full of manipulation

Civ1228 case out but Armada case not out, very funny, I think they dragged again

https://ecourts.justice.wa.gov.au/eCourtsPortal/Decisions/Search?searchText=Armada&jurisdiction=SC&advanced=False&validateNow=True

I guess the Armada operator already knows they lost the court, if not, they already pushed up the price to 0.47 & beyond that

Today no action by Armada operator, most of the transaction done by shorties alone

Today close at 0.47 or 0.475??

Shorties where are you????

Now totally nobody sell at 0.46 already haha

Personally feel that shorties buy back

Selling pressure not that strong already, but the issue is nobody buying at 0.465???

Finally got rebound abit

Current price already very below market value and already expected nothing from Claire court case award

New low again closing, speechless

If shorties buy back. EPF will throw again, don't worry

Don't think it's idss players buy back

Then mikekim you not buy now?

If not buy now when to buy????

Totally agree with armadatuah, 0.46 is super super super cheap

But rate only 10%??????????????

No rebound at all

Everyday new low

Buy rate only 8%, and volume very low

Armada operator still want to press down the price again

Actually I have been observing Armada operator style, when at 0.20 time, operator really like the price to stay around 0.20-0.21, then collected cheap shares, same to 0.30-0.31, then 0.35-0.355, then 0.40-0.41, then again 0.45-0.455 (up two times to 0.55), and now 0.465, Armada operator will be doing the same again, to collect at 0.45-0.46 again and again, take note on this


Same thing happened at 0.15 time, as it was traded very heavily around 0.15-0.16 range very often then eventually up to 0.20-0.21

So if you all really wanted to buy cheap, 0.45-0.46 would be the best cheap price, and even 0.465 also very good buy, don't just care about half cent as it doesn't make very much difference

Fundamentally is getting stronger, with 3 positive quarter results, and recent 3rd quarter result is amazing, and pending coming quarter result will be even better, and favourable court case result , but price reacted adversely, it's very obvious the Armada operator is controlling the price

Middle of November: price from 0.45 to 0.55
End of December: price from 0.455 to 0.55 again

But two times still cannot break the 0.555 wall

Now, 0.465, the history might repeat?

0.47 got hugeeeeee block

Ya right, idss sell at 0.465 and buy at 0.46