Gasol’s annual report and accounts: no wonder there’s no new power station

Published: October 22, 2014 at 11:49pm

Gasol plc accounts

On 11th September, Gasol plc published its annual report and accounts for the year ended 31st March 2014. I quote directly from it below. But I’ll note here that Gasol plc lost £10,632,295 during the year under review. Its operating income for the entire year was just £68,000 and its finance income was £100,636.
————

Gasol plc Directors’ Report for the year ended 31 March 2014

The Directors’ present their annual report on the affairs of the Company, together with the financial statements and auditor’s report for the year ended 31 March 2014.

The Directors have prepared these financial statements on a going concern basis. The Directors acknowledge that further funding will be required within 12 months. Further details can be found in Note 1.

The results of the Company for the year ended 31 March 2014 are set out on page 10.

The Directors do not recommend payment of a dividend for the year (2013: £nil).
(…)

Business review and future developments

(…)
The project in Malta, in which Gasol participates in and leads an international consortium, is to deliver and regasify LNG in order to supply gas to both an existing power plant and to a newly constructed power plant built by the same consortium.

This project has also progressed significantly with pre-engineering works having started and Financial Close expected towards the end of 2014.
(…)

Principal risks and uncertainties

(…)
Funding: the business of the Company currently represents a mix of early stage opportunities and defined projects and these opportunities may lead to large capital intensive long-term projects which it is anticipated will not generate revenue for several years. As a result, the Company is likely to be required to obtain significant capital in the future. There is no assurance that it will be able to raise such capital when it is required or that the terms associated with providing such capital will be satisfactory to the Company. Further details are provided in Note 1.
(…)

Independent Auditor’s Report to the Members of Gasol PLC for the year ended 31 March 2014
(…)

Emphasis of matter – going concern

In forming our opinion, which is not modified, we have considered the accuracy of the disclosures made in Note 1 to the financial statements concerning the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. The Group is reliant upon its ability to successfully raise further financing to settle existing loan repayments and fund working capital. Further the Group has agreed to guarantee Senior Notes issued by Afrique Energie Corporation. Although the Directors are confident that the Group will not be required to settle these guarantees and will be successful in raising further finance, this cannot be guaranteed and indicates a material uncertainty, which may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. The financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the Company and the Group were unable to continue as a going concern.
(…)

Notes to the consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2014
(…)
Going concern
The Group does not currently hold sufficient cash or liquid assets in order to meet its commitments as they fall due for the next 12 months. Among its commitments the Group has guaranteed US$ 23 million Senior Notes maturing 13 November 2014 which have been issued by Afrique Energie Corporation (“AEC”), a company in which Gasol has a 47% equity interest.

The directors are confident that AEC, whose principal asset is a 10% holding in Panoro Energy ASA, will be in a position, through the business proposal it is currently structuring and negotiating, to reimburse its senior notes or to renegotiate the terms, and as a consequence believe that the Group’s guarantee will not be called.

The directors have prepared cash flow forecasts which also indicate that, even if the guarantee is not called, the Group will require additional funding within the next 6 to 12 months in order to meet its existing commitments such as loan repayments as they fall due.

The Group is currently involved in discussions with external investors and advisors to secure future financing arrangements in the form of debt, bond or equity instruments. The Directors believe that based on preliminary discussions the outcome will be positive. The Board is also confident that it retains the continuing support from its major shareholders to provide additional funding should other sources not be forthcoming.

With the expectation of the Group not being called on its guarantees to AEC and formally agreeing new funding from its major shareholders and other financial investors, the Directors have a reasonable expectation that the Group will have adequate resources to continue trading for the foreseeable future and have therefore concluded that it is appropriate to prepare the financial statements on a going concern basis.

However, the Directors appreciate that the current lack of formal agreements mean there can be no certainty that the additional funding will be secured within the necessary timescale or that the guarantees will not be called.

These conditions indicate the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast significant doubt about the Group’s and the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

(…)




48 Comments Comment

  1. La Redoute says:

    It’d be interesting to see the annual report for the year ending when the power station’s supposed to start running.

  2. WhoamI? says:

    Perception.

  3. ciccio says:

    Daphne, I think that there is more public deception by the Liars Now in Government.

    La Redoute has listed the current shareholders of Electrogas here:

    http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2014/10/shell-is-providing-the-gas-now-what-happened-to-socar/

    They are the same ones identified on your website in June, soon after Enemalta transferred the ownership of the company Malta Power and Gas Ltd to Electrogas Malta Ltd, but at the time a recent annual report of Gasol plc was not available.

    Gasol LNG Import Ltd was set up in the UK towards the end of 2013.

    In a public announcement released to the London Stock Exchange dated 30 May 2014, Gasol plc had referred to Gasol LNG Import Ltd as a “subsidiary.”

    http://m.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/mobile/news/detail/11968986.html

    But, lo and behold, the audited annual report of Gasol plc of 31 March 2014 updated with important events to 11 September 2014 – your link above – makes absolutely no reference to this company in a list of subsidiaries on page 41 or anywhere else in the report. Am I mistaken?

    This is extraordinary news for the media: the 30% shareholder of Electrogas Malta Limited has gone missing from the audited annual report of a company which has declared to be its “parent” – Gasol plc.

    Shall we call the Agenzija Appogg? Is this another abduction?

    Is Gasol LNG Import Ltd a subsidiary of Gasol plc, or is it not? And if it is, why did the audited annual report of Gasol plc miss this point?

    Your website is an excellent tool to get more investigative work done by the independent media. The independent media must now investigate who Gasol LNG Import Ltd is.

    Who is Gasol LNG Import Ltd?

    Who owns this company?

    Who is financing this company?

    Is Shell involved in Gasol LNG Import Ltd?

    What is the financial situation of Gasol LNG Import Ltd?

    Someone must drop an email to [email protected] for some “written” answers.

    • ciccio says:

      As per link above, the current shareholders of Electrogas Malta Ltd are:

      Gasol LNG Import Ltd.

      Socar trading SA

      GEM Holdings Ltd

      Siemens Projects Ventures GMBH

    • ciccio says:

      Like in the case of Shell, if it turns out that Gasol LNG Import Ltd is at least part-owned by third parties – i.e. not by Gasol plc – even if owned by any one of the other declared Consortium members – then the whole tender and contract process are vitiated.

      The Minister of Energy had declared publicly to the media that the composition of the Electrogas Consortium was:

      1. 30% Gasol plc
      2. 20% Socar Trading
      3. 20% Siemens Project Ventures
      4. 30% Maltese entrepreneurs

      http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131013/local/gas-bidder.490079

      If 1% of Gasol LNG Import Ltd is owned by anyone other than Gasol plc, the award process has been prejudiced and the whole tender must be cancelled and started afresh.

    • Gary says:

      It gets better:

      Gasol LNG Import Ltd
      UK Company No 8762786

      Company Secretary
      Mr Miles Oladipupo Adekoyejo

      Company Directors
      Mr Ewen Wrigley
      Mr Alan Keith Buxton

      Statement of Capital:
      Allotted Shares – 1
      Amount paid per share – 1 GBP
      Shareholder – Gasol PLC (100%)

      Gasol LNG Import Ltd is a shareholder in Electrogas Malta Ltd with a shareholding of 3,000 shares worth 3,000 EUR. There is no mention of this on the documentation I got from the UK Companies House.

      So, just to clarify in my mind.

      The govt of Malta have signed a 400 million euro deal with a consortium whose lead stakeholder is a shell company worth 1 British pound who didn’t even win the tender as the parent company – Gasol plc – did.

      And this shell company (or parent) is supposed to be paying 30 million (or part of) for the acquisition of Malta Power & Gas from Enemalta. Of which, no money has been forthcoming to date.

      Surely this power station project is seemingly nonviable by the day.

      Was this mentioned in the parliamentary debate by Konnie when he was chucking accusations around?

      • ciccio says:

        All your observations are right. But bear in mind that Gasol plc can use a wholly owned and controlled subsidiary to manage this project for it. That’s because such sub would be like an extension of Gasol plc.

        What Gasol plc cannot do is to bring in another party in, or through, the subsidiary, unless it had declared that fact in the tender process.

    • Ta'Sapienza says:

      @ La Redoute,
      Dont bet on Tumas hanging around. Heard that a replacement is being sought.

    • hoovermouse says:

      Not rathole, but asshole

  4. Silvio Farrugia says:

    Please write something about that TVM show Reporter. I honestly do not know why anybody who opposes Labour accepts to take part. I used to like it but Saviour Balzan and Ramona Billboard Frendo both round on anybody who opposes the Labour government.

    I find Ramona Frendo obnoxious, impolite and always utterly grateful for the gifts given to her in return for featuring in the Labour Party’s campaign advertising.

    • curious says:

      I couldn’t stand the way Saviour Balzan treated George Pullicino. Even his facial expressions and body language changed according to whom he was addressing his questions.

      This attitude fires back at his programme because I switched channels and I hope others did as well.

    • Tinu says:

      I wouldn’t bother watching Saviour Balzan, not because he’s so spiteful but because he’s not up to the mark as an interviewer/show host.

    • ciccio says:

      Silvio, I agree with you perfectly.

      What is the purpose for having Ramona Frendo in that little window on the screen – is that to interfere and disturb every time someone from the Opposition opens his/her mouth?

      Pastaza mill-kbar. L-ebda rispett lejn it-telespettaturi tal-istazzjon nazzjonali. Livell baxx tat-tielet dinja.

      And what is this that somebody jumps in from a remote distance when somebody else is making an argument? This applies both to Ramona Frendo and to anyone who interjects when someone else has just started an argument.

      What level of crassness is that? In her particular case, she behaves like a woman who happens to be cleaning her front window in the village centre on a Saturday morning and one of her neighbours has just dropped a garbage bag on her doorstep. She sounds as though she’s about to get involved in a brawl.

      If she wants her opinion heard during the programme, she should sit at the table with the rest of them and have the Broadcasting Authority-mandated share of the government’s airtime.

      Dan jissejjah “hmieg.”

      • Franco's (Feathered) Tits says:

        “Pastaza mill-kbar. L-ebda rispett lejn it-telespettaturi tal-istazzjon nazzjonali. Livell baxx tat-tielet dinja.”

        Breeding will out. Years of hard work at a My Fair Lady accent won’t undo the fact that Ramona Frendo was raised by sub-literate Mintoffians in the Zejtun Labour club, and that was all she knew in her formative years.

        Nothing wrong with that, but those are her limitations.

        It’s not that she doesn’t know better, because she does. It’s that she’s incapable of it. Bniedma baxxa u hamalla min guf omma.

  5. Madoff says:

    One should never be trustful in the relability of these paper companies especially when huge projects are involved.

  6. Alex says:

    Dawn zgur mhux fil-Yellow Pages sabuwhom. Gasol wouldn’t even be able to afford a paid insert.

  7. Gahan says:

    All we need now, is the PN opposition to state that it reserves the right on behalf of EneMalta to purchase electricity at the best favourable market price from either the BWSC plant , from the up coming inter-connector cable or from the Alice in Wonderland LNG Power Station.

    I appreciate why the opposition wants to see the contracts, because it won’t be jumping the gun that way.

  8. pablo says:

    No wonder they are so secretive about what they’re doing. They themselves have no bloody idea. They are living from day to day, clueless and at the mercy of the crooks who financed their election campaign.

  9. pirellu says:

    kollox preparat!

  10. Freedom5 says:

    The Speaker finds Konrad Mizzi prima facie guilty of breach of privilege. Will this be an excuse for the prime minister to sack him and save face over the power station?

    Will Konrad Mizzi face the same fate as Anglu Farrugia himself di, when he was fired as deputy leader of the Labour Party just a few months before the elections?

  11. freedom5 says:

    To the lazy reporters: how about an opinion from Lino Spiteri and Karm Farrugia about this annual report and accounts.

  12. Anthony Cachia Castelletti says:

    Now we will see how transparent, honest and responsible the Maltese government is.

    Will they do the right thing?

    Will they make a fresh call for tenders?

    Will they take political responsibility?

    Will we see heads roll?

    And where is the independent press?

    • White coat says:

      Will they do the right thing? NO.

      Will they make a fresh call for tenders? NO.

      Will they take political responsibility? NO, they will blame Gonzi instead. Or George Pullicino.

      Will we see heads roll? Of course. They are planning a frame-up.

      And where is the independent press? Independent what?

      There are only this website and The Malta Independent. The rest are hibernating for the whole duration of this long political winter.

  13. Osservatore says:

    Interestingly, the cash flow statement reveals a net cash outflow from operations of £8.2M (2013:£3.4M) and a net cash in flow from financing activities of £13M (2013:£10M).

    This is a company which is running at a loss on its operations and which is financing itself through the issue of longer term bond instruments, which is not exactly sustainable in the longer run.

    Add on to that the significant worsening of the company’s net liability position from £2.2M in 2013 to £12.7M and the need for the company’s auditors to rely on representations made by directors, and included as a going concern emphasis of matter, which when all considered, seems more like a going concern qualification under the wrong heading.

    I would touch not touch this company with a bargepole as an investor, much less so if it had to be remotely connected to a country’s power station.

  14. Mr Meritocracy says:

    http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/1000000043/muscat_underlines_need_for_highend_properties

    The bullshit keeps on spewing out of his mouth…

    1) “Prime Minister Joseph Muscat this evening underlined the need for more high-end properties to match the demand.” – Why? Because your IIP scheme isn’t working half as well as you expected it to be?

    2) “… Muscat said his government was committed to cut bureaucracy, adding that new initiatives will be in place to speed up planning processes while guaranteeing transparency and accountability.” – If they guarantee transparency and accountability, they should publish the contract (?) that they’ve signed regarding the power station and table it before Parliament; and Muscrap and Konrat should stick to their word and resign in March 2015, after the self-imposed deadline for the building of that power station has passed.

    3) “Developers are not in the business for profits but because they have a passion for the sector,” he said.” – Seriously? That’s why Malta is a perennial building site, then!

    • White coat says:

      I’ve heard from reliably informed sources that the IIP has flopped.

      Con-rat will have a new bottle of snake oil ready to sell by end November, that is to sell to his voting minions and who will thus have a straw to clutch on to, suppressing their indignation, disappointment and dissatisfaction. Poor sods.

  15. Ruby says:

    As recently as last year I was involved in a small company and I recall that as part of the criteria for certain government tenders (larger ones) you had to provide the company accounts in order to prove that your company is financially sound before even being considered. What’s happening now?

    The more time passes the more we can see that we are being led by a bunch of dilettanti.

    • curious says:

      Why are you surprised? Under this administration you can land a job at Dar Malta in Brussels even if you have a criminal record.

      Maybe they are extended the criteria to the business and public tender sections.

    • ciccio says:

      According to Konrot Mizzi, Gasol plc is a “world class” company.

  16. Barabbas Borg says:

    The Going Concern qualification is relatively common in the accounting world. I wouldn’t be too much concerned about it.

    [Daphne – Please don’t be ridiculous if you want your subsequent comments to be taken seriously.]

    • chico says:

      The notes regarding “going concern” are, to put it mildly, of considerable concern.

      A business that “cannot pay its debts as they fall due” (notes to the consolidated f.s.) is in trouble.

      It’s a red flag if there ever was one. The only positive is, that they’re declaring as much, unlike others that went bust, pulling down more others with them.

      [Daphne – It’s a plc. They have to.]

  17. Makjavel says:

    No wonder Joseph Muscat and Konrat Mizzi will never show the contracts,
    They have no signed contracts to show.
    Liars by default , it’s their DNA.

  18. ciccio says:

    I suggest that the next Xarabank collection should be for Gasol plc.

    Kif tista’ ma ccempilx?

  19. ciccio says:

    If Gasol LNG Imports Ltd is wholly owned by Gasol plc, as I seem to understand from La Redoute’s comment above, then, to some extent, one can say that Gasol plc and Gasol LNG Imports Ltd are effectively one and the same thing.

    However, one would still need to understand whether the financial numbers of Gasol LNG Imports Ltd have been incorporated in the annual report as presented. The fact that the annual report contains not a single reference to Gasol LNG Imports Ltd suggests caution.

    It is possible, perhaps probable, that at 31 March 2014, Gasol LNG Imports Ltd was just a tiny little entity worth no more than a few Sterlings.

    It is possible and probable that subsequently, between 1 April and May 2014, Gasol plc found some money from “family and friends” and passed on the money to Gasol LNG Imports Ltd so that the latter could buy its share in Electroga Malta Ltd, and so that The Times could be given a story entitled “Electricity deal signed.”

    Fine. Now can anyone imagine the director appointed by Gasol LNG Imports Ltd on the board of Electrogas Malta Ltd signing an “electricity deal” with Enemalta/Malta government for a Power Purchase and Gas Supply Agreement in which that director commits Gasol LNG Imports Ltd and Gasol plc – a near-bankrupt company – to investments worth Eur 400 million and to delivering power and gas for 18 years worth billions? That director would have to be either stupid, or fraudulent or crazy.

    Now imagine if the directors of Enemalta were sitting at the other side of the table and signed a contract with the directors of Electrogas, including that one from Gasol, knowing that Gasol, representing 30% of the consortium, is near-bankrupt.

    The “electricity deal” has not been signed.

    Which brings me back to “the contracts.”

    The government has been very silent about the claim that the Power Purchase and Gas Supply Agreement between Enemalta and Electrogas Malta Ltd has not been signed. And it is actually right. Unless the government is directly confronted with the right questions by the media or the opposition about what contract exactly was signed with Electrogas in May 2014, the government will not give the right answer. In effect, one contract was signed between Enemalta and the Electrogas Consortium members in May 2014, and that was the contract for the sale of the shares in Malta Power and Gas Ltd. So the government will keep repeating that “the contract has been signed.”

    But then we know how the government plays with words. Just look at how the prime minister tried to work his way out of the promise he made before the elections that he will resign if his power plan fails. He tried to argue the other day in Parliament that he promised to resign if an investor does not turn up. Although that was not what he had said, he is willing to clutch at straws in order to save his face.

    If the journalists continue to ask the government “to publish the contract,” the government will continue to say that it will publish the contract at the right moment – and what’s untrue with that?

    But if someone later accuses the government that it lied when it said that the Power Purchase and Gas Supply Agreement had been signed, the government will deny the claim, and will say that it was only asked to publish the contract and that it had said that it will publish it when it was opportune.

  20. Lorry says:

    Do we all recall Lawrence Gonzi saying that we don’t need a new power station?

    We will be generating far more electricy than we need?

    Match that to what Miriam Dalli said in Brussels that she’s seeing Malta as an energy hub and presto we will be sacrificing more Marsaxlokk land to export this excess electricity through the interconnector.

    http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-10-23/local-news/European-Union-summit-in-Brussels-Can-our-interconnector-do-a-reverse-job-6736124295

Leave a Comment