We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Angus Energy Plc | LSE:ANGS | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BYWKC989 | ORD GBP0.002 |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.025 | 5.56% | 0.475 | 0.45 | 0.50 | 0.575 | 0.45 | 0.48 | 115,252,487 | 13:06:47 |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude Petroleum & Natural Gs | 28.21M | 117.81M | 0.0325 | 0.14 | 17.02M |
| Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/8/2021 22:46 | Every now and then you get one diamond in the rough like COPL. I'd like to see Angs turn it around for the long term suffering shareholders | ultimatejustice9 | |
| 09/8/2021 22:42 | Just when you think things can't get any worse... My gratitude to the resourceful posters here, who continue to unearth the warts and all truth about this company and its (I hesitate to use the word) management!?!?! The FCA should have a field day with this! CQ ;-) | clottedq | |
| 09/8/2021 22:12 | 1347: I got increasingly outraged for months when I first got involved in AIM by the lack of even rudimentary protection of the interests here of small shareholders and by the sharp practice that is the norm. Now, I’m not so sure. I still think it’s a sort of regressive taxation system, whereby money is shifted from the accounts of a large number of relatively poor investors into the accounts of a relatively small number of wealthy market practitioners. However, I now see that there’s a satisfying Darwinian process at work. Fools and their money being soon parted etc. Survival of the fittest. Capitalism red in tooth and claw. And the small investors (mug punters) seem very often to be dull witted, greedy, rude and barely literate, if these bulletin boards are anything to go by. Exactly the demographic one would choose, if one could, to be fleeced in this way. So now I think that Anguish and UKOG should disappear only when they can no longer raise enough money to keep their Directors in school fees, port, club memberships etc. It’s impossible to know when that will be, though next summer looks a fairly good bet in Anguish’s case. They’ll be missed only by their Directors. But even they will probably re-emerge elsewhere: look at Lord Clanwilliam. The mug punters will have learned a useful lesson - though a new generation of them will emerge and get roundly stuffed in their turn. The market practitioners will get smoothly richer. The Directors will have done very well while it lasted. Some shrewd short term traders will happily have taken regular small trading profits. The mug punters can gripe together for hours over their strong lager about the swindles they’ve participated in and the losses they’ve made. So, really, it’s a good deal for everyone and quite amusing for uninvested onlookers. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 21:19 | JT Well the Wild Turkey Chase was called out as a gamble and indeed a gamble it proved to be. Must check out the ADVFN UKOG BB while I'm here, I really don't know why such companies are allowed to continue, lifestyle company is indeed an apt term for them, although other terms may also be appropriate. | 1347 | |
| 09/8/2021 20:31 | 1347: in the same vein as Mr.Sanderson’s Turkish roll of the dice? | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 20:22 | JT - I do wonder if that reference to gambling was a Freudian slip? | 1347 | |
| 09/8/2021 19:34 | 1347: it took me more than six months to find it. I don’t normally filter anyone but it’s such a waste of time scrolling down your filteree’s nonsense isn’t it? I’ve only got two filters on here now. I should have thought shareholders deserved an update on the lawsuit, having been made aware of it two or three months ago in an RNS. I’d like to know if it gets to the High Court, might see if I can get in. Incidentally, on the hedges, I came across this again, from January’s Q&A: “The final hedging won’t be put in place until we are closer to precise supply dates, given it will be much easier (and cheaper from a credit perspective) to hedge against known production. Outside of that likely requirement, generally speaking, companies who have tried to speculate outside of hedging defined production have tended to go spectacularly wrong more often than right in much the same way that in gambling, on average, the punter loses and the House wins.” The House in this context will be the Lenders. They’re no closer now to “a precise supply date” or to “known production” than they were then, are they? | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 19:16 | JT Maybe CH were just behind in getting it loaded? I did email them and ask why but it was posted before they got back to me. I've also flagged to CH about the missing note pages on AEWB No 3. As for the case with Gneiss, well who knows who's right or who's wrong but it seems Anguish didn't pay the bill and both are now having a go at each other, so it will be good money for the lawyers one way or another. Gneiss did act as advisor to Humber Oil (Frazer Lang) over the Biscathorpe transaction so it will be interesting to see whether he holds 'em or folds 'em, as I suspect it may have been Gneiss who got him involved in the first place. I'll try and unscramble the numbers at SEL at some point, not sure when as it's not a high priority item for me and they've posted the minimum they can and not disclosed the related party transactions. Yes, the mention of the filter prompted me to find the one at ADVFN, the annoying twerp (in)sincero is first one in. | 1347 | |
| 09/8/2021 18:44 | jtisadly " I’ve de-filtered you!",PAHAHAHAHAHAHA | sincero1 | |
| 09/8/2021 18:19 | 1347: with any luck, whatever has changed CH’s mind about the SEL Accounts will do the same very soon re the full AEWB3 Accounts. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 18:16 | UJ9: well spotted. I’ve de-filtered you! Clearly should have done so before now. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 18:08 | 1347: I can see a reference to it on a law website. All I can read is that Angus is suing Gneiss for lying about the existence of a potential large investor. This can only be a counter-suit to a financial claim from Gneiss, surely? In any case, it appears to be ending up in court, so prepare for more unexpected expenses, particularly as Gneiss will be able to hire a QC or two. Can one attend court hearings of these legal disputes? I’d like to see the part-time Interim MD in live, unscripted action. He’d do well to avoid quoting Shakespeare. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 18:07 | JT UJ9 posted a link to a website that indicates that Anguish is in dispute with Gneiss, £14m is mentioned but you can't read the full article unless you register and I won't. As for the SEL accounts, yes numbers have been moved around regarding the impairment and abandonment values. | 1347 | |
| 09/8/2021 18:01 | the old duffers are in a frenzy this afternoon....pahahah | sincero1 | |
| 09/8/2021 17:59 | 1347: we’d assumed it was but have I missed an announcement? | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 17:54 | Very easy to accuse some of the negative posting as de-ramping but I think a few posting here have lost a fortune. If I'm right then I understand why you post. Looking forward is a different mindset and that what I intend to do | ultimatejustice9 | |
| 09/8/2021 17:53 | So according to the recent post it was Gneiss they are in dispute with. | 1347 | |
| 09/8/2021 17:51 | Is the explanation of an apparently asset-rich balance sheet explained by the “reversal of impairment”? It may be that Wingas took anything of value (other than the plant and equipment they left at Poundland) out of the company before they let Mr. Forrest have it, and Mr. Forrest has reversed their earlier abandonment reserve, on the basis that it’s only appropriate to reserve for it if the asset is defunct, whereas SEL/Angus’s plan is to reactivate it and then offer it for hydrogen storage, thus obviating the requirement for an abandonment provision into the distant future. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 17:40 | Am I reading this correctly? He has written of £12 million De-Comm costs--looks that way | ultimatejustice9 | |
| 09/8/2021 17:38 | hxxps://www.law360.c | ultimatejustice9 | |
| 09/8/2021 17:26 | Well, I can’t make sense of it. How has Forum got so little in its balance sheet and SEL so much? Does Forum use a different accounting method? How did Mr. Forrest acquire Wingas if it’s got assets on this scale? Almost all of it appears to be plant and equipment, so does SEL actually own the existing Poundland plant? If so, it’s no wonder the Lenders wanted them as guarantor. I agree, there’s something odd about the abandonment provisions. Perhaps Gazprom thought they would ultimately be liable for these, and Angus/SEL think they can finesse it? That might explain why they let Mr. Forrest have it. The existence of assets on this scale in the Accounts of its wholly owned subsidiary would enable Forum to borrow money if it needed to. I don’t understand why they’re not consolidated in the Forum accounts though. Any better-informed views than mine would be extremely welcome. | jtidsbadly | |
| 09/8/2021 17:10 | Unbelievable.....AAO Saltfleetby loan Forum the money to buy into AAOG?? Then AAOG to buy 25% of Saltfleetby......Sur | ja51oiler | |
| 09/8/2021 16:58 | Am I reading this correctly? He has written of £12 million De-Comm costs?......and no mention of the Angus £2.5 million payment?....... This is astonishing! How has a company (Forum Energy Services) with only £89k showing managed to take over here?? | ja51oiler |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
