Angus Energy Share Discussion Threads

[1347] 21/10/2021 16:11

gaffer Don't not forget they also have around £4.5 m loan and interest payment due in June, unless they also negotiate a deferment on that.

[gaffer73] 21/10/2021 16:06

"There is no hedge on production until July 2022. What is the value of all production from March 2022 to July 2022 at the prices on the present NBP Heren forward curve for these months with and without the side track? Asked on 21 September 2021The short answer is the field ,on the original CPR plateau volumes but at the latest forward curve prices, might generate £17 mllion over those four months with the side track and about £8.5m without it. Angus share is 51%. Ordinary opex might be about £0.6m excluding debt service." If they are confident on moving into production by March the above figures would indicate a 1.4m payment could easily be made. It also ties together with the July extension date, clearing debt before hedging starts. That kind of revenue would lead to a share price far more than 1p so why give away shares in April.

[clottedq] 21/10/2021 14:09

JT,

Hmmmmm exactly! Funny how "without delay" has a whole other meaning when said in context to AIM isn't it?

It's a cesspit in need of urgent "LONG OVERDUE" cleaning IMHO!

CQ ;-)

[sincero1] 21/10/2021 13:40

hits - common used latin yes , as well as italian , doesn't yours ?
you are right of course re the extension being on the side of positive ... it is only confirmed further by jtisadly constantly trying to coerce you to think otherwise... perhaps you would consider counselling uclot?

[headinthesand] 21/10/2021 13:33

3Put, yes of course I stand by it, otherwise I wouldn't have said it. I'm not a multi-ID charlatan stating fake opinions that change with the wind.

I have also explained why. Can you think of any other feasible and more palatable alternatives, given the current state of play at ANGS? If they hadn't got this agreed with Knowe, what were they going to need to do to come up with £1.4 million in six months' time?

One answer could have been "produce and sell a shedload of gas from Poundland by that point to provide the spare £1.4 million requiring repayment on Apr 20th 2022"... but that clearly doesn't seem to have been considered likely by ANGS within the required 6 month timescale.

Sincero, your predictive text predicts Latin as well? And incorrectly at that? Whoda thunk? I'd change your phone...

[gaffer73] 21/10/2021 13:32

It could be a simple case that the company didn't want to issue 114m new shares as they believe they'll have 1.4m spare by July.

[sincero1] 21/10/2021 13:15

jtiadly " 1347: yes, let’s put this to bed..."... very subservient to 13reallyneedsahobby47...chain of command becoming clearer and clearer...this makes uclot the hamsters hamsters hamsters pet hamsters flea....

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 13:11

11347: yes, let’s put this to bed... ”agreed to extend the final mandatory repayment date by a further 12 months until 17 April 2023” is pretty clear though, what? The share price, as I recall it, went to well below 0.6p in March/April 2020.

Good luck with the 4p. You have to be in it to win it, innit?

[3put] 21/10/2021 13:04

HITS 'the deferment of the CLN is definitely and without a doubt a positive thing'

Do you still stand by this statement ?

[sincero1] 21/10/2021 12:51

hits - you seem irritated , you are splitting very fine hairs , give my predictive text a break .... is jtisadly getting under your skin that much ? you are not being subservient enough for his liking hence the constant replies and sniping .... it does make me chuckle that he has to always give an excuse to reply to my posts whilst pretending to have me filtered....ingenui vetus fenestra linger .....

[1347] 21/10/2021 12:47

JT Not wanting to carry this on really until and unless some other information is available that clarifies or confirms whether Knowe have the right to be demand repayment in cash or not. The agreement certainly doesn't state that but you regard it as implicit, I do not.

However I would point out that it's not just a case of the 4% interest Knowe would also have for deferring equity they would also have got the shares at a discount (assuming the shares were above 1 p when converted, which I think they expected it to be by now).

I also note the use of the term 'possible cash outflow' above, i.e. to me confirms optional. Thus tends to suggest to me that both Angus and Knowe wanted at least some of it settled in cash and the agreement as I read it is that it was at the option of the company what amount was in cash.

Still I'm more interested in 4 p by Friday, going to need a late burst.

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 12:45

CQ: a change in the shareholding of someone with 3% or more has to be disclosed “without delay”. If such a change in their % is not announced before the new shares are issued to Knowe in two weeks time, we should be able to infer that Knowe is not behind the current selling, what? Can’t we? Hmmmm. What?

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 12:41

.. and, by the way, I don’t disagree that the deferral of the repayment is going to give them the possibility of struggling on a little bit longer, during which time a successful sidetrack could come to the rescue. To that extent, it’s good news. The bad news is that this development ought to make it quite clear to the optimists how dodgy the financial position is and that cash flow is still going to be inadequate, or absent, in April next year. And I agree with you that early success in getting gas flowing, and a successful sidetrack, are all that matters here. If they can’t meet the terms of the hedges in July while gas prices remain elevated, I think they’re done.

[clottedq] 21/10/2021 12:39

IMHO:

Knowe are already forward selling from their own stock... you can see these being drip-fed into The Market.

Looks to me like the reason for the recent cheerleader pump was to enable this to happen at a more generous price point.

CQ ;-)

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 12:32

HITS: yes, precisely. I think it was Alan, wasn't it? Disgraceful.

[3put] 21/10/2021 12:31

HITS 'the deferment of the CLN is definitely and without a doubt a positive thing'

Do you still stand by this statement ?

[headinthesand] 21/10/2021 12:26

One of ANGS's least laudable moments was when they publicly doxxed (look it up) a disgruntled private investor who had asked a pointed investor question.

I imagine that's why.

[3put] 21/10/2021 12:22

I don't trust this lot with personal details --Why?

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 12:20

And this is the wording in the RNS yesterday:

“...Angus Energy plc (AIM: ANGS) is pleased to announce that the holder, Knowe Properties Limited, has agreed to extend the final mandatory repayment date by a further 12 months until 17 April 2023.”. And

“This extension strengthens the Company's medium term capital base and in particular will relieve the Company of a possible cash outlflow in the early months of production at Saltfleetby”.

[jtidsbadly] 21/10/2021 12:16

HITS: so if they don’t have to repay Knowe in April, why have Anguish incurred this unnecessary cost? Why not convert the loan to equity? A useful saving in interest and in RNS expenses.

[headinthesand] 21/10/2021 12:12

JTids, I agree that would be far FAR more usual. However, it's not what ANGS has said (or at least - I again agree - has been very unclear about).

Separately, gaining another max 12 months of lending on that £1.4 million will make Knowe the standard 4% p.a. agreed, plus a further £110,000, what with those free 11.2 million shares it is about to receive (and which I would bet heavily it has been forward selling over the last couple of weeks - anyone possibly been able to detect increased ANGS rampathon activity recently).

Anyhow, by my reckoning that's near on 12% annual interest being paid by ANGS for this 12 month extension...

[headinthesand] 21/10/2021 12:01

Sincero, you say:

"...you need to be more like uclot , blindly follow , except all is true and repeat ad nauseum ....

uclot - i know you struggle with even basic english and now i have used some latin , i hope it doesn't hurt your brain too much ...."

Sadly, if you're going to play the smart-ass card, it's important to get it right.

"Ad nauseam". "Nausea" is a feminine noun following a standard declension - hence its accusative form (as governed by the preposition "ad") would indeed be "nauseam" and not "nauseum".