Angus Energy Share Discussion Threads

[jtidsbadly] 29/10/2021 09:23

I see that, thanks to HITS, the hedges issue is getting more attention elsewhere. Oktane observes that OTC contracts can be terminated early, but that would be at the prevailing price and Anguish doesn’t have the money to do that, they’ll let them run, they have no choice.

If people start to get concerned on the other site, they may start to ask questions or the company may be forced to comment on the issue. Who knows, perhaps they bought options? It would be nice to know, wouldn’t it?

[sincero1] 29/10/2021 08:56

jtisadlypvtFrazer - after your "i don't want to mislead anyone post , justify these comments.....

5.7.21 "placing this week or next"
8.7.21"another placing or two in the next few months"
9.7.21 "" placing is in the queue and will come once the latest UKOG issue has been digested"
14.7.21 ""I'm expecting two placings this year"
21.5.21 "poor angus 0.20 soon
" share price into the sixties shortly "
" 0.15 by end of year".

[sincero1] 29/10/2021 08:11

jtisadlypvtFrazer "they appear to me to be a Damoclean sword."...doomed we are all doomed..what a clown...from the fool that stated he didn't want to mislead anyone...

[jtidsbadly] 29/10/2021 08:03

Chickbait: the thing about buying futures and forward sales contracts is that they commit you to delivering the commodity in the amount agreed at the date agreed. They shouldn’t be used where the buyer of a futures/forward sale contract doesn’t know for sure that he’ll have that quantity to sell on settlement date. If they are used in this way, they amount to a gamble in the derivatives market, not a hedge. They can be settled in cash, so that the party to whom you have contracted to sell the commodity can buy the commodity in the cash market. Either way, if you haven’t got enough of the commodity to sell on the agreed date, you have to pay the prevailing market price for the volume of the commodity which you can’t deliver.

The gas in this case is contracted for sale to Shell. So the “hedges” are pure financial contracts. They were taken by Anguish at the insistence of the Lenders to guarantee them a minimum price which should ensure that Anguish can meet the terms of the loans - interest and capital repayments. If Anguish can produce the volume of gas specified in the contracts, they are an effective hedge. With so much uncertainty, however (all those volume figures in the CPR were provided by Anguish) and with a huge rise in gas prices since the contracts were signed, they appear to me to be a Damoclean sword.

[sincero1] 29/10/2021 07:33

jtisadly "I don’t want to mislead anyone though.".. says the most disingenuous, duplicitous, mendacious poster here....

[jtidsbadly] 29/10/2021 01:11

Chickbait: thanks. I’m no expert in derivatives and it’s late in the evening but I believe what I’ve written is roughly how this works. I don’t want to mislead anyone though, so if anyone knows better than I do I hope they’ll pitch in. I’m frankly a bit tempted to write to the Competent Person and ask him why he didn’t do an analysis of the impact of the hedges in his risk assessment.

[chickbait] 29/10/2021 00:16

JT. Thank you for the explanation. To be honest I am still not fully understanding how these hedges work though?

Late now. I may post again another time if I have further questions.

All of your input with the rest has been very enlightening.

It would be great if Sincero1 and 3put could contribute to this debate instead of deflection and spamming this thread.

Take care

[jtidsbadly] 28/10/2021 23:59

Chickbait: they sell to Shell, as I understand it, at the market price minus a small discount. It’s in the CPR somewhere, 3% or so, I think. The hedges are with a completely separate counterparty. Anguish hasn’t guaranteed a particular volume for delivery to Shell through the pipeline. They’ve undertaken to sell them all the gas they produce. Anguish has sold forward particular monthly volumes of gas to its counterparties in the hedges. These will be settled in cash, not gas. If they produce just enough gas to meet the volume they’ve hedged, they’ll get the market price for their gas from Shell. The hedge is at about 43p, so they will settle in cash with their counterparties for the difference between the market price for the gas they’ve produced and the hedge price. The net effect will be to give them 43p for their gas.

If they under-produce the hedged volume, they’ll get the market price from Shell for what they produce and will still have sold forward the 5mmcfd to their counterparties in the hedge. If the market price is below the hedged price, they’ll make a profit, of the difference between the hedged price and the market price. If the market price is above the the hedged price, they’ll make a loss, amounting to the difference between the hedged price and the market price. If they over-produce, they’re in the clear and will make the market price on the excess. The risk is therefore that they won’t produce enough gas to meet the hedge contract volumes while the gas price is very high. The benefit of high gas prices is predicated on their producing enough gas to exceed the hedged volumes. That seems to me to be what they’re missing on the other site. High gas prices and low volumes of gas would be very bad for Anguish.

The above assumes that the hedges are forwards/futures. If they’re options, Anguish are in the clear. They don’t seem to be though. It’s a very important point and the questions should be asked of the management. They should have been answered in the CPR, in my view.

[chickbait] 28/10/2021 23:31

Okay. Still no answer. Can someone please explain how the price per therm actually works?

Thanks..

[chickbait] 28/10/2021 23:29

But CQ. They said they are experts. What, what?

[clottedq] 28/10/2021 22:42

All I see is Put... put... put... put... put...

Maybe vocal stuttering has transferred to the keyboard in this technologically advanced age... or maybe - just maybe - somebody doesn't care to read rational argument - as it doesn't suit their agenda?

Hmmm... I wonder which it could be?

I've only just picked myself up off the floor, having read Malcy describing Anguish as "a senior player in the gas market!" LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!

I guess that must make me a senior player in the gas market too then, since neither of us actually produce any gas at the moment?!?!?!

CQ ;-)

[chickbait] 28/10/2021 21:26

Basically what I'm asking is if let's say the price of gas is 43p per therm. Is that the end price to the consumer or does the price that SFB sell to Shell less?

[chickbait] 28/10/2021 21:23

Most likely already been posted previously. Do the figures being mentioned include Shells off take costs or do Shell buy the gas a lot cheaper?

[jtidsbadly] 28/10/2021 21:14

It’s fantastic really that there is no mention in the revised CPR of the impact on profitability of a possible under-production of the volume figures covered by the hedges. With gas prices where they are, this must surely be the biggest single risk to Anguish? Do the authors not understand hedges, or have I got it wrong? Someone needs to ask the questions about what the hedges are and what happens if Anguish under-produce. To forecast higher revenues and not to mention this risk doesn’t seem very sensible, does it?

[3put] 28/10/2021 13:13

Paweł Majewski is the CEO of the Polish oil and gas company PGNiG.

As gas prices have skyrocketed across Europe over the last few weeks, members of the European Parliament have rightly suspected gas market manipulation and called on the European Commission to investigate the role of Gazprom, Russia’s state-controlled natural gas exporter, amid the ongoing surge. Regrettably, Gazprom has indeed often applied political pressure by using its market power in the past. This time is no different.

Gazprom is using record-high gas prices to create the misleading impression that immediate regulatory concessions are needed to start the operation of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, in order to prevent a gas crisis in the upcoming winter. In truth, however, there is plenty of available capacity to supply Russian gas, and this new pipeline will not provide additional gas volumes — it will only substitute existing supply routes. Given this, there are clear requirements of EU energy law that must be fully implemented when it comes to Nord Stream 2.


The International Energy Agency confirms that gas storage levels in Europe are currently well below their five-year average — but this is mainly the case for Gazprom’s storages. As a main supplier to the European Union, Gazprom has market power and isn’t shy of exercising it. The Russian exporter has been supplying less gas and has not been filling its storages to achieve adequate levels before heating season. It has also limited capacity bookings on the Yamal and Brotherhood pipelines, which have always transported gas from the East, and reduced gas volumes on spot markets.

Kremlin’s spokesperson has openly stated that quick regulatory approval of Nord Stream 2 and its operation would reduce gas prices — the pressure is barely covert. Particularly given that even without Nord Stream 2, there is more available gas transport capacity from Russia to Europe than could ever be needed.

Europe has previously experienced gas crises in 2009 and 2014. And both times, Russia limited gas supplies to politically pressure Ukraine, putting European economies at significant risk. While the EU mainly remembers these two events, however, Poland has experienced seven gas supply disruptions since 2004. We know that Gazprom is not willing to play along with the EU’s gas market rules and has a history of abusing its dominant position.

In 2015, the European Commission had already prepared an extensive Statement of Objections, identifying Gazprom’s breaches of competition rules, which undermined the EU gas market. Regrettably, in practice, the agreed commitments between the Commission and Gazprom did not lead to improvements in the functioning of the market. Since then, however, arbitration tribunals have confirmed the Commission’s findings on the excessiveness of Gazprom’s prices, requiring it to repay $1.5 billion to our Polish oil and gas company PGNiG and $2.9 billion to Ukraine’s Naftogaz.

This clearly shows that non-market pricing had — and still has — an important role in Gazprom’s toolbox. Given its track record and the way the pipeline is being used even before it is operational, Nord Stream 2 will only offer additional instruments to exert pressure. And as rightly stated by Poland’s late President Lech Kaczyński in the beginning of Russian aggression in Georgia in 2008, this will undermine the security of Ukraine, the Baltic states and the whole Europe.

Realistically, no EU rules could fully address all the risks associated with the controversial pipeline. However, the full implementation of EU energy law to Nord Stream 2 could limit supply risks, providing at least minimum necessary guarantees for energy consumers. Consequently, all requirements of the EU Gas Directive should be applied to the entire pipeline, especially ownership unbundling, nondiscriminatory and cost-reflective tariff setting and third-party access.


As stated, not long ago, by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Nord Stream 2 is a highly political project, and all legal means should be used to ensure that EU law is fully implemented. Undermining a level playing field in the energy market counters EU energy policy and goes against the interests of the EU and its member countries. On this, the EU must be united and speak with one voice.

[3put] 28/10/2021 13:13

For the second time in a month, a Spanish minister met with Algerian officials on Wednesday to guarantee the European country’s supply of natural gas after Algeria closes a pipeline that runs through Morocco this weekend.

While a leader in wind and solar power, Spain still relies heavily on energy imports and Algeria provides over a third of its natural gas. Spanish officials worry that a shortage in supplies will fuel already skyrocketing energy prices that have made electricity bills a major problem for its left-wing coalition government.

The trip by Spain’s deputy prime minister for ecological transition, Teresa Ribera, to Algiers came only a month after the country's foreign minister travelled to the Algerian capital to discuss the gas supply that Spain fears could be a collateral victim of Algeria’s diplomatic spat with Morocco.


ADVERTISING

After meeting with Algeria's minister for energy and mining, Mohamed Arkab, Ribera thanked him for “his pledge to ensure the viability of the transport of natural gas and to honour the commitments for its purchase between different Algerian and Spanish companies.”

Europe's energy crisis: EU countries dismiss Spain's calls for market intervention
Moldova receives first non-Russian gas delivery as it grapples with severe energy crisis
Algeria has said it won’t renew an agreement, set to expire on Sunday, that has kept its natural gas flowing through Morocco and on to Spain for the past 25 years. The development follows a deterioration of Algerian relations with Morocco centered around the disputed region of Western Sahara, highlighted by the recall of the Algerian ambassador.


The pipeline that travels across northwest Africa before crossing the Mediterranean Sea at Zahara de los Atunes on the other side of the Strait of Gibraltar supplied Spain with just over 10% of all its natural gas in 2020, according to CORES, Spain’s public corporation that watches over its strategic energy reserves.

The pipeline also supplied Morocco with enough gas to produce 10% of its total electricity on top of the annual $60 million (€51.7 million) it received for crossing its territory.


SPONSORED CONTENT
The Key to 2022 Business Success? Your Network
Traditional networks were not designed for today’s app-driven, multi-cloud, remote-working world.
By VMware

A second, longer pipeline from Algeria to Almería in Spain’s southeastern shore currently provides 16% of its total natural gas imports.

Europe's energy crisis: Five charts to explain why your bills might go up this winter
Europe's energy crisis: Why it's not just Spain's poor fearing a rise in electricity bills
There are plans to boost that pipeline’s capacity from eight to 10 million square metres in the coming months. Even so, that won't fully make up the shortfall, unless boats can bring in enough liquefied natural gas to Spain directly from Algeria.

Ribera said her counterpart also agreed to be prepared in case Spain asked Algeria to increase the supply of natural gas.

“Algeria, through the company Sonatrach, will honour its commitments with Spain, relating to natural gas supply and is ready to discuss the terms of additional gas deliveries,” Arkab said, according to the Algerian official news agency APS.

Spain’s diplomatic mission comes amid a spike in energy prices across Europe that is hitting the Iberian peninsula hard and driving up electricity bills for homes and businesses. Ribera, a respected environmental policymaker, has been tasked by Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to find a solution.

[sincero1] 28/10/2021 12:21

hits "I'm more than capable of deciding if and when I've been "attacked" "..no doubt, I'm sure you can look out for yourself..I was just pointing out how underhanded, duplicitous and disembling old grey jtisadly is ..that or it is senility....

[1347] 28/10/2021 12:11

Breaking news from the future.... Latest pictures of the Mysteron gas field on Mars, complete with solar power. It's from 2068 so first gas about the same time as Poundland then.

[sincero1] 28/10/2021 11:45

a look at 13reallyneedsahobby47cptmainwaring's posting history on this whole site really is quite interesting....literally negative supposition on every single share ...angs, vast, ujo, gemd, bmn, avct, ukog .......

[headinthesand] 28/10/2021 11:08

I have no qualms whatsoever, given that I'm on the side of the angels.

(That'd be Harmony, Destiny, Melody, Rhapsody and Symphony, naturally).

SIG. Cloudbase over and out.

[jtidsbadly] 28/10/2021 10:27

1347: yes, you’d think they had enough on their hands chasing rainbows rather than sending hired thugs to interfere with HITS, what? If Captain Brown (Trousers) were to rouse himself to deal with them, all he’d need to take would be Great Big Billy Goat Gruff.

As you know, I’m wondering now if they’ve decided the only way out of the bind they’re in is a successful fluke at one of their oil sites. The problem will be paying for it. I should imagine they’ll remain quiet on Balcombe and have a go at Lidsey, if this is what they’ve got in mind. Stick it all on 36, good idea.

[1347] 28/10/2021 10:18

HITS is being attacked? Is it those Mysterons? If so Captain Brown (trousers) will soon sort them out I'm sure.

JT: I don't have a hat, but if I did then sadly I would have some shares in this 'failed' company in it. However Trolls don't influence me at all, they are generally semi-literate at best and almost invariably intellectually challenged.

No I'm more concerned about the interim MD and his misleading predictions on costs and timescales and the convenient omissions when informing market about things. Still waiting for notification about that appeal at Balcombe, or was the statement that they would appeal just more misinformation?

[headinthesand] 28/10/2021 09:57

Just for info, I'm more than capable of deciding if and when I've been "attacked" - though frankly, the very notion of being "attacked" to any extent that requires notice and in any meaningful manner on some backwater share discussion board causes an amused eyebrow to get raised.

Equally, I am more than happy to own any comment or post that I have made - solely on the basis that I have chosen to make such.

Let's not get all playground melodramatic here, eh?

[sincero1] 28/10/2021 07:39

jtisadly "..likeable and persuasive.." when hits is being critical..senility or disingenuousness makes him forget how he attacked hits last week ....watch out hits...don't get implicated

[3put] 28/10/2021 00:07

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 2021
The 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.

The forward prices from are given below in $/MMBTU (approx pence/therm equivalent in brackets). Prices from ICE for contracts for Q2 in pence/therm in particular seem to be a penny or two better which is probably the £/$ exchange rate (see

Heren March $28.583 (213p); April $16.679 (119p); May $14.260 (102p); June $13.774 (98p), given a conservative conversion rate of volume (mmscf) to heat value (therms) – i.e. multiply mmscf by 10500 to get therms – the field would generate in total over those four months gross revenues for all partners of £17.1 million at 10mmscf/d (i.e. CPR plateau production with side track) or £8.6 million at 5 mmscf/d (i.e. CPR lower plateau production with no sidetrack). Operating expenses for full year 2022 according to CPR might be of the order of £2.3m and therefore for this period would be c. £0.6m.

All of this information is already publicly available, and we stress these are presently notional numbers arrived at approxmately and that these prices are not hedged in any way and therefore might not be available come production in March etc. However whilst the final outcome may vary considerably, we and our partners do anticipate strong demand for gas in the coming years regardless of short term price effects.