Angus Energy Share Discussion Threads

[sincero1] 11/11/2021 09:36

13reallyneedsahobby47cptmaniwaring " a clear warning flag to anyone who has a clue about 'investing' on AIM ...... are too dull to realise it." says the plonker that admits he is losing money on at least 6 aim shares.... d'oh ....another case of this grey old nobody losing his marbles, in a rush to be negative, not thinking before he posts...

[solo4yous] 11/11/2021 09:15

When do you think you might be able to pay dividends to shareholders? Asked on 27 October 2021
With a successful side track we would hope to be debt free and dividend paying during the financial year beginning September 2023.

Have angus got any interested or potential partners for the Lidsey oil well if the remapping is favourable. Asked on 27 October 2021
We have had discussions in outline with one potential set of partners – but we don’t expect to get partners to the table before getting a) seismic re-interpreted and evaluated and b) all planning and permitting consents for a side-track

[headinthesand] 11/11/2021 09:06

Indeed, the Cuddo ID choir is getting busy again.

One of these two IDs is the one that's been responsible for irritating investors on other BBs on ADVFN with his incessant cross-ramping of ANGS over the past week (check his post history... it's mildly amusing how busy he's been in this latest attempt to breathe some life into George's Norwegian Blue).

Thing is, this is such an obvious and cack-handed way to attempt to polish the unpolishable that all it's serving to do is to diminish ANGS's gossamer-thin credibility even more. It's very effectively spreading the word that ANGS is in dire straits. Someone with a higher IQ than shoesize in the Chiswick-run boiler room needs to have a rethink...

[1347] 11/11/2021 09:02

JT They are just daft and boring. Discussion on here makes very little to no difference to the share price, repeated failure by the BoD to deliver their projects to their forecast time and costs does, as does their attempts to gloss over past failures.

In fact the clearly orchestrated attempts to drown out any facts and/or opinion that doesn't suit the narrative is, or at least should be, a clear warning flag to anyone who has a clue about 'investing' on AIM (if indeed investing and AIM is not an oxymoron). They are actually shooting hemselves in the foot but are too dull to realise it.

[solo4yous] 11/11/2021 07:54

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.

[davemarn] 11/11/2021 07:50

"What are the views of managment on the value of the company given its current prospects? Asked on 21 September 2021
We have argued recently for a sum of the parts valuation of nearer 3.5 pence. That may seem ambitous but at current spot and forward gas prices the cash generating potential of Saltfleetby has been grossly underestimated merely by virtue of the lapse of time snce the last CPR was done on Saltfleetby in early 2020 when the gas price was near an historic low. We are still confident of restoring value to the oil assets after the drilling results at Lidsey in 2017 and Brockham in 2018/19 and the difficulties with planning permissions at Balcombe. This process continues unabated, albeit in a slow or sometimes difficult regulatory and planning environment. Finally we believe that our venture into geothermal will come to form the greater part of the Sum of the Parts of Angus in the future and will meet with a more enthusiastic response from all stakeholders – regulatory, planning, financing and others."

[johncasey] 11/11/2021 07:16

depopulation is the agenda but when the severe cold hits the northern hemisphere this winter you'll see an avalanche of deaths ..if you watch this lecture by john casey,will explain everything..fast forward to 56mins if you havent got time to listen in full

[1347] 11/11/2021 07:00

JT Yes I suppose if you class anything with a positive or northern Lattitude as in the north then it is 'in the north', along with those oilfields in the Middles East and Northern Africa.

[3put] 10/11/2021 22:55

There has been much recent comment on the investment forums about how long the sidetrack would take to drill at Saltfleetby. Certain posters have claimed that they have internal company documents that say this will take 16 weeks. Please can you let me know if this is correct or if you expect it to take a different amount of time?

Also being speculated about is the volume of gas that has been hedged. It has been claimed that you have hedged 70% of 10mmscf/d and therefore the sidetrack has to be completed and everything has to run well for the project to be viable. Please could you confirm if this is correct or if the hedge is for different figures? Asked on 23 September 2021
We would be surprised and disappointed if the drilling part of the programme exceeded 28 days and the entire programme involved more than 7-10 days either side. On behalf of the Board, we have never heard or seen of any internal document which suggested we were planning for a 16 week side-track at Saltfleetby and we would challenge the poster to produce it. For that matter I haven’t heard of a drilling programme anywhere to these depths which could conceivably take 16 weeks – except perhaps on Mars, which is possibly where your poster hails from.

Supplementally, one poster has pointed out that the Planning Application allowed for 16 weeks time. This is not some “internal document” which the poster only had access to, but part of an application that is publicly available. Every company puts in their application for more time than is absolutely necessary in every sphere of life. This is hardly news. We reiterate drilling to these depths does not take 16 weeks as every reasoning investor in this industry knows.

The other assertion is equally bizarre and must be challenged. We have already clearly stated that the hedge was for “approximately 70% of the Company’s future gas sales …. under a conservative projection” and this was prudently set by the lenders, based, as we understand it, on their own estmates of achievable flow from the existing wells and excluding the contribution from the side track. Otherwise it would obviously not be a conservative projection.

[3put] 10/11/2021 22:55

Sirs, this is not a question, rather, a note of congratulation for the speed and determination of your efforts at Saltfleetby. My holding in ANGS, at present, is relatively small. But I am in a position, both financially and mentally, to increase that holding quite substantially, perhaps up to notifiable level. Kindest Regards. Hussein Asked on 15 October 2021
Thank you.

[3put] 10/11/2021 22:55

I have just checked your planning statement on slide 13, It states the sidetrack duration will take up to 16 weeks as mentioned from another poster. Please could you clear this query up once and for all. Asked on 1 October 2021
As now already noted, all applicants for permits and permissions in any walk of life give themselves much more time to complete a task than is necessary. This is because of the length of time and the cost incurred in obtaining the permission in the first place. They will then advise to market, at commencement of operations, a shorter period and expect to come in on the short end of that.

Reabold for instance advised six to ten weeks for drilling the West Newton WNB1 and completed in 6 weeks before moving onto the sidetrack. This was drilled to 2250 m. We are side-tracking from about 1150m to a Measured Depth (including horizontal sections) of about 3000m or 1850 metres of drilling. Nor are we doing a well test which might extend the programme, because we are moving straight from drilling into production here, so there is no need for a well test.

The hardest rock in Europe gives a rate of penetration of about 3m/hour (see page 6 of hxxps://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/pdf/IGAstandard/SGW/2017/Baujard.pdf). That would imply 600 hours here or 25 days/3-4 weeks of continuous drilling. Even assuming the drilling was no more than half of the time advised, then to drill through this much granite would be only be 7 or 8 weeks.

Granite of course wears drill bits faster and there is much changing of drilling equipment when addressing such hard rock. We are not drilling through granite in Cornwall or Scotland but through sandstones, clays, coals and limestones in Lincolnshire. We anticipate 20 odd days of 24/7 drilling – so a rate of penetration of over 12m/hour (verify by page 29 of Halco’s helpful graphs on rates of penetration hxxps://www.halco.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/A-Z-Drilling.pdf). Of course drilling is not the only workstream here, and even if we were to more than double the time, to suggest five to six weeks of work, we would actually expect the rig to be down inside that envelope. Things can go wrong and extend the timetable – we have always been frank about that – but this is a reasonable verifiable estimate.

What disturbs me about assertions by this poster (and concert parties) – and they are hardly the first instances of obvious falsheoods deliberately spread – is that he holds himself out to be a knowledgeable investor and could have fact checked any of this with online sources in a matter of minutes. Worse still by claiming to have discovered an “internal̶1; company document he implies some great conspiracy by the Company and its Board, rather than sharing his source from the outset and pointing to the very obvious conclusion here: that people give themselves ample leeway in any official permission!

[3put] 10/11/2021 22:54

Please could you give a clearer timescale when the Lidsey remapping results will be available to shareholders. Asked on 15 October 2021
These will be reviewed by partners in the Field during November and we would hope to release more generally shortly thereafter.

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 21:49

1347: yes, it is. In the East Midlands/Lincolnshire/East Lindsey governmental districts but in the geographical, latitudinal and therefore meteorological North!

[1347] 10/11/2021 21:36

JT No, you need to get up towards Humberston before it's classed as North Lincolnshire. Poundland is in East Lidsey, Lincolnshire, East Midlands, England. Planet Earth (note: not Mars - where drills can take longer, up to 16 weeks I'm informed).

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 21:26

1347: I posted that before I saw yours. Yes, I’ve looked it up, you’re right, it’s East Lindsey. Classified as within the East Midlands. For me, however, Sheffield is in the North and Saltfleetby is north of Sheffield in terms of latitude. I’m inclined to give the troll some slack on that!

Yes, it’s not stopped them in the past, but issuing misleading information a few months before things really go wrong would be inadvisable. Those blokes on the other site with large shareholdings would take a dim view of it. Though I suppose their depleted funds might not run to consulting Messrs. Sue Grabbit and Run.

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 21:04

1347: it’s in NE Lincolnshire, surely? A higher line of latitude than Sheffield. Just a few miles south of the Humber.

[1347] 10/11/2021 20:59

JT No we can't justify it, it's in the East Midlands, North Lincs yes, but not the rest of the county. Poundland is not in North Lincs.

The East Midlands is one of nine official regions of England at the first level of NUTS for statistical purposes. It consists of Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire (except North and North East Lincolnshire), Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland.



As for the time of year and making misleading statements, it's never stopped them before, they issued the plans for Poundland just before Christmas 2019 didn't they.

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 20:48

1347: I think we can justify classifying Saltfleetby as in the North, can't we? It’s north of Sheffield, a fraction south of Doncaster and Manchester in terms of latitude. It’s the impact on groundworks and all that piping caused by really cold weather that may be a further issue in the rush to first gas.

Yes, lots of nice pipeline being laid this time last year in the lovely N. Lincolnshire sunshine. Very nice. Not so much this year. As for phoning the sub-contractors, what would they say? They don’t know when the kit’s arriving and can’t afford to keep them on standby. If the contractors have got work elsewhere, it may be hard to get them back, which could be the next delay they come up with.

If they feel, as some of us seem to, that the game is close to being up, you can’t blame them too much for taking their foot off the accelerator, can you? It’s human nature. It must be very demoralising. And this is not the time to be making misleading statements.

[1347] 10/11/2021 20:21

JT Does the troll suffer from poor Geography as well as English? What's the relevance of a cold snap in the North got to do with anything, Anguish doesn't have any assets in the North and it isn't supplying any gas for fuel?

Anguish were publishing mulpiple pictures of diggers and potatoe trenches this time last year, this year nothing. Mind you they were trying to secure loans and find placees one year ago.

Do you think they've thrown in the towel or are just so busy working on Version 4 of their timescales roadmap and plan that they've simply forgotten to phone the sub-contractors?

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 20:09

I see that the Spam-loving troll is predicting icy conditions towards the end of November in northern England for a week. The unpleasant troll with the bumpy head won’t like this, he’s not keen on weather forecasting. I hope this won’t cause a rift in the Chiswick lute, what?

On this topic (broadly), it’s worth bearing in mind what they said on 3 June about timing etc.

“• Construction activities are planned over several months with multiple local specialist contractors. On site operations will commence in July with limited groundwork preparations on this pre-developed site. In situ fabrication of flowlines will commence in August and main production equipment will be connected as individual skid packages arrive.”

Has anyone seen any of this? I haven’t. That’s several months then, once the kit has arrived, all by multiple local contractors. And snow and ice on the way. These chaps don’t like their hands getting cold, and who can blame them? Some of the bits on those small pipelines must be a bit fiddly, what? It looks as if the groundworks are at least 4 months late and fabrication work at least three months late already. The above timings were incorporated into their prediction of first gas at the end of this year.

[3put] 10/11/2021 19:10

Going to be an expensive winter , perfect time for Angs to get the gas flowing

[3put] 10/11/2021 19:09

UK long-range forecast shows up to four inches of snow in freezing cold weather blast
TEMPERATURES are expected to plummet to -7C by the end of November, with snow and ice predicted across Scotland.

UK weather: Chart shows snowfall is set to strike country
Sign up to receive our rundown of the day's top stories direct to your inbox
Enter your email address here
SUBSCRIBE

According to the latest WXCharts, temperatures across the country will remain mild throughout the rest of this week. By 6am on November 15, temperatures across England, Scotland and Wales will drop to 4C and will remain around the same for the rest of the week.



Snow long range forecast: -10C deep freeze that could reach UK - maps

Snow wall to engulf UK in mid-November as downpours batter country
However, the weather is expected to turn bitterly cold towards the end of the month as the wintry conditions arrive.



By midnight on November 25, the entire country will wake up to frost and freezing weather as temperatures are expected to plummet to -3C.

The cold weather will continue for the rest of the month, with Scotland receiving the main brunt of the freezing temperatures.


On November 26, the Scottish Highlands - such as Inverness and Fort William - will see temperatures of around -7C.


Scotland expected to see some snow (Image: WX Charts)
At least six inches (16cm) of snow is expected to fall across the Scottish regions of Portree, Fort William and Inverness.

The cold weather will continue down through to England and Wales.

Newcastle and the north east of England will see the coldest temperatures of -2C.

But the whole country will see the freezing temperatures as the cold weather moves down Britain by the end of November.

[3put] 10/11/2021 19:08

Since the publication of the CPR yesterday there has been much discussion on the forums about the amount of gas that has been hedged each month. This figures show that the hedged sum is up to almost 5.4mmscfd in November 2022 and because the Jan 2015 July 2017 production averaged 4.7mmscfd it has been claimed that Angus has to drill the sidetrack just to cover the volumes required for the hedge. However, further details in the CPR show that 2022 production is predicted to be 2.8 BCF 7.7mmscfd in 2022 and 3.6 BCF 9.8mmscfd in 2023.

So my questions are:

A What is the predicted output of Saltfleetby without the sidetrack being drilled? Will it be enough to cover the 5.4mmscfd of the hedge in November 2022?

B If the sidetrack is successfully drilled, what would you hope would be the total gas output of Saltfleetby mmscfd in a worst, probable and best case scenario?

C Will it be possible to continue producing gas at Saltfleetby while the sidetrack is being drilled or does all production have to stop during this time period? Asked on 27 October 2021
A.The lenders technical advisers and Angus evaluated the deliverability of the existing two wells as being likely to be greater than 5 mmscfd. The reasoning was twofold. In the last years of delivery to the old Conoco refinery, average production was constrained by persistent issues with the main compressor at Theddlethorpe. Secondly it was the view of technical experts that, following a prolonged shut-in, the two wells should have improved deliverability in the first 18 months or so of operations. This is because prior to shut in there was an area of reduced pressure around the producing wells. Since then the pressure has equilibrated across the field resulting in significantly higher pressure around the producers. So it is our view that the hedged production should be able to be covered by these two wells in the event of failure of the sidetrack

B. Finger in the air: Worst 7mmscfd, Probable 10mmscfd, Best 10mmscfd (but extended for a longer period of time) Note, the combined deliverability of the three wells will exceed the production rate during the plateau period which is limited to 10mmscfd by virtue of the process equipment.

C. We believe that simultaneous operations are feasible on this site but we do need to do much more work on how such operations would be conducted.

[3put] 10/11/2021 19:08

The £12 million finance facility seems to be taking a lot longer than usual. You had seemed confident of closure in a recent RNS. Can you explain the delay? Asked on 30 April 2021
A number of reasons. There isn’t anything particularly “usual” about senior secured lending in the UK’s onshore oil industry. The bulk of operators and licensees fund out of equity. We have a multitude of counterparties here: three borrowers inside the Angus group, a limited recourse guarantor in the shape of our Licence partner, a security agent, and a collection of private lenders, large and small as announced. Certain parties have very unique documentation needs or wants and a single draft can take some time to circulate arond the various parties’ counsel.

Then, as a secured loan into a heavily regulated industry, there are a large number of reports to be collated, assets to be identified for charging, specialist bank accounts to set up, technical support, regulatory enquiries. The trust deeds for the Licence alone stretch to well over 100 pages. We have been frugal on our own legal costs, and restrained on the use of counsel, and we are not paying for any other party’s costs (excepting limited reports on property title) other than the commitment announced in November to Aleph as arranger. Nonetheless the delay has been very frustrating for us and all our shareholders but we hope that we have made good use of the time we have without the full funding in hand.

[jtidsbadly] 10/11/2021 18:40

1347: yes, you can’t really question their green credentials. With their feet in the out basket at the office and on the fender at the Club, their carbon dioxide output is pretty low too.