[ADVERT]
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
  0.048 5.99% 0.85 0.80 0.90 0.85 0.725 0.83 10,918,652 15:53:24
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 0.1 -2.5 -0.4 - 8

Angus Energy Share Discussion Threads

Showing 12701 to 12723 of 14775 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  519  518  517  516  515  514  513  512  511  510  509  508  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
22/10/2021
12:45
jtisadly " in my view" Well as we all are now aware your view is not worth anything at all being so disingenuous mendacious and duplicitous . discredited and ridiculed constantly . just for fun lets see those recent posts from this clown again: 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" 23+ weeks ago. " share price into the sixties shortly " 23+ weeks ago. "oga approval doubt" . " financing doubt" . " running out of money " weekly prediction for last 9 months. " 0.15 by end of year". " placing soon " daily prediction for last 10 months. "its a pump & dump" - it wasn't. "gas to Shell at current prices from New Year until July in decent volumes. I' put the chances of that at about 1%" "you should be pleased - that 0.70p re-entry level of yours is just round the corner. and my favourite " They did run out of money towards the end of March, as we predicted" - And from the interim : As at 31 March 2021 the Group had cash of £591,000. As at 31 March 2021 the Group had net current assets of £1,351,000"
sincero1
22/10/2021
12:44
1347: I take your point about the wine though. You may be onto something there.
jtidsbadly
22/10/2021
12:38
1347: they've deliberately put the Weald “assets” back in the frame precisely to avoid any question of provisions, in my view. So I doubt they'll raise money for that at this stage. They intend neither to progress nor to provision for them. Crocqman’s otherwise good post is flawed by his statement that the schedule for the project is 14 months late. The original forecast was for May-August 2020, wasn’t it? It looks like April 2022 at the moment, though with Anguish, these things have a marked tendency to slip and slip, what?
jtidsbadly
22/10/2021
12:15
HITS No wrong yet again, I have no interest in dancing on lines. Your logic is as flawed as saying getting a £12m loan at onerous terms due to getting the costs wrong by a country mile (other explanations are available) is a good thing. Or claiming that bigger losses are a good thing because then you have a bigger tax asset. It seems to me that you may have been on the ocebot training course. Come to think of it, has anyone actually ever seen them in the same room together? PS: I expect a placing or other fund rise anyway, how else will they progress/abandon (delete as appropriate) their Weald 'assets' and cover the Christams wine bill?
1347
22/10/2021
12:13
hits - don't lower yourself....justifying yourself to those two is like pis*ing into the wind....you are only going to cover yourself in pi*s.....
sincero1
22/10/2021
11:55
Now now, gentlemen. I know that 1347 is in a positive hissyfit of pique, owing to my failure to recognise some archaic country and western no-mark like Tennessee Ernie Vauxhall and ascribe to him (whoever he was) the same level of musical credibility as Pink Floyd, but still. (You know, I never had 1347 down as a devotee of line dancing, but hey, each to his/her/its own...) If you look at what the alternatives would have been for ANGS if they hadn't got the requirement to stump up £1.4 million in just six months' time postponed (and let's face it, nobody realistically expects them to have produced oodles of gas out of Poundland by the original Apr 20th 2022 repayment due date), then postponing repayment was their only viable option - even if those extra 12 months of bullet dodging has cost them an an eye-poppingly Shylock-esque rate. So sure, on balance a good thing for the company. But far more an essential thing to continuing existence than a good one, and even then only "good" in the sense that herpes is "good" when compared to ebola. Again, what other alternatives were there, given the company's long-ongoing pre-revenue state? The only other option I could come up with would have involved a rush-job placing, probably resulting in a c. 15% dilution... and that would have been a great deal worse.
headinthesand
22/10/2021
11:54
JT I'm sure it's mapped out for something that doesn't involve stale Bulls, Paddy has previous on this. Can't see what it's posting but it seems HITS' new found friend is back.
1347
22/10/2021
11:45
hits - i no longer look at ukog , i have email alerts set for ukog so if anything extraordinary happens i will know about it bad or good . they are a paper loss until i crystallize them. It is still fresh in my mind that ukog went from .08 to 8p based on nothing except sentiment and hope ......so optimism is my only thoughts currently there... i see the resident disingenuous grey old window lickers are back with, surprise surprise , negative supposition as i predicted earlier .... and seems they have turned on you as they failed to coerce and manipulate you ...as they have uclot, ja51contactvoidoiler and clickbait...... ..they always show their true colours in the end ........
sincero1
22/10/2021
11:38
1347: well, yes, I agree that’s a possibility, unless the Lenders fancy their chances of achieving a return on it by managing the thing themselves. Anguish are going to cost them £2.5mm p.a. on top of the finance cost when Anguish can’t make the interest/capital payments. It’s one thing for AIM shareholders to keep these chaps in the manner to which they’ve become accustomed but these Lenders are hard-nosed types, what? I agree that in the eventuality you outline, the current shareholders are unlikely to do very well. The Interim MD may need to parachute himself elsewhere to achieve his geothermal ambitions.
jtidsbadly
22/10/2021
11:30
JT - Yes funds heading in all directions except the shareholders, other than Knowe. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a deferment of the main loan to come yet, which will also come at a price.
1347
22/10/2021
11:17
1347: yes, I know what you mean. I think he’s striving manfully to be even-handed. The extra money they’re paying Knowe puts Knowe approximately on par with the Lenders in terms of the interest rate they’re respectively getting on the first year of the Lenders’ £12mm and the final year (as it now turns out) of the Knowe loan. Fair do’s, what? If Knowe asked for this, it seems equitable that they got it.
jtidsbadly
22/10/2021
10:58
JT Yes I know, I'm resigned to more of the same next week. Bit worried about HITS though, his/her/its previously accurate assessments seem to have become as flawed as their musical knowledge and they now think admitting that you can't repay an agreed loan on time and having to pay the equivalent of £110,000 to push it back a few months is a positive. No wonder he gets stuck in lobster pots, maybe it's spending too much time in Kansas that causes it?
1347
22/10/2021
10:42
1347: unless Cudswallop and Jamesll get behind it with big orders, 4p now looks optimistic for this afternoon.
jtidsbadly
22/10/2021
10:32
Sincero, I agree that in comparison, ANGS is a better bet. (They may be able to get sufficient gas out of Poundland to meet - and of course hopefully exceed - their already incurred commitments, both debt funding and hedge related). Still very high risk though, because it all hangs on my much quoted question "how much gas and by when?" The answers appearing to those questions is in my view literally life or death for ANGS. However, unbelievable though it may be, UKOG is in an even more perilous state. Its recent Turkey trot seems to have slammed into an unsurprising brick wall (and I suspect that whole episode to have been entered into as a smokescreen). I cannot for the life of me foresee where UKOG is ever going to generate any noticeable revenues. It's certainly not going to be out of Loxley, no matter what permissions may or may not be granted...
headinthesand
22/10/2021
09:22
hits - yes I do hold ukog...I have written that investment off although I haven't sold them...as with aim you never know ....
sincero1
22/10/2021
08:52
Sincero, solely out of idle curiosity, am I right in thinking you also hold some quantity of UKOG shares? I think I remember you saying you did, but am not sure.
headinthesand
22/10/2021
08:33
ahhhh... nice and negative supposition free here today ..... unfortunately it won't last...so predictable ...
sincero1
22/10/2021
06:30
yawn..same spectrum different ends...truth is the best defence...
sincero1
21/10/2021
21:58
3Put is clearly worried enough about the issues raised for discussion this evening to feel the need to fill up this board with copy n paste spam.
headinthesand
21/10/2021
21:39
If the sidetrack produces the extra gas, will it reduce the hedge percentage of the gas produced. Asked on 1 October 2021 Yes. The hedged amount is fixed so incremental gas is unhedged. --------------Some investor questions answered recently
3put
21/10/2021
21:38
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
21/10/2021
21:38
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
21/10/2021
21:38
Some board posters are saying that a side track done in November would delay First Gas by up to 3 months. This sounds like nonsense. Can you comment? Asked on 21 September 2021 No it would emphatically not delay First Gas by three months. In fact there is no reason for it to delay First Gas by any material length of time and it is certainly not in the plan that it does. We are planning to execute the limited foundation work required beforehand and move heavy equipment in both before and after the drilling programme and will be following this week’s HAZOP with further SIMOP (Simultaneous Operations) planning which will allow for sensibly risked continuous working on the site during the programme. Again this poster may have misunderstood the nature of the equipment coming onto site, almost all of which is skid-mounted and pre-fabricated for immediate tie-in to the pipework and control lines. Thus some of the equipment won’t come on until February but none of the units will require on-site fabrication beyond connection work.
3put
Chat Pages: Latest  519  518  517  516  515  514  513  512  511  510  509  508  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
ANGS
Angus Ener..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20211202 01:32:16