Angus Energy Share Discussion Threads

[tidy 2] 14/6/2022 14:26

Best to watch George's interview from last week. I think his figures were 175m pa Leave HITS to continue to beat himself up and clean up his AMGS jail cell

[3put] 14/6/2022 14:24

Noted 1347. HITS said 100 million over 3 years with a successful sidetrack. Do you agree?

[1347] 14/6/2022 14:03

I would remind people when discussing the value of Poundland that there are a number of variables that can impact that, along with several risks, not just with the sidetrack drill but with the existing geology and wells, as documented in the CPR. Not to mention the management risk.

[3put] 14/6/2022 13:49

Scaffolding coming down 🤑

[3put] 14/6/2022 13:25

Are you batting for both teams?

[3put] 14/6/2022 13:24

100 million over 3 years are you words HITS.

[3put] 14/6/2022 13:24

HITS has sold out at 1p but still handing out free advice. We can all see who is nervous!

[headinthesand] 14/6/2022 13:01

3Put's clearly getting nervous - again. He's reverted to copy n paste spamming old IQ answers.

JTids, the raw asset is certainly worth more than the various liabilities that ANGS has bound onto it. Those obligations are variously:-

The loan (call that £14 million including interest)
The three year hedge (call that £72 million at today's gas future pricing)
The revenue due to FESL on the acquisition (that's £6.25 million)

Total? About £92.5 million or roughly 60 million therms' worth of gas. Presuming it can be made to produce at even half George's hoped-for 1.5 million monthly therms sans sidetrack, the asset's definitively worth more than that.

ANGS's issue is of course... what is the field worth to it? As you're fully aware, their problem remains that the asset has to deliver enough revenue to meet their several and various obligations (against which they've put the field up as surety) within a pre-defined timescale.

[3put] 14/6/2022 12:49

It was massively accretive and not dilutive at all. We acquired the 49%, which by the October P90 valuation was worth c.£25 million, for £14 million. We won’t call it the deal of the century, but it is an outstandingly good deal, especially when you consider that the average forward gas price in that October 2021 CPR has almost doubled today.

It is difficult to do the sums easily, since our own market cap prior to the announcement was only £17.5m (at 1.28p) and barely reflected the October CPR valuation of our 51% interest let alone potential (and now at Brockham actual production) at the southern oil fields. A decent estimate of 100% of Saltfleetby (just on the lower October CPR) and, say, just £10m for the oil fields would yield a value around the £60m mark and give a price per fully diluted share of nearer 2.5p. With current prices, the sky is the limit.

Yes we nearly doubled the number of shares outstanding but, taking into account the price paid for the asset, we more than doubled the value of the company.

Also unlike past placings only a small fraction (4%) of this issuance wss to market participants who might trade out. The rest is either locked up or part of a strategic stake.

Finally the raising of the £6m cash – done to ensure the assent of regulators and lenders – puts the risk of further placings out of people’s minds. Retail should be able to work in this stock with confidence

[1347] 14/6/2022 12:20

Concerts? Parties? Is there a No 10 Business Meeting?

[3put] 14/6/2022 11:46

HITS thinks 100 million over 3 years

[3put] 14/6/2022 11:46

Thanks. The level of confidence about the target zone is indeed very high. We are addressing an area of the reservoir which was being produced from by an existing well, which was shut in due to a well-bore related issue.

An non-exhaustive list of risks, ever present in all drilling programmes is given in hxxps://www.researchgate.net/publication/317248002_Downhole_Drilling_Problems

Pertinent here are 1) hole collapse – this occurred twice in the Saltfleetby field and both times in the same layer, so we have introduced mitigation measures and will approach this layer with appropriate caution and 2) differential sticking ; 3) loss of bottom hole assembly – this occurred twice at Saltfleetby and 4) lost circulation fluids with reservoir damage. Many of these issues can be managed by reducing mud weight which is easier to do when well control is not such an issue as in a depleted reservoir.

It is wrong to characterise the historical drilling programmes at Saltfleetby as being especially prone to failure. Drilling was conducted between 1984 and 2017 by a number of Operators of varying competence. This being the UK’s largest onshore gas field, a great number of the earlier side tracks were in fact wholly exploratory. Some of the later drilling programmes did encounter problems which (by the common agreement of many specialists present at the time) could have been avoided with a relatively small degree of caution by the then drilling manager.

As we have advised before, this sidetrack has been planned with the benefit of enhanced 3D seismic and the oversight of a great number of independent drilling engineers and specialists. Some of the later side-tracks did not benefit from such oversight.

Angus’ drilling programmes have generally been well executed – albeit with disappointment about the target zone at Brockham and Lidsey. Angus drilled Horse Hill-1 successfully before selling out to partners and drilling programmes at the other fields either did not encounter the sorts of issues listed above or Angus was able to rectify them swiftly.

[headinthesand] 14/6/2022 11:27

JTids, I've brought up the issue of concert parties before - occasioned by Aleph itself only reporting as having 7.19% (or 164 million) of the 2,283 million shares (at the time).

It was meant to have had 273 million shares, so the assumption is/was that it either sold 109 million, or that 109 million shares were held by parties brought on by and related to Aleph (quite possibly including Mercuria)

It'll be interesting to see what percentage of the soon to be 2,556 million shares turns out to be actually owned by Aleph itself.

I don't see any issue with the lenders taking title, if they have the opportunity to, if ANGS cannot meet its several obligations regarding the field. The raw asset is worth more than the loan and the total hedge differential combined (c. £84 million ish), so there's no risk.

Back on the ground in Lincolnshire, it really is getting very near the sharp end now...

[3put] 14/6/2022 11:09

Is that a ramp JT?

[jtidsbadly] 14/6/2022 10:54

One could argue that there’s now a much lower chance of Mercuria being able in the short term to exercise their Charge. With Knowe, Forum and Aleph holding, between them, 50% or so of the shares, control of Anguish is now in the hands of what some may consider to be a concert party. Mercuria’s loan money should be safe and they can now sit back and enjoy the returns on their hedge contracts. Provided that Anguish can meet them. But it’s quite a big potential liability for Aleph to be taking on, isn’t it? If Anguish can’t meet the contract terms, Aleph will have to dig very deep to meet 36 months’ worth of them. Should one conclude that they know something, or that they’re just taking a massive flyer with their clients’ money? It can’t be Russian money, can it? They’ll never be able to take control of Poundland if it is, even if Poundland turns out to be a dud. Very odd, the whole thing.

[tidy 2] 14/6/2022 08:34

Chickpea watch the latest interview from last week then you will be bit more clued up kiddo.

[3put] 14/6/2022 08:34

Celsius took several large leveraged positions and borrowed assets from various DAOs. If Bitcoin falls too much, they get margin called and liquidated. Celsius and their staking sounded great when Bitcoin was doing well but now they have liquidity issues

[3put] 14/6/2022 08:34

BTC is done for now

[chickbait] 14/6/2022 08:33

Me, Nooooo Way...!

[chickbait] 14/6/2022 08:33

Its a bloodbath!