London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
B
80 days since first gas was "imminent"
Its worse than the financing
SB he can't. You've laid out a series of undeniable facts which do not fit in with any of his various delusions.
So I expect he'll accuse you of being some multi-ID of some green activist or something. It's his only riposte, however tragically lunatic it may be.
BV,
How is it crap?
Your analogy ignored the hedge & our that we likely havent sufficent capability in production to meet the future hedged quantities until the side track is successfully installed. that is not crap.. that obvious.. re read what you wrote if neccessary.. please explain how it is crap if you disagree??
And as for rolling over the hedge into the future, meaning we hedge more during periods of higher gas prices, which means we have less production over the hedge to sell at those high prices. how is that crap? instead of selling x quantity (at present unknown) in Q1 & Q2 next year for market price, we are selling it for 52P.. that is what we are doing.. how is that crap? please explain.
SB, what a load of utter crap, GL has been a hedge fund manager in charge of several staff under his wing, he knows what he's doing unlike the wannabe finance experts on here.
HITS, every day Angus is in business gets up your nose which is too obvious on here and advfn, you get slapped back and forth over the nett. What's your next company target when you fail here very shortly, maybe SOU which has lost 1/2 of its value,no production and more debt than Angus.
BV,
"JTS, if the company was a pub would you prefer to sell a pint at £3.00 or £5.00 - £7.00 a pint with the same amount of barrels in the cellar?"
Unlike lemon pie & his ilk ( or elk as was previously posted here :-D) , your not a completely ignorant muppet so you are aware what you posted above is completely disengenious as it takes no account of the hedge and selling "pints" for 43p giving the difference to our lenders, nor does it take into account we are unlikely the quantity of "sales" we told the lender we would..
you can spin it anyway you like, this delay is costing the company money, we are increasing our hedge quantity in the future becasue we can meet it now and this mean less surplus to hedge production to sell at the high prices your quoting..
the delay in the side track also means we are unlilkely produce enough to meet the hedge in the future and if we do manage to meet the hedge, there will be little to no surplus so regardless of the price of gas all we will be getting is 43p.
More farcical mudslinging, BV?
Unsurprising, since you're incapable of dealing at all with the point made.
A rising gas price is really REALLY bad for ANGS unless it can meet or exceed the quantities it has hedged.
And the most optimistic production projection from the two existing wells that ANGS has ever issued is lower than the quantities it has hedged in Q4 22 and now especially Q1 and Q2 23.
Therefore, the as yet to be attempted sidetrack (which one hopes they've got the funds to pay for) is literally crucial. Without it, they'll be generating negative revenue in Q1 and Q2.
360, there's an old saying "If you don't like it lump it" If any of the armchair CEO's on here can do any better put your name forward at the next meeting, we're all in the same boat but moaning changes nothing imo GLA!
HITS, all researching and never investing year after year, and after all that researching you lost money so you say which I doubt. There is a certain site which has a research Journalist with a very big mouthpiece showing every disruption to the O&G companies whenever possible, isn't there HITS/WG/Tygra/Mirasol =R.
BV, astonishingly you appear to believe there are only two options for investors with regards to this board:
- ignore bod incompetence and display total servility in worshipping the mighty Lucan.
or
- leave the board.
With ANGS running the sidetrack, what could possible go wrong?
Ocelot quite correctly mentions a natural gas price of 610p per therm for Jan 23.
The reason the well-researched find the mention of this intensely irritating is that, even if ANGS manages to produce the 1.75 million therms it has hedged for the month of January, it will only receive 52p per therm for those. It has to pay Mercuria the balance of 558p per therm on the January hedge swap contract.
Of course, with the deferment of part of the current Q3 hedge into Q1 and Q2 next year, the January hedged volume will now almost certainly be higher than its original 1.75 million therm level, which itself was already higher than ANGS's most optimistic production forecast from the two existing wells. And I reckon ANGS is just a few days away from having to ask to defer even more of the current Q3 hedged volumes into early next year.
Higher gas prices are only good for ANGS if it manages to produce more gas than it has hedged, If it can't do that for whatever reason, then higher gas prices are the absolute worst thing that can happen to it while the hedge is in place.
That sidetrack drill (whenever the company gets round to attempting it) simply has to turn out successful for ANGS or it'll pretty much instantly be right up the creek without a paddle.
darientaylor, do you know how to use a door to exit a hot kitchen.
heads on a spike?? your a bit extreme
JTS, if the company was a pub would you prefer to sell a pint at £3.00 or £5.00 - £7.00 a pint with the same amount of barrels in the cellar?
GIIP of 114 BCF
1999 Production rates exceeding 50 MMScf per day
Still decent amount left in the ground definitely at these stellar gas prices
Might well be all time high gas prices,,,,but Angus haven’t got any.
Stop talking sxxxe then.
this is now an embarrassment. total incompetence by the board. heads on a spike a must
About as exciting as a nail in the boot.
TELLING US THE HIGH GAS PRICES IS LIKE ADDING SALT TO INJURY.
Jamesthesecond,
We have both been here for some quite considerable time (in my case, since Spring 2019!).
The achievement of first gas has taken longer than forecast, that is obvious. But, imho, prospects for ANGS remain as exciting as ever.
Best wishes.
515p summer 23, anything you say jts lol!
Ocel;ot-GL has messed this up BIG. The incompetent deceitful person has lost heaps of revenues.
Natural gas Jan 23 contract currently 610p:
https://www.theice.com/products/910/UK-Natural-Gas-Futures/data?marketId=5253323