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.
No. Clearly the company needed the fundraise, given after he left, the company raised money to pay JTP et al. I don't see your inference anywhere in my statement.
Lord Lucan said Vonk ended up in a disagreement with shareholders towards end of 2018 and wasn’t able to come to market with a regular fundraise and so raised unsatisfactory convertible loan note. Lord Lucan failed to mention that it was one shareholder and that was JTP.
------------
wealdpwr,
Are you saying you think PV should have resigned before arranging the "unsatisfactory convertible loan note"?
YL
Maybe Lord Lucan fails on Corporate Governance and won't sack JTP because he doesn't want to end up like the last BOD? Unclear from his interview, why he even wants this job......
And who has a reasoned argument?
To my point about facts, the requisition had nothing to do with the financing deal as Lord Lucan pointed out. Lord Lucan said Vonk ended up in a disagreement with shareholders towards end of 2018 and wasn’t able to come to market with a regular fundraise and so raised unsatisfactory convertible loan note. Lord Lucan failed to mention that it was one shareholder and that was JTP.
It stands to reason, if JTP wasn't trying to avoid being sacked for all the violations pointed out by Alan 2017, ALL shareholders would have benefited from better financing..which was clearly necessary.
And what about that pay off to David Leningas, JTP's departed mentor?
YL,
One man's "reasoned argument" is another's "bee in the bonnet".
YL
I don't think you have a 'negative' agenda at all. Unfortunately that 'some' are rampers (who chose to ignore the facts and select what I would refer to as euphemistically fuzzy math and speculation) .
Play on Sir!
Ocelot,
I got that.
Sadly... here, we can only speculate what "management" want and hope that they are listening at long last to reasoned argument!
As a previous employer and MD myself, I do wonder "these days" what it takes for an individual who repeatedly fails... to finally acknowledge they are a liability rather than an asset and leave without needing to be pushed?
YL,
The "you" in my question referred to management.
Ocelot: "do you want a potentially influential shareholder to be close to you, where you can maintain contact with him, or sulking on the back benches?"
As "a major shareholder" I would anticipate that Tidswell's aspirations would be aligned with shareholders - in that he wants the SP to recover and the company to be trusted & taken seriously by Investors and The Market (again) In which case he should RESIGN and leave OTHERS - freed from the shackles of his appalling public record of devious actions and disastrous decisions - to get on with that job ASAP.
Alan2017,
We all know JTP possesses influence, because he was the one who removed PV.
There was a falling out between them, suspect PV's financing deal was one of the reasons. The first thing GL did on becoming MD was to reverse that deal and just as well, given the subsequent decline in the share price.
It's the same as in politics, do you want a potentially influential shareholder to be close to you, where you can maintain contact with him, or sulking on the back benches?
I think we can ALL draw a line in the past - even hardliner LTH's like me are willing to average down at some point when I feel that there are genuine opportunities to make back losses here.
I set three ground rules: management buy in... Tidswell loan pay back... Tidswell resignation. My forth was for ANGS to report at least ONE success... but I agreed to remove this condition.
The first of the three have already been completed and I also credit management for opening a question and answer section on the website and offering more transparency as a result. I have absolutely no doubt that Tidswell will be pulling strings even from the outside as a large shareholder (and I have no issue with that) but I think in order to restore market confidence... his long outstanding loan needs repaying and he needs to resign.
Then... and only then... do we move forward TOGETHER :-)
Ocelot - Here is your current Management CV
The thing that stands out the most from the Drillordrop article is how much power Tidswell still 'Wealds' ...pardon the pun ;)
Tidswell with his Knowe Property connection is the King Maker at Angus and Lucan confirmed this.
While discussing Vonk, Lucan stated "......fell out with Jonathan Tidswell, which is never a good thing to do. Jonathan is not a majority shareholder but he is a significant one."
Lucan then confirms his own lack of experience by then saying "Initially, I was slated to come on to that board as non-executive director just to add some eyes and ears."
"At that point in time, Jonathan, the NOMAD and I had discussed what role I would come in as and it was suggested I come in as interim managing director"
I’m a relatively low-cost managing director.....It’s been a steep learning curve but I’m distinctly enjoying it."
So only Tidswell and the NOMAD brought Lucan in who doesn't have the experience by his own admission, but makes up for that by being cheap. There lies the problem with Angus.....looong sigh
They have a Financial Director in Carlos who isn't qualified.
A Technical Director who also happened to be or still is Chief Geologist (Andrew Hollis) at Angus who made the damaging decision to drill Lidsey and Brockham.
You had a Site Manager looking after production who was a Wellsite Geologist (Peter Eadsforth)
And then you have Tidswell who doesn't know his left from his right, alienated the OGA, EA, HSE, Local Authorities and is now tasked with Business Acquisitions for Angus .....when he has no experience.
The old expression "You get what you pay for" comes to mind.....long sigh.
Not sure there can be a meeting of minds, YL.
Those who are so negative about ANGS are those who have lost a lot during the protracted decline of the last many months/couple of years.
But it is management's business to focus on the future and do what they think is best for the company's development.
TBH Ocelot,
I hope ANGS answer as many questions as they are able... as there are some very pertinent questions posed there now. Will be interesting to see how they respond and if they do so openly and honestly, then I think they will start to improve sentiment and begin to rebuild investor trust.
I "sincerely" hope they listen and "genuinely" learn from their past mistakes. If they choose to ignore and try to carry on as before... then we all might as well write off our investment right now.
Thought it sounded like you, YL, but if I'm mistaken, fair enough.
Ocelot...
LOL. I would probably have worded it differently, but it will do. To be honest, I have only just followed the link, checked out the questions and voted myself this a.m.
Maybe someone here will own up to forwarding it?
Are you sure that question isn't yours, YL?
I realise that "some" folk think that I only have a negative agenda here... but in reality... I am also trying to help everyone who is either already invested in ANGS or currently thinking of investing.
The negative issue that stands head and shoulders above all others is (as others have rightly highlighted) the continued toxic presence of J. P. Tidswell.
I've just taken a look at the questions page and the third most prominent question asks about Tidswell's current value to the company. I strongly believe that it would be in the best interests of ALL here, for shareholders to VOTE for this question in order to send a clear and unequivocal message to the board that HE MUST RESIGN and allow ANGS to start to rebuild the severely damaged trust he has caused.
Send the board a message that WE WANT REAL CHANGE and want ANGS to draw a clear line across it's miserable past!
Sorry
I remember reading somewhere that he was restricted from doing this.
Alan
You forgot to mention that.... IF.... his recent purchase of Angus shares had been made without paying the loan back this could easily be argued as being illegal.
It would be difficult to defend buying shares with money that was borrowed from the very company he bought the shares in!!
I remember reading somewhere that he was restricted from
The Jonathan Tidswell Director loan deal rankles share holders especially as the “….Company’s share dealing code was not complied with and accordingly for clarification not be reinstated to the Board”.
Jonathan broke the companies rules yet still has the Directors loan which originally should have been repaid after 12 months. Why when he is no longer on the board has he not paid back the loan? He has enough shares to pay it back and how many salaries can be paid out of the £211,000 plus amount?
He has used Angus as his personal piggy bank from 2013 onwards racking up huge loans - Angus forfeited recovering over £700,000 loans due to them by Tidswell as it would have stopped them selling HH and going public.
I appreciate you have had a tough beginning with Angus Energy, but to continue to have a major share holder who has broken company / AIM rules by trading his shares in a closed period, crashed the share price on multiple times, managed to alienate the OGA, EA and local authorities and being paid a salary for doing absolutely nothing is damming. You need to cut the rot out which should have been done a long time ago and severe all ties with Jonathan Tidswell for a clean break to give Angus a chance to regenerate itself both with its reputation and more importantly its share price. Until you do that then you have a millstone around your neck. Jonathan can be a private share holder like everyone else and hope your stewardship will recover the SP.