George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
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.
Significant shareholders, from the website:
Knowe Properties Limited 8.41%
JDA Consulting Limited 5.45%
Jonathan Tidswell-Pretorius 4.25%
Rupert Labrum 3.08%
The above information was accurate as at 11 September 2019.
YorkshireLife, fair enough. I am going so if no one else pipes up with the question I will ask it.
Tor: "YorkshireLife, why not attend the meeting on the 3rd and ask your questions?"
I am 100% sure that the BOD read the BB here and Twitter and elsewhere.
It CANNOT have escaped their notice that many shareholders have been pressing for changes over the years (especially where JTP is concerned). Hence the reason they made him a backroom boy at the last reshuffle.
Problem is... whilst ever JTP is still been paid a full salary, LTH's & The Market will continue to question if he is still pulling strings... likely to lead to more chaos for the company as a direct result!
The sooner he's gone... the better for everyone in ANGS!
RealAnalyst, How long have you been asking people to join your group and is the case progressing. i.e has any action been taken yet?
We have received formal advice that we have an extremely strong case - From a barrister who wants the lucrative fees no doubt!
This 'vote of confidence' by Lady Lucan has had absolutely no beneficial effect on the sp has it?-when we start to see pre Brockham prices and above,then I might be more impressed.
At the moment the facts speak for themselves..the share price has fallen today again,and it reflects the total lack of confidence that the market has in the company.The sp hasn't even got near 2p let alone 4p...
Charlie
If they got their empirical analysis wrong having emphatically assured us if its validity,that itself is negligent!-proves my point really.
I can't speak for Alan2017 obviously,but I do remember on June 28th,after the Brockham RNS, he stated that they would have known from the logging results early in the year if it flowed or not.This is the view of an experienced oil professional.
Therefore we have been blatantly mislead by the board-after all at the CC they didn't even try to fill in the gaps about why the February and June rns' contradict each other.Then of course,we have JTP's tweets reinforcing how well (excuse the pun) it flowed-indisputably misleading.And of course,the notorious email Angus sent on March 29th to the OGA,stating there would be no well testing whilst reassuring us to the contrary.The fact that they didn't flow test as promised,suggests they already knew long before it definitely wouldn't flow and lied to us in a succession of RNS statements...otherwise if there was uncertainty about whether it would flow they would have tested it to resolve the uncertainty.
Undeniably there has been a reckless misstating of the facts,and its clear a systematic deceit has occurred.
This isnt just the normal risk of AIM...and I would remind you CL that Angus promoted itself as an oil producer NOT an oil explorer....its a succession of deliberate false claims....an outrageous deception.
If you're an investor here who has lost £40 or 80 or 100k..or even just £5k...why tolerate it?-you wouldn't suit back and accept it in any other scenario.
Join our action group.We have received formal advice that we have an extremely strong case.
If youd like yo know more
Email keither one nine seven at g mail dot com
It's all the negativity that constitutes a positive sign!
Means ANGS presents buyers with a cheap buying opportunity.
Possibly negativity because ause there is nothing to be positive about at the moment
YorkshireLife, why not attend the meeting on the 3rd and ask your questions?
mufcm, you seem very busy on here today posting all negative stuff, I wonder why?
The recent buy in was excellent news. To keep the momentum going, what we now need is for Lucan to follow up with a new RNS reporting that Tideswell has "LEFT THE BUILDING" for good... never to return.
Then The Market and investors might start to believe in this company again. I genuinely hope we are at - or close - to a turning point here!
GLA :-)
spot on.. PI's averaged down while bod sold !!
Charlie
For the two rns to so emphatically contradict each other suggests at the very least a careless or reckless misrepresentation of the facts,which makes them equally as liable.JTP and the RNS' emphatically stated the oils maturity and flow with a fair degree of certainty ..."geochemical analysis indicates"-conveys a fair degree of empirical certainty.
Either way its blatantly misleading.
Scarface
We still dont know if Brockham was a duster because they didn't bother to flow test it!
If it was a duster then they already knew back in Dec/January but continued to assure you to the contrary in tweets and rns..economique avec la verite lol
..
Sorry but GL is also equally responsible for the misstatements in the rns...and for the February 3rd rns which seems at the very least recklessly misleading:-"Extensive geochemical analysis...indicates similar maturity to HorseHill"....and GL's own managing directors comments:-
"I am very pleased with the oil analysis confirming kimmeridge at Brockham,with natural flow to the surface and evidence of oil.." a-and yet without any flow tests they completely contradict this rns with the June 28th rns.At the very least this is recklessly negligent and in reality,logging results from Brockham would (according to oil professionals inc Alan2017) have indicated back in December and January whether or not it flowed viably.GL has been complicit in this .misleading of investors.
Having pulled out the net cash flow projections for Saltfleetby (see my post of 19:39 below), I think the upside potential offered by ANGS may be higher than I have been assuming - now believe a return to double figures may well be achievable.
You can’t materialise oil and gas out of fresh air.
They drilled a well. It was a duster... you need to get over it. Or stay away from AIM oil exploration.
Just to add: that 4p broad brush figure of GL's re Saltfleetby does not seem to reflect their optimistic scenario or the potential knock-on effects to be derived from the employment of the projected positive cash flow:
Even under a conservative scenario the total net cash
generated over the 10 year field life is £17.6 million.
• The optimistic scenario assumes total net cash generated over
the 12 year field life is £36.5 million.
74% of the closing price of 3.55p before the Brockham RNS of 28/06 = 2.63p
+
GL's broad brush estimate of the value to ANGS of Saltfleetby of 4.00p
= 6.63p.
I'm hoping 5p will represent a staging post on the way to the restoration of a healthier share price.
Exactly wealdpower
5p from these levels is extremely ambitious indeed.They suckered a few people in at 4.25p whilst they forward sold.Someone who bought in that last placing needs a 215% return just to recoup losses.
Not impressed in the slightest.
They lied to us over Bro ckham and didn't even bother to flow test.
This is an asset stripping scam,nothing more.
If you bought at 4p or higher,your only chance of recovering your losses is to join our action:
keither one nine seven at g mail dot com
Charlie , a bit sensitive about your boy Lucan? If you actually read what I wrote, I agreed with YL. His comments were clear including the noter on 'bad form' and "CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE!" . Perhaps your undying loyalty needs a rethink but that may be beyond your mandate.
Scarface
Sorry but we've got plenty of reason to complain...this is long overdue and when the share has gone from 14p to 1p..too little too late
The RNS only came out with 35min left of trading. Jeez. Tough crowd.
First people complain about Lucan not buying. Then when he does people cry about the SP not going up.
If the SP did go up... people would complain about it not going up enough. Seriously.
Dont want to put a dampener on the party,but her purchase has done NOTHING for the share price-which still ended the day in the red.
Lucan hasn't actually bought any now.