We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
W.E.C: "Expect Rupert will pick some more up at these levels."
Tell him, he can have mine if he pays enough for them ;-)
formation water - Schlumberger Oilfield Glossary
Featured snippet from the web
Geology] Water that occurs naturally within the pores of rock. Water from fluids introduced to a formation through drilling or other interference, such as mud and seawater, does not constitute formation water. Formation water, or interstitial water, might not have been the water present when the rock originally formed.
All very small volume- doubt you can accumulate much in bulk so not sure how representative the drop/spread is. Expect Rupert will pick some more up at these levels.
YL
If its Angus water it would seem it may have enough salt in it to be able to walk on!!!....lol
"What are your plans for the water reinjection well at Brockham?What we’d like to do is to discuss water reinjection. We’d like to do more studies internally. We have done it in the past. We may conceivably do it again. We would do it only on the basis that there would be negligible risk of any significant pressure problems on the hole. Over the 20 or 30 years that the Portland has been worked at Brockham, about 300,000 barrels of fluid have been removed. So,it’s a depleted reservoir that could be available for injection. Injecting water would clearly allow us to increase the recoverable oil and would potentially solve problems in terms of disposing of water elsewhere.
We haven’t made any definitive planning or application for that purpose. But what I will say is this: water disposal for the onshore industry is quite an issue. The salinity of formation water is incredibly high. The salinity is of such a concentration that even using the most sophisticated filtration techniques it is almost impossibly expensive to clean it up. And when I say clean it up, we’re not talking aboutsome heavy metal. It’s just the salt. So,you get to a point where we do what we do now. Rightnow, the water has to be trucked several hundred miles and then burnt because there is simply nothing else that we can do with it. We’re at a loss that we can’t get environmental permits to inject 2,000 meters below the surface, 1.5km away from the nearest water table that anyone conceivably uses and yet one gets this great resistance that,somehow,we’re poisoning the environment. And yet we truck it miles and miles and miles up country roads and motorways and then it gets burnt. We’ll consider it [waterreinjection] but we haven’t got any application in to do it yet. Do you need water reinjection to get the Portland flowing at reasonable rates?My understanding is it unquestionably increases recovery, yes."
https://investigatingbalcombeandcuadrilla.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/transcript-of-interview-with-george-lucan-of-angus-energy.pdf
Ja51,
The Lord clearly needs to teach ANGS how to walk on water... and quickly!
Looks like the Lord didn't fancy the 8.5% drop and 15% spread!
... So, if I were to tell those (AIM market) investors that I believed this collection of assets together may be worth between 4 and 7p RIGHT NOW, ...
The mid-point of GL's valuation of ANGS is 5.50p meaning that, in his opinion, at 1.175p, the share is approaching a potential 4-bagger.
Those on the look-out for bargains in the market will, sooner or later, alight upon ANGS.
https://investigatingbalcombeandcuadrilla.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/transcript-of-interview-with-george-lucan-of-angus-energy.pdf
Looks as if ANGS has registered some of Alan2017's questions:
http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/media/investor-questions/
"One would hope once Saltfleetby has been approved sentiment will start to change here."
Several hurdles to cross before Saltfleetby is "priced in" IMHO.
Not only planning... but testing and connection to grid before any revenues are even assured... and in the meantime... more salaries to pay and on-going associated running costs that will simply detract from even the current low SP.
We are at a crossroads here... and EVERYONE knows it!
It's why even the BOD are looking to gas and other potential assets to purchase - because they have little - to no - confidence in what we currently own. Before we run out of money... they need to prove up one... YES "ONE" asset... to convince investors that there really is future potential here... but until something... "anything" is proved up... investors will remain wary and sit in the wings and watch...
We're waiting Lucan... give us "concrete evidence" this time or else existing investors will not average down & new investors will sideline you with a wry smile.
ANGS have played the "promise of jam tomorrow" game far too often already... and understandably, NOBODY trusts this company anymore!
One would hope once Saltfleetby has been approved sentiment will start to change here. Low Risk production at meaningful levels.
It's been more than 3 1/2 months since the Brockham RNS of 28/06.
At some stage, the market will have sorted itself out and those who wish to sell at these current levels will have sold.
Then, to buy, it will be a question of raising the bid, to find new sellers.
Just looking at Saltfleetby, isn't the presence of Mike Wells more of an asset due to his previous connection there?
His Bio details: Mike was employed by ROC Oil to oversee the Saltfleetby Gas Field (the “Field”) and he remained with Wingas UK Storage Ltd on its acquisition of that Field. Mike has extensive experience in field management and engaging with all regulators.
Only going by his bio, but from this it seems (to me) that he would be a 'safer pair of hands' to be involved with this particular asset?
gla
Ocelot your quote from the meeting made me sigh ":.....our principal technical man, our technical director, he is in fact
ex British Gas. He’s almost more familiar in that territory than he is in oil so he was delighted to go back and put his gas hat on and look at this field."
Technical Director as in Andrew Hollis who was / still is (?) Angus Energy Chief Geologist who decided to drill Lidsey and Brockam...both of which were Gelogical failures resulting in the SP crashing both times. Is he really the best person they can get?!?! See the video link at the very bottom.
And why has the Angus site airbrushed out his stint as Chief Geologist at Angus?!?!
http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/management/
https://twitter.com/share_talk/status/1042460542672224256?lang=en
Note, too, that Saltfleetby should open up to them other sources of finance apart from placings.
Thank you, neon, and understood (and you're far from alone in thinking this way!).
I arrived late in ANGS, so avoided most (but not all) of the share price decline, so am free of any particularly negative feelings about management.
It's going to require new investors to raise the share price, because, as you say, most existing investors are too reluctant to average down at the present time.
I'm sure management DO want to see the share price rise and, from this low level, significantly (the mid-price of GL's range of 4-7p is 5.50p), at which point, yes, they recover the option of a placing, should they find a new project they wish to pursue further and which requires the additional funds.
Ocelot
I really want to believe everything JL says but when I look back to his and his predecessor's interview and RNS history, my finger on the buy button comes off automatically.
He is just drumming it up so that another placing can be arranged by attracting investors to buy the stock again. But investors like me who have lost a fortune because of his/Mr. Vonk's lies/misleading statements will probably think 10 times before investing again.
Personally I will wait for ANGS to actually produce something first before believing anything JL or his technical guys says or believes because they say lots of things but failed to provide every single time.
Regardless, I wish you all the best mate.
GL
We have looked - in the weeks before I started, I was doing some work tangentially with the
company - I suppose at 40 different projects in the last year. Most of them you can chuck in the bin
in about 10 minutes. But about 10 of them have proved to be interesting enough to merit a lot of
attention.
Originally, Saltfleetby was thought by my predecessor not to be worth the candle – to be treated as
an abandonment issue. Actually, when I first joined, that was still the technical team’s view. And I
think they didn’t have enough data. When they did, they immediately said it was a very attractive
asset.
We have a gas operator’s licence and our principal technical man, our technical director, he is in fact
ex British Gas. He’s almost more familiar in that territory than he is in oil so he was delighted to go
back and put his gas hat on and look at this field.
https://investigatingbalcombeandcuadrilla.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/transcript-of-interview-with-george-lucan-of-angus-energy.pdf
ANGS SP has "always" traded UP on hype and hot air... and DOWN again when cold hard reality hits home (as it has done every time to date!) God help us if the traders leave... as - without them - they will be nothing left to stimulate a rise in SP.
I also think UKOG will buy the oil assets over time - probably at bargain basement rates - once ANGS finally admit that the real reason for their new found enthusiasm for gas is that they lack the technical skills and requisite knowledge to achieve "anything" meaningful with oil...
ANGS only "proven" skill over the years has been in diluting existing shareholders at each and every opportunity... can a leopard ever change it's own spots?
Personally, given his 30 years' experience as an investment banker, I suspect he knows what he's talking about when it comes to valuations, but, of course, Ja51, you are entitled to your own opinion.
Judging by his valuations of the company I'm not sure if he would be able to take the lens cap off either end !!.....lol
Ja51, You're saying GL is looking through the wrong end of the telescope, I was quoting him.
From the lack of funding available to the buyer, I understood the buyer was likely to be UKOG, as, you, dsfat, suggested in your post.
Ocelot
My thoughts are igas have been in talks regards Brockham and ukog may have expressed an interest but they have no funding options available to them at this time.
TBH I have always been confused as to igas 100% owned pedl235 ? Is that Brocham ?
Not invested in Angus anymore but interested in Weald Oil and I don't think we've heard the last of Brockham..
It wouldn't surprise me if it landed in ukogs hands next year with ambitious plans for Portland and even Kim..
Just my thoughts of course
Ocelot
I think you may be looking at this from the wrong end of the telescope.
Why would anyone actually pay for Brockham?? Three wells to de-commission. No EA permit for water injection (which they where/are? paying £50,000 PA to the landlord for) Massive difficulties to get a new EA injector permit and a likely new injector well needing to drilled if they where to get permission at how many £ million cost?...............and all for an estimated 93 Barrels a day from the Portland?
Don't forget they only paid £100,000 for Brockham and Lidsey combined.
I see this far more as a Saltferry type deal that they would need to pay whoever was willing to take it on the" supposedly ringfenced " de-commissioning money.
Just IMHO of course.
Another extract (my capitals):
... So, if I were to tell those (AIM market) investors that I believed this collection of assets together may be worth between 4 and 7p RIGHT NOW, that would be a view which I have professionally with 30 years’ experience based on my relative confidence in their immediate producing capability.
https://investigatingbalcombeandcuadrilla.files.wordpress.com/2019/10/transcript-of-interview-with-george-lucan-of-angus-energy.pdf
So availability of funding to the potential buyer.