Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. 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.
Reaction to Balcombe appears to be way over the top. The SP is gone in to a free dive and looks set to head for new all time lows.
I am surprised that Forest Nominees, which want their 10%, are not jumping in to add to their holding. After all there is a placing coming just for them. Why pay more for it?
Could Balcombe approval be a precondition for receiving the funding?
"Reaction to Balcombe appears to be way over the top. "
I have to say I agree - unless all the sellers REALLY believed it was a shoe-in - and if they did there are even more idiots about than I'd have guessed. The only value in ANGS right now is SFB - anything else is pointless
Mirasol, fully agree.
Any thoughts as to why Forest Nominees, who are due to buy the 15 million shares at the placing of 1p and the 15 million warrants at >1p, are not hoovering up these shares being sold below 1p?
Doesn’t make sense to me. They can buy these shares below 1p and cancel their interest in the forthcoming placing (to be approved March end).
I don't see any value in anything until it produces income.
So you put no value on gold at all.
I thought the plan for expansion was income from Balcombe and Lidsey as stated from GL.
BV, not quite so. For quite sometime now the plan has been income from SF.
Gold will always have a retail value, would you buy Balcombe off Angus if you had a few quid to spare. And please let us all know what your plans would be. We are back to buying a boozer in lockdown, but cannot sell beer. You never did answer that question either, what was it ifs and buts.
Do you think we will get a dividend in 2 to 3 years,also stated from GL.
I don't see any value in anything until it produces income. (balancedviewer's post of 11:03)
Gold will always have a retail value, ... (balancedviewer's post of 11:22)
Re your question about a dividend in 2-3 years' time:
don't know, but it does provide a useful insight into GL's ambitions for UKOG and the direction in which he seeks to steer it.
Agree that the level of downside SP movement on on the back of the oh so obvious Balcombe planning refusal would seem to be an over-reaction. I'll throw my opinion in again that planning being refused is easily viewable as no bad thing. Or should be.
A significant cause of this over-reaction has without a doubt been the ANGS BoD itself. If it hadn't issued that frankly ludicrous rainbow-filled investor presentation, fervently talking up the alleged opportunities in re-engagement with Balcombe, Lidsey and Brockham (let alone the "let's drill big expensive holes in Cornwall" never-never project), then my feeling is that the market wouldn't have been that bothered at all about what was a clearly telegraphed no vote.I mean, pretty much everyone with an IQ bigger than their shoe size has known without doubt for many months that quite literally the ONLY thing that makes any sense for ANGS to attempt is to deliver on Poundland Gas.
So bizarre was that "investor presentation" document that my biggest concern remains the actual motivation behind George's sudden "straight out of left field" efforts to puff up the potential of the very evidently cash-starved ANGS outfit on the back of four extra projects... not one of which it has a snowball's hope in the tropics of affording. Why would anyone think this was a good idea? Puff up Balcombe (inter alia) as an allegedly viable prospect (yet again), just before a planning meeting, where there was a more than even money chance of refusal? Madness...
No wonder planning refusal has caused an SP dip, then. That's what happens when a BoD deliberately attempts to attach significance to an "asset" that is actually - currently at least - valueless and entirely irrelevant.
Paddy Clanwilliam has a track record of shooting himself in the hand - it looks like George unfortunately has very similar tendencies, except it's his own foot that he's shot himself in.
We're not there yet, but Angus's profile is in the process of taking on a much more "institutional" profile, even if its market cap continues to remain very modest.
Ocelot. Your editing half of the question again to suit your trainee political swerving. Do you think posters only read half of my reply to yourself and don't notice your convenient lack of a full reply. You are really insulting their intelligence, so i will be eventually expect your filter having being caught out every time.
You will be "threatened" with being filtered soon... Too many pesky questions...
It seems some find it easier to filter than to answer awkward questions that do not suit a particular agenda.
balancedviewer,
I don't find all questions interesting (and I don't understand all of them), so I choose the questions I answer (if any).
Nom. It's ok because posters who don't answer questions honestly without dodging are a complete waste of space.
Ocelot, No sense no feeling sounds appropriate [swervie]
Now then guys swervie in a police interview room. MO COMMENT.NO COMMENT.
Looking at tomorrow evening's presentation, the SFB timing does seem to assume a financing closing within first week or so in March. I suspect GL will want to try and close by tomorrow evening if he possibly can.
what presentation?
James,
It's all in the 24/02 RNS
sorry misunderstood "tomorrow evening's presentation".
Yanis. Regarding income for expansion plans from Saltfleetby. The company states on the transition page 5 that the oil revenue from Balcombe/ Lidsey are part of the plan. If Balcombe doesn't eventually contribute to expansion,the expansion is going to be slower or require more funding from else where.
BV, with Balcombe now gone on hold, any possible income from it will not materialise in the short term, but it does not affect the plan. Each of the projects is separate and separately funded, at least I think that is how GL has presented it.
Is still annoying though that as we were gearing up for SF all these other projects came in to play. I just wish GL to concentrate on SF and get that going first before anything else.