Member Info for AIMOilking

Stevo, broadly agree but think net debt at end of August will be in the region of US$275-85m, slightly lower than your figure, but where uplifts fall will make a difference as will the Brent price which has just dropped again. EPL will certainly affect H2 and so November's update will be telling. Subject to Brent, at least we know that 2025 should be a better year. with reduced lease and interest costs.

Perhaps the pressure has been taken off Waldorf temporarily, but if our BoD, Senior Management and IR are to be believed, then all NS O&G assets are currently on the table. One presumes that all NS O&G companies would jump at de-risking/strengthening balance sheets or reducing debt given the opportunity. EPL has reduced the amount of FCF floating about, so selling assets is the next best thing, and for listed companies, followed by raising equity which no shareholder wants.

With reducing debt, tax losses and $500 in liquidity, ENQ is one of the only NS O&G's that is in a strong position to buy producing assets, the likes of HBR is busy with M&A indigestion and paying out to shareholders. ENQ can also in-fill and milk existing assets whilst riding out EPL, but the other side of the coin is that an increasingly de-risked ENQ and under valued ENQ means that it itself is increasingly ripe for a takeover, even with a 40-60% mark up on the current sp that would only be 18-21p or an MCap $345-395m or £267-306m, which is not a lot for a $1.3bn turnover and bucket of FCF and tax losses.

Just over two weeks to ENQ half year results - anyone any guesses for net debt and FCF figures?

In the meantime, treasury purchases should turn into real buybacks this week and I hope the real buybacks will prompt an increase in the trading of ENQ shares, perhaps reduce share liquidity and drive up the sp a little to form an upward trend. Increased trade will hopefully increasingly accelerate the buyback programme. If completed, I am hoping the buybacks will add 2.7p to the sp by year end and that reduced debt might add a further 4.8p and de-risking and 2025 prospects perhaps another 2.5p, so perhaps 23p by year end with no other + or -ve news. Hoping for a modest 26-32p in 2025 with accelerated buybacks, reduced debt/leasing costs etc.

"On or after 1 November 2024 all or part of the outstanding notes at perscripted redemption prices" - this would be at a redemption cost of 3%, so any debt repayment would be 103% of capital.

The original bond was for $305m, I don't know what is outstanding, but if all is outstanding that is $35m interest a year, perhaps we'll finally see this loan paid off, perhaps using cash and the RBL revolving loan facility. By November, if no deal is struck there should be a decent cash balance and it may be time to re finance as necessary.

Krak, very positive post - are you on Krak, if so send some over!

Nice wish list and plausible. Personally, waiting for half year results, hopefully less than 20 days away, if good, we are heading in the right direction and towards your wish list. ENQ 1st half should have decent average Brent pricing and may be there will be some announcements as well......?

Dumbly, whilst pessimistic, I fear you are right in your assessment but you did of course leave out the price of Brent, who knows where that will go next but the consensus seems to be below $80, rather than above $90. A lot will depend on economic output, whether the Iranians kick off and the possibility of peace in Israel and Ukraine.

I assume the Waldorf assets are being discussed and if the deal terms are good enough, I don't see why a deal cannot be struck before the budget, although the bigger the deal the more likely things will be delayed, I think. It also depends how much pressure the administrators are under.

Krak - love it? Brilliant idea, great lateral thinking.

The only trouble is, I came up with a brilliant idea like this one some years ago, the company approached the treasury for confirmation it was legal, they said "yes it is" and immediately changed the rules!

Unfortunately, when certain rules suit them, the government turns a blind eye, Drax being an example and the burning of wood chips does not count towards UK emissions as the chips are imported and renewable - go figure?

The whole fiscal situation surrounding net zero is quite depressing, we are in the moment when we can rationalise and see a disaster about to happen. Maybe I am just depressed about the depressed ENQ MCap thanks solely to EPL madness and its thievery!

The Labour lot are in cloud Cookoo Land, if they think they have the answer with GB Energy, why does it have to be subsidised by NS O&G? Why are other governments rolling back from net zero commitments? Why are subsidies so great for renewables? Why are governments bailing out windfarms? Why has 40% of the US $84bn renewable programme been delayed or stalled? Why have the windfarm auctions failed? Where is the transmission infrastructure? Why will they have to run two parallel energy infrastructures for dull winless days? Where is the electricity storage? Exactly how much is all this going to cost and maintain? Why have they cut the winter fuel allowance?

To top it off, we'll be hostage to import prices for energy and at best have intermittent energy security.

Someone needs to do the figures on the impact of EPL on all aspects of the NS O&G industry and transition...........

I have had to deal with many politicians in the past, virtually all are self-serving and sly, but this lot apparently have the collective nouse of a load of lemmings jumping head long over a cliff when it comes to net zero!

Pete640 has finally lost it in the nicest possible way - 1-2p a week!

At the current rate, we'll be lucky for 0.5p this year thanks to buybacks and that's if the full allotted £11.5m can be spent by year end. What we need is higher volumes that will allow faster purchases of buybacks and confirmation of a more robust buyback figure going forward.

Any how, I am off for a coffee and to dream about Pete640 being right - happy days!

Totally agree, nicely put Dumbly.

The question is: Who has the gravitas to lead the NS O&G charge against EPL?

How do they present a clear, concise and undisputable case covering all the issues?

Could we not start with a well phrased question as the basis for a petition, if it gets (not sure on the figure) 10,000 signatures does it not have to be debated in Parliament and I am sure there will be some Tories and Reformers that we could feed the right questions to? If the NS O&G emailed shareholders, I am sure they could get the petition past the post.

Totally agree, they need to raise the profile and coherent arguments. The Unions and Oil towns (Aberdeen) could also play a supporting role.

20 odd days to news from ENQ and some firm figures, plus if AB was correct, a deal in the next 100 odd days.

Taverham, it would send a strong message but do we want Reeves, Raynor or God forbid Ed as an alternative, Devil you know......

Brent almost back to $82, it would be nice to see the ENQ sp rise as well and a few more trades so that we can get the 25m shares for Treasury out of the way.

Stumpy, you are so right! The UK will be bankrupted in a race to net zero and the followers will reap the lessons of all our mistakes and benefit from all the new technology which will be available in the future.

We need a strategic plan that takes in to account the strength of the economy, financing and technology and its mix to provide our energy needs as efficiently and renewably as possible.

I pity anyone who has fallen for this advice on insulation, if they don't strip it in time the chances are they will need to re-roof as well!

A couple "discovered that the government had endorsed spray-foam insulation, a quick and unobtrusive technique by which liquid foam is spray-gunned into roof spaces and walls. Their loft was successfully treated at a cost of £2,800 and their gas bills duly fell.

Now, two years on, they have found that, by making their home more energy efficient, they have also made it unsaleable. “We are unable to borrow against it, or potentially to sell it, unless the foam is completely removed,” says Bunce.

The couple had hoped to take out an equity release mortgage to fund their retirement. “No provider will offer equity release on a property with spray-foam insulation due to fears that it damages roof timbers,” he says. “The removal will cost us £3,370 and, apart from the waste of money, there’s the environmental impact of 50 square metres of spray foam being sent to landfill.”

Thousands of other householders are in the same position. It’s estimated that up to 300,000 properties could be affected, some of which had government funding for the work.

A report published in March by the government’s Health and Safety Executive found that condensation could cause 25% of roof timber to decay within five years if spray foam is applied directly to roof tiles, or certain underlays. The general risks increase the further north the property is, because of colder climates."

The government would be better off giving away several sets of thermals rather than supporting stupid schemes, any one with any sense knows that certainly older houses need to breath! Just as anyone with any sense knows the government has got EPL wrong!

Ed seems to be wagging the dog and by passing local people's views, local knowledge and objections smacks of dictatorship, I thought Starmer was the PM. In addition, concentrating power in this way is a slippery slope to corruption, whether it is on a political level as per the housing quotas being higher in Tory constituencies or financial corruption as decisions are made about planning permission and land values going from agricultural rates to commercial on Ed's say so. I hope some keen journalists keep an eye on who benefits personally and donors to the Labour party.

How a single politician of no note can steer the UK into economic suicide and blight the country in a single term of office in a minor ministry (not a great office of state) by 2030 is "DIABOLICAL" as Billy Butcher would say. He has already done enough damage/lobbying against the NS O&G industry and our investment in ENQ.

Wake up Starmer and Reeves, you are pedalling the rival of the UK economy and don't understand that Ed is pedalling in a different direction and steering you into a black hole of epic proportions, I hope you realise before the lights go out and he slips into the darkness on his index linked MP's pension and probably Directorships and House of Lords sinecure.

It's holiday time here and it seems that all my neighbours are preoccupied with cutting up firewood for the Winter and not participating so much in normal Summer activities. If a tree fall on your property you have to be quick otherwise it is gone! I chopped up 10,000 logs and now spend my time contemplating which backup generator to buy, in case all other systems fail and it has just occurred to me that a steam turbine might back up the petrol generator that will back the hydro that backs up the grid. Trouble is, if I am the only person in the village with power, I might need a redoubt to protect my infrastructure!? Although, I am using a "hearts and mind" tactic by giving away timber to my neighbours.

ENQ remains the key to my future over and above basic bread and butter, so looking forward to Half-year results in 3-4 weeks time and trusting Brent will hold at around $80 or above.

Whilst painfully slow seemly due to low volumes, we are almost at 25m shares for Treasury and real buybacks will start, I am hoping whilst small they will help generate a little more volume.

Everyone forgets that 1.5m homes in the UK use an average 2,300 litres of heating oil, I reckon that is 3,500,000,000 litres in the UK alone or roughly an additional electricity equivalent of 35,000,000,000,000w p.a. I reckon that is 224 days worth of our nuclear capacity, currently five plants which will probably all be retired by the end of the decade. I just hope ENQ keeps pumping oil, otherwise we'll need another 6000 average onshore turbines to replace heating oil! Perhaps another £19bn Ed will have to find, plus average £225,000,000 annual maintenance costs for an additional 6,000 turbines. Don't forget decommissioning costs (otherwise land useless) or replacement (average life 17 years) and land fill for disposing of blades and shortages of material driving up costs. The renewable principle is sound but the economics, strength of our economy and necessary technology do not stack up and currently we import most of the equipment via foreign companies - trade balance - ouch! UK dropped from fifth to 12th industrial exporter, but heh that all helps us race to net zero, even if we have to go back to candles for light.

Ed is running us headlong into a disaster and I am not sure who will win the race to destroy every aspect of the UK, climate change or Ed Moribund. I think my figures are roughly correct although sources from random google sites but it depends on the source and how much the wind blows, so take with a pinch of salt. Now expecting to be marched off to prison for this post.

Dumbly, well put and totally agree, may I suggest you write to AB.

This is a good clip from Australia, it points out several things we all know such as the impact of tonnes of concrete foundations for wind turbines on land use, larger turbine blades failing, max turbine life 15 years, 20 if you are lucky and so on but the real kicker is that no one is thinking about decommissioning costs or putting money aside as the O&G industry has to do, they reckon the cost for one region alone with 1300 turbines will be Aus$650,000,000.

Raised an interesting question, are the existing wind turbine foundations reusable after 20 years? If not, we will be in a never ending cycle of building turbines and decommissioning - how much will that cost Ed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oemvo40-mEg

Oxygen, your note prompted me to look at HBR to see if I could spot the excessive windfall profits. However, all I could find was $100m profit on revenue of $1,900m. I make that 5.26% to HBR and an effective 85% tax rate to HRMC. That is only slightly higher than the effective tax rate I have paid thanks to EPL, my loss is equivalent to 65% tax thanks to the loss in MCap since the introduction of EPL, and that does not include inflation, loss of interest or opportunity.

However, the upside is ENQ is paying much less tax than HBR and is not embroiled in swallowing a major takeover, just quietly paying down debt and less than a month to half-year results, just hope Brent stays above $70 and preferably a lot higher. I sorry if O&G is going to be demonised it might as well be at a high price! A decent ENQ sp will more than cover any personal energy costs.

As a powerful PR exercise, I think that all the NS O&G independents should announce a major meeting at a high profile location with press present to discuss EPL, highlight the key issues and specifically review the possibility of a legal challenge. This should be followed by a series press releases on investment and potential job cuts and future HMRC black hole being created by the acceleration of the decline of the NS and associated costs to the government associated with decommissioning wells and infrastructure. However, I think that a more seismic event will be the potential departure of Shell from the LSE which would be a body blow to the City.

The problem is that the government is so desperate for cash today that they will never willingly give up EPL, it is too easy to do nothing, who ever gets the next terms in office will have to deal with the problem. In addition, climate change has sway and oil workers/industry are a demonised minority, and public opinion will only be modified by flickering lights and massive bills.

What is sad is that so many people are completely unaware that Labour's policies are walking the UK into an energy nightmare of unimaginable magnitude:

Cost of dual system for windless cloudy days;

Being held to ransom by energy exporters as UK ability to generate sufficient power continues to wain;

Increased demand from cars, electric heating, AI etc;

Reduced GDP and declining tax take;

Closure of nuclear plants without a replacement plan

Likely inflation as energy costs increase and cost of building/maintaining/replacing 100's even 1000's of turbines, loss of productive land to solar farms and transmission infrastructure and battery sites.

Increased demand for materials and manufacturing capability pushing prices higher as indeed will desperate attempts to reach unrealistic net zero targets.

I could go in but it has all been covered here before, but the industry needs to make a stand in the lead up to major events such as Shell delisting, energy brown outs, tax revenues falling, investment cancelled, jobs lost and energy prices going much higher. The NS O&G industry, key O&G regions and the City need to spell out the consequences of the current NS O&G folly to the government.

Well done Parka!

Brent rebounded a little bit.

Almost at 25m shares for Treasury, so real buybacks will start in a few days.

Should be less than a month to half year results, which should be the next news in the absence of a deal.