The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Peterashbeck
The point I was making is that perhaps, potential investors want to see more verifiable news and better transparency rather than what we have currently. The CPR is independent of management. There is also no guarantee that gas prices will stay at these elevated rates for life of the well; albeit I do concede those prices would most likely be used in any new CPR. Perhaps if the CPR were updated there would be a more bullish sentiment.
I also note that people do various calculations with related assumptions to get an idea of what the company is worth. It may be reasonable for them to do so but not me; I take a conservative approach. There are too many variables and assumptions with varying probabilities. If it were per your post, why are potential investors not piling in? In order to understand this, I think we have to understand their thinking. My post was giving one possibility.
DYOR
A_D
Just an opinion. Price is determined by demand and supply. The small day trades placed will not materially affect share price. However, the warrants and related sells may have had an impact. I'm not sure why people are expecting a multi-bag when GL himself said that the CPR gave Saltfleetby a £25m value when ANGS owned 49% (do correct me here though, can't fully remember). Albeit, price did rise from 1p to over 2p since we had a flow of good news. At current market price the market cap is circa £51m at time of writing, so value in line with CPR. Demand for ANGS shares will continue to remain low as buyers will continue to remain cautious as management has over promised and made mistakes in the past (circa 3 month delay to first gas depending on which RNS you read). That combined with the ambiguity around the hedge has made people nervous. Perhaps the days of "buy on the rumor" has gone.
Personally, I am holding and would love to see a price of 3.2p (my own target profit). Still I am very tempted to buy more.
DYOR
A_D
V,
At the time forward prices were higher. The Q&A post suggests this also. There are a couple interviews with GL over the past few months. Have you seen these?
One is on Malcy's blog. https://www.malcysblog.com/
I think there is another on lse youtube channel.
If there were issues with the Hedge they would have to RNS it. GL has mentioned this also.
A_D
From the Q&A 01.08.22
"The hedged volumes were lower in the first quarter but as advised we have a rolled a portion to give us leeway in the even that commissioning is more protracted. We have been fortunate enough to be able to roll hedged volumes into forward months with much higher prices without incurring upfront cost. This is not normally possible to do as generally speaking forward months are lower than front end months. So large is the difference at the present that this has been simple to trade."
A_D
Do we have to add the 41p per therm on the 55k therms also?
Any idea of daily costs?
A_D
Tygra,
Thanks so much. Appreciate the kindness.
A_D
I'm not sure how warrants work. Why convert now if you believe there will be an uptick? Why not convert later?
Thanks
A_D
Not sure of all the details but I would consider the following factors:
1. The hedge volume changes next year so I would do a calculation based around the monthly hedge volumes for each of the 12 months (assuming you are trying to get a yearly number)
2. Set out your assumptions and substantiate with reasons
(a) Gas prices - you can use a flat rate or use the rates on the forward curve.
(b) Therms - again, assuming the second compressor comes online and there are no issues and assuming we can get 7-8 mscf (per GL interview with Malcy) total for 2 compressors how much over the hedge can we get. This is another reason why I think a monthly analysis should be done.
(c) sidetrack; you can make an assumption for that as well. Maybe assuming both compressors give 10 mscf.
Hope this helps.
A_D
Noel,
Thanks so much. I really appreciate this.
A_D
Hi,
I am looking at the production data and would appreciate some help please. I ran the data from 27th July to 27th Sept (for curiosity) and 'System Entry Volume, Saltfleetby , D+2' only.
Is this the correct parameter set to use (System Entry Volume, Saltfleetby , D+2)?
Thanks
A_D
Given that the market was told to expect gas today, is ANGS compelled to put out an RNS?
Thanks
A_D
Per GL "we are aiming for first gas around the middle of June." Assumes no issues with commissioning.
A_D
"we'd like to think that with a successful sidetrack that would be gone by year end." GL comments re the debt.
Make of it what you will.
A_D
I'm no deramper. I want Angus to do well, simply because I like money. My concern is that the sidetrack produces before Oct when the hedge volume increases. If we don't have money for the sidetrack but are producing later than June, say mid July (which is more than adequate 2 months from now), maybe they go to the market for equity or debt.
It's not the end of the world. I think some or us are just more anxious than others.
A_D
What's the point in debating something to this level no one knows with certainty? Why are these boards always like this?
A_D
I had a look at the 28th March LSE interview and did some rough calcs. It appears to me that the sidetrack is necessary to pay back the debt. Critically, prices are now around £1.60 per therm. Back then it was over £2.35. Maybe GL was being bullish on prices. Also, he said something to the effect (6:38 in video) "with that on stream we would also expect to pay off all debt this calendar year". To me calendar year (not financial year) means by Dec 22.
Would be nice if someone could review my calcs.
Thanks,
A_D
Thanks HITS. I will revisit the interviews. It would be very bad if I invested based on such a big error. Lol.
Thanks again.
A_D
Yes. But if I recall, the goal is to ramp up to 5m therms not 1.5m. I think that was also in one of the interviews. Do correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks
A_D
Anyone knows what this is about? vis-a-vis who terminated the contract.
"...the Company has made a proposal to FRAM Exploration Trinidad Ltd. ("FRAM"), parent company Challenger Energy Group plc, based on its assessment of the value in the prematurely terminated Inniss-Trinity CO2 EOR project that is defined in the Inniss-Trinity Well Participation Agreement and subsequent amendments thereof."
Thanks,
A_D
Cynderlad,
Which RNS do you refer to here?
"I was 100% correct with my position on Turkey and this has been proven by way of RNS.
They drilled a duster in a dead play..."
Thanks,
A_D