Member Info for Bubblepoint

Robday,

I don't care who likes me or doesn't, I couldn't give a ****.

I post as I see it, and regardless of those trying to polish a tvrd, they do not own 100%, they own 100% of the liability, and they owe the lenders.

I will always stand by the original potential that was born out of SLBY, and they did manage to get it to where it needed to be operationally, but it should never have hit even half the hurdles it managed to hit, and that was purely down to bad management, and now what exists is a debt pile which is near as much as the original cost projection, and that is AFTER well over 12 months of production revenues that have effectively been dissolved into that damage.

It is simple Robday, if you don't like others views or posts, hit the filter, It makes no difference to me, or my posting.

Anyone for a bit of forrest-gate ?? that's gotta be the next brick in the wall !!!

They own 100% of Saltfleetby !!

Really !! when you borrow 90% to buy your home, you own 10% of it, even if you rent it out to cover the debt and some, you still only own what you have paid off.

As it stands Angus has had around £47 million through their hands since the initiation of Saltsfleetby, for what was estimated to cost £25 million to get to where it is today, and they still want to borrow £20 million to consolidate the high cost debt they have on the place.

So on paper, or the financiers papers, they will assign a value to the asset, which will be a lot different to what you believe Angus own outright.

JTS,

As said, you cannot sugar coat it, you say "£1 million of annual saving is not to be sniffed at." I say it is a £1m cost that should NEVER have existed in the first place if they had managed this correctly.

I would agree with you if for example installing a gas fired generator for site saved a million per year, that's a saving, the cost of the pipe and separator is more a reduction in the self inflicted 1000 cuts blood loss.

Each to their own and all that jazz.

Ocelot,

It is a cost that was never originally factored in, yes, any cost reduction is essential, but as said, it isn't going to transform the company, just helps a little against the debt mountain they are climbing. You can't really sugar coat it.

Ocelot,

It is not that high, at best they will be paying £2-3k per day for the bit of pipework, separator and a couple guys for monitoring it 24/7. So around £80-100k per month, which in the grand scheme of things isn't going to transform the company.

That said, any saving will help against the debt mountain they are working against.

Donek,

The "new" pipework isn't going to change anything, other than release the well test pipework and associated separator, which will reduce monthly costs, but it will not make any difference to the flow volumes at all.

I don't know why folk keep on about it like it will transform the daily rates or something, they are already flowing all wells at the limit relative to the dew point, flow it harder and they will pay heavily later as more condensate is induced and banked in the reservoir.

With a VERY below average BOD !!!!

Gezzz that's a bit harsh Tygra,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but True !!!!

Also don't forget the next episode of Forrest-gate !!!!

Nope, sorry BV,,, still canne hear yeee,,, nowt, just green and clean box!!!! you MUST try HARDER !!!! Maybe just post things of relevance to the company, noooooooo not the chooo choooo 10p train coming soon stuff, or more HITS fits !!!

Come on,,, tryyyyy,,, actually try to post something of value, something constructive not self destructive.... you can even ask SV, Singhie, WG and a couple others in the green room of doom to help !!!

Hey upp BV,,, your in the green room of doom,,, you need to shout louder !!!!! i canneee hear ya !!!!

Still waiting for you to post up the lies you claim !!!! hmmmmm helloooooo

Ps, if you and SV keep averaging down you will eventually catch the bottom, though you might need to do some more averaging down before you see it, SV will likely hold more than PF at the rate he/she is going lol....

Angus will soon be finished with the welltest pipework and the welltest separator they have not noted to anyone about, then and only then can they connect any new direct pipework, but then you wouldn't know much about that as you already show how clueless you really are in your daily verbal spew !!!!

Still waiting for the lies you claim to be posted up,,, come on,,,, chop chopppp

It's only money !!!!! until it's all gone (into GL & the teams new Aston Martin Co vehicles)

BV & SV trying to prop the price up !!!

Market cap in this company disguises a disaster for long term shareholders.

Well I wholeheartedly agree on that OP lol....

OP,

Each to their own & all that jazz, but for me MC & SP are directly associated, along with the general objective of raising funds, dilution and financing that has a primary objective to be utilized in a way that develops the company both through asset and ops, and any related revenues/growth, Here they have demonstrated that they have achieved the asset, ops and revenue, but drowned it in dilution, debt, poor management decisions on timings with hedges etc.

I know what you are saying in your post, but for me it is totally normal to track the MC, which shows a more stable

underlying true growth or waste within the company. As you note the SP is down roughly 90% and does not really represent that underlying growth or waste... I agree for the likes of many (including me) for trading purposes then obviously the focus is on the intra & daily price movements, but long term investment cannot or should not ignore the underlying MC.

They are close to embarking on the Onshore drilling campaign, which without doubt will raise awareness, traders, investors etc etc, along with almost certain steady news flow to keep the stimulation there.

As for the price at the moment, well it can and will do whatever until this new rock is upturned. They have told us the plan, they have all the funds needed for now, let them cross the i's & the T's on whatever they need to, to get the real ball rolling. just a little more patience needed.

Good job GL is gone, as was noted by HITS, the MC was higher BEFORE what he created at SLBY and then undermined it with debt & dilution.

Anyway I will continue to use my industry knowledge to FULL effect, meaning to make trade & investment decisions in REALTIME and react accordingly.

Still waiting for the "lies" to be put up here, though I think I will be waiting a LONG time for anything remotely sensible, useful or just plain normal to be posted from the resident rodent ;-))))

Easier to cry the thread to be removed than answer to your own claims lolol

Don't tell WG, he won't be happy about the gas price already up at the quid mark......;-)))

BV will like the carbon *pump & dump" thing, I put that in just for him. Works well for Angus team too.

As said I a past post Op, I doubt it will be gas storage, far simpler and with minimal field application to convert to carbon capture, pumped & dumped, paid per m3. No issues about depletion level etc

OP,

Also Storengy has spent what £500m creating salt caverns and surface plant in Cheshire purely for gas storage, not small numbers and they are still increasing their capability.

So even if Angus were to look to facilitate SLBY for storage and it did cost say the est £200m, then that is less than half what Storengy has spent for less storage capacity.

The difference is though, is that the salt caverns are solid containment, therefore you can get out exactly what you put in, whereas utilizing a depleted field has different attributes, the containment is not uniform, nor is the baseline for recoverable stored gas, meaning the more Angus depletes the field, the more of an issue to get the reservoir back to a baseline that is usable for storage.

That is why when Wingas were looking at this, it was more suitable, as the depletion level was within the baseline for storage.

OP,

In fairness GL's original timeline and cost for the sidetrack was (in my opinion) totally within the realms of reality, fairly realistic for such a sidetrack.

The downside to it all was that they failed to follow their own gained understandings of the past issues, if they had opted for the correct drilling muds from the beginning then they would have almost certainly avoided almost all the issues they endured, lest not forget that stupid casing patch they used to bridge the first major geological issue and then compromised any contingent solutions, thus needing to "re" sidetrack and the story goes on !!!

As for the "temporary" flow line, this is NOT just a flowline, it 99.9% also has the welltest separator tied in to it too, this is to take out the unwanteds from B7T, and why they cannot connect the direct new piece of flowline until they have low enough unwanteds that the plant separator can handle all from the 3 wells combined.