Member Info for Crocqman

Just came across this. Not ANGS specific, but interesting regarding the potential
https://www.businessweekly.co.uk/news/cleantech/quaise-energy-expand-us-and-uk-teams-after-40m-series

Company background: https://www.quaise.energy/

Can't imagine the nimbys being happy about drilling down to 20kms
Not looked too much into Angus and Geothermal, but may take another look at the tech being developed in this area. Can't see it being anything less than a long term project for ANGS though, and certainly wouldn't believe any of the timescales from their presentation document as being achievable given their history

Yanis,
I am just basing my timing on the current SP and cash availability, tbh.
I thought we would see a further drop below 1.00 before the placing was announced, but was not expecting them to place at such a low level. It was hugely disappointing given the news received at around the same time, and how close we supposedly are to delivery.
No real science behind my proposed top-up at these levels, but the tide must surely turn soon for the bod in respect of delivering, albeit Q2 for me at the earliest, and most likely after Easter.
As I said in my last post, news expected to commence re: any formal offers (for Sound, anyway) by the end of next week, so a little pre-emption on the SP starting to move in anticipation of that particular starting gun which may flush out a few others to show their hands.
I will take responsibility for any further investment here, as elsewhere.
Good luck with your continued mix of patience/frustration here

Just to add. I will be looking to add here imminently to back my conviction that the worst of the risk re: SFB is now past, but that the market still recognises that there is a risk, hence the current SP.
If I can add sub-0.90 I will be significantly reducing my current average.

Worth noting that Sound Energy have until 11th March to put up, or shut up in respect of formalising any proposed offer, so not long until some form of news here which could be an indicator for investors to make more informed decisions in relation to SFB
gla

I agree SB,
I have both sides filtered.
Some do post some relevant info, but it is the relentless posting, making the same point over and over again, or changing their tune to a different angle when one avenue has been exhausted, or disproved, and their refusal to accept anything that is counter to their view that makes these boards unreadable, and discourages actual discussion.
Swerving questions as to the reasons for being here day in and day out, and getting abusive to anyone who questions their motives just highlights the agendas on here.

As you say, anyone with any negative view is automatically labelled a swampy, or greeny, just like anyone who posts positively is a paid ramper, trader, or company stooge.

Seeing one side of a conversation most of the time is not ideal, but there is little actual discussion of facts here most of the time, mostly it is just supposition and reaching to paint the view that they want to get across.

As ever, I am here for SFB only. Hugely disappointed, but unsurprised at the continued delays and vague timeline updates, but confident that this asset is close to fruition, and a potentially decent uplift (I am still conservatively targeting 2p to 2.5p, as I have done for most of the last 3 years).

Have made some good money here over the years, and a decent dividend yield.
Not been following too closely for the past year or so though, and the ongoing net outflows is one to watch, although it has been going on for a few years now, from memory.
Will be looking to buy back here in the next few days when funds are available, especially at these prices, but will have to have a read up first just to see what has been going on of late with changes to directors, latest results, etc
Not sure how successful the acquisition of Merian has played out so far, but not exactly the best financial climate for this to have happened, just at the outset of covid 2 years ago.
gla

We are not producing. Simple as that, imo.
If they had got this producing at any of the previous 'first gas targets (Q4, 2021, Jan, Feb, Mar - ignoring all of the earlier ones), then yes, this would be much higher if producing at CPR levels.
But, there are still questions and uncertainties, coupled with a (deserved) market distrust for Angus and the bod's ability to deliver, hence the current SP.

Only 2 things will move this. actual delivery on SFB, or a confirmed bid.
Until then, this is still a risky play (although, arguably much less risky that any time in the last 3 years).

Jeez Earl,
Todays' current volume has barely broken 1.6% of total shares in issue.
The size of those trades are really not that big, the largest being barely £20k in value, so really no evidence that 'someone is loading up big time here'.
With over 20 posts here today you have a clear agenda, and you want this to go up, but your baseless ramping is not needed, and it will have no effect on the SP which is actually down today (at time of writing) despite your claim that 'someone is loading big time'.

Disagree on even +/- 1 day.
But they should be able to confirm a 2 week window when it will happen by now, but, imo, they will not.
No CEO will commit to a firm date for something to happen when there are still uncertainties at play.
Reality, I am afraid.
And the stigma/history of underperformance here is what will continue to keep the SP depressed until such time as any confirmed offer is announced, or a firm and achievable timetable is known.
Q2 still my earliest expectation, as has been for more than 6 months now

They will only achieve first gas on time because they keep changing the time that first gas is expected!

We shouldn't have to wait long for news if they stick to answering the IQ's at month end. There are 5 IQ's currently, and by their own submission criteria are obliged to answer the one from 15th Feb that asks "what is the current state of play regarding the permissions for Saltfleetby, Brockham, Lidsey, Balcombe".
The other 4 are all connected, so should be covered with any SFP state of play response

So, we should not believe what is reported on the BBC, CNN, and other UK news outlets, those in France, Germany, etc, or even the likes of Al Jazeera, or even the Ukrainian National News Agency as to what is really going on with Russia/Ukraine, but we should believe what is being reported by the Russian News Agency?
Makes sense

RNST,
Do you have any evidence to show that any share buy back cannot be changed until the program is complete?
I am sure that many companies have halted share buy back programs in the past, particularly due to the uncertainty at the start of the pandemic

I can't see who started this thread, but 'mid-tier company in the making', is a bit far-fetched, imo.
Much like the £1 predictions.

Why not just let the company grow at the pace it is going and see where it gets?
£1 parties, and mid-tier predictions are just pie in the sky ramps, imo.
UJO will remain a small cap company despite the assets held, unless there is a massive change in philosophy and big expansion plan, which I cannot see at this stage, unless there is a management change (not advocating one).
Nothing wrong with that at all, either, small cap companies can still be profitable and give good returns to shareholders.

Prior to the consolidation, I was always in favour of a share buy-back, rather than any dividend, due to the ridiculous number of shares in issue.
With the current number of shares in issue, a return to shareholders would be welcome, should the financials support it, of course, whilst still allowing alternative (and less draining) methods of fund raising, should it be needed.

I believe David has always stated his intention to return cash to shareholders when possible to do so.

Like many on this board, I have been critical of performance over the past couple of years, the delays, and the leaked placings which have led to a depressed SP.
Unlike many on this board, I took the time to contact the company to express my concerns, and always received a reply from DB. I may not have agreed with the response, but appreciated the reply nonetheless. I have never received any response from any other AIM company to any queries raised.

It is perfectly reasonable to be pro a company, whilst seeing that there are things that are not as you would like them, or could be done better. It is called being objective, and not being blinded by your prejudice (pro or con).
The majority always seem to take the extreme view and refuse to acknowledge anything that goes against their personal stance. Natural, I guess when money is involved, and emotions take over from taking a rational approach to what is going on (clear agendas aside).

Fairs fair. I have relayed my concerns and disappointments to DB in the past, so on the back of the good news these past few days, I will also be contacting him to congratulate him on progress too.
Well done DB and the team. Still lots to do, but the progress is tangible now. Not everything here will be a success, and I am still managing my expectations accordingly.
Still down, but relaxed about my holding here now.
DYOR
gla

We saw this the other day with ukog holders supposedly moving their profits here.
Volumes more than suggested otherwise with more than 10x in value traded there compared to here.
Just a desperate cross-ramp, trying to entice investors to another stock.
Volumes there (MATD) today are low compared to even their to normally low levels, and volume here is not that significant.
Some posters are just so transparent, trading when they say they are holding for £1, or making unfounded claims which can be easily dismissed by a quick check.
Just happy to see this moving in the right direction these past few days with some good news. Hopefully it will at least hold at these levels and we have seen the last of a SP in the teens.
gla

Hopefully, the 'switch on' of the gas will be more successful than 'turning on the taps' at Brockham was.
Will be looking to add here next week when funds become available, at this price it is worth it for a quick trade, if nothing else

My understanding for a private investor is that while it is the holders' responsibility to ensure any position is notified, it is more likely to be their custodian/fund manager who will be monitoring the holdings of all their clients' and get flags when reporting thresholds are breached to ensure this is done in a timely manner.
I expect they will make the disclosure on the individuals' behalf as part of the client agreement, especially as they will have direct access to the required tools and contact details for making the disclosure, and systems that may well automate this process once any position has been verified and signed off by their internal controls.
Much like how they would do for corporate action events, etc
It (timely disclosure) has clearly fallen down somewhere. In my earlier post I implied it may have been with the company which looking again would seem unlikely.
Not a concern this individual has sold, it does look like it was to channel the proceeds into another venture, as per V-I-I's post.
gla

Yes, I am just waiting for the news of further delays due to the storms.
Would not be a surprise at all.

Didn't I read somewhere that they were going to provide weekly updates on progress, a few weeks back, or was that just wishful thinking?

The thing is, we do not know when they sold.
Was it all (or enough to go below the threshold) in one go, or in different trades over time?
Presumably, as a TR1 holder it was within the required reporting timeframes, but why has a TR1 not been issued, and a sloppy looking notification message like this?
And why the info about Cornish Metals and the blurb at the bottom about forward looking statements, it reads as if they have amended an old RNS on a different subject and left all this superfluous information in. A bit of a dogs dinner of a release, tbh.
Not great from an admin/regulatory disclosure perspective if the notification rules have not been adhered to, and suggests management may not know the disclosure requirements, but the reduction itself is not a big issue, for me, and the market does not seem to concerned at this.

You've been rattling the cupboard for so long now, I'm surprised the cupboard hasn't fallen apart

The FCA will never disclose who may or may not be under investigation, or whether there is even an investigation going on.
Names would only be made public if any prosecution follows an investigation.
Historically, the FCA can take upwards of a year or more to conduct any review, and despite rule changes to market abuse regulations in 2016, there has not been a significant case brought by the FCA (that I am aware of).
I do not expect this to change, even if they are presented with any information.

Like others, I am not happy with the 2 years of leaked placings decimating the SP here, but it really is time to let this go now, as others have said.
Absolutely nothing will come of any review as absolute proof of any wrongdoing is particularly hard to prove in this digital age, so the daily protestations from some on here are absolutely pointless.
Yes, UJO may make some external comment on any internal review, but that will be as far as it goes, imo.