Member Info for CynderLad

Cannot wait to see the next annual accounts to see what level of % cut Sanderson took. Did they say that the board had each taken in the region of 20% to 50%?

Will he get a bonus? If so, on what basis? Why can they not publish the criteria and scoring system used in calculating the bonus? I can show you how mine is calculated and there are hard set deliverables and simple scoring. SO come on Sando, what's the Bonus situation? Are you going to get SFA because Loxley/IoW delayed to planning and not yet approved? Or will you get a whopper of a bonus for expanding the portfolio to include some Turkish pipe dream? Or is it just a case of getting a bonus for doing ZERO investor calls in a full 12 month period?

Seriously, how can someone call themselves a CEO if they refuse to do a single Investor Call in a 12 month period? Its a joke!

lol. I only peep in a couple of times a day, so I'll be very likely to miss his feedback. What a shame.

No need to go look at HH, it doesn't make an ounce of difference.
UKOG are either getting oil out the ground or they are not.
I think we can conclude that they had been getting oil out the ground, but had an increase in water cut accompanied by a decrease in oil.
Then they went into a long term PBU, how long is a piece of string?
Since then they've not updated us once, their MO is to go quiet when there is bad news, so draw from that what you will.
Their other MO is to shout loudly and brag when they have anything positive to release, yet again, nothing coming.

Frankly, it's a complete and utter joke. We all know that they are withholding sensitive updates from the market. The O&GA data shows what was happening 3+ months ago, and a simple piece of analysis shows what's happened and what continues to happen, yet not a single official comment on it from them. Its a disgrace.

I wouldn't hire Sanderson to scrub my downstairs loo for fear of him needing a BKP waste tanker to take away waste. He needs to invert his oil divining stick to detect crude rather than water.

Just wondering who owns the pump on HH1 and the one downhole in HH2z?
Is this kit rented? If so, I dont think that the profit for oil sales in the last month would cover the cost of the rental of those 2 pieces of kit.
Time for Silent Steve to fess up. He's had months of saying nothing. Why is he allowed to do that?
I think he should have been sacked after BB, ever since it's been nothing but lies and hype.

Silent Steve should be paid based on his investor Q&A sessions.
<5 sessions per annum = 0% bonus & 50% pay cut for the next year
6 to 8 sessions = 10% bonus & 25% pay cut
9+ sessions = 15% bonus & 0% pay cut

Then the company performance element
Bonus: make up your own numbers here, but my view is that Silent Steve should not get a bonus unless the company can make an asset level profit at HH. He promised that it would happen, it hasnt, therefore no bonus
Pay: 50% pay cut unless he can deliver profit at HH.

There are no scenarios where he should have an increase in pay. He's a disgrace to the role of CEO.

Happy New Year to all. I've enjoyed the break.

So what is happening at HH then? No RNS, but Twitter shows some tankers and steam on the water separator.

Is that from HH1 or HH2z?

No haze on the flare stack, so no gas I assume.
If it was HH1, then I would expect oil+gas+water = flare stack haze
If it is HH2z and it is water with small quantities of oil and no gas = no flare on stack, water separator steam + tankers.

I suspect good old Stevie Boy is trying to get HH2z to flow something. Maybe its standard practice after a PBU.

Talking of which, where both wells under PBU? or just HH1?

UKOG should really think about updating us all. We have no formal news, but it is fairly obvious that they are doing something on site, and an RNS is long overdue.

Or, are UKOG waiting for positive news in Turkey before delivering bad news in HH? They need good news to get a placing away.

MJFMSG, do you think qwerty, rich and brillo are all the same person?

Poor sausage. If I had his address I'd send him a "Get well soon card". However, I am inclined to disagree with your understanding of his profile. Personally, I think he is a front-line XR campaigner, trying to persuade others that he is here as a shareholder. Do me a favour, him and that rich3659 or whatever his name is. Both are XR. Same with Brillo11. 3 well known disruptive posters. Does not take much to see straight through their posts to the real reason for them posting here.

*breaking not braking.... (LOL)

Qwerty can you state the specific rules that Tymers broke? I don't recall any that would be an issue.

While you are at it, go check your own post from the 11th Dec where you stated:
"I like the analogy - lottery is appropriate. Add another ball - impossible to win, add a few more billion shares - impossible to gain. Only the people at the top make the money. They do not play the lottery and SS does not invest in UKOG. Up to ‘mugs’ to finance their lifestyle. When they eventually get found out they just move onto another scam to take investors money."

I can see a few issue with that post
1) You claiming it is a lottery
2) You claiming it is impossible to win
3) You claiming only people at the top make money
4) "mugs" finance the lifestyle of SS and co.
5) you stating that it is a scam.

I don't see Tymers making any statements that top yours for braking posting rules.

MS Finch is 100% using gas. Nimby/XR hypocrites. They love gas, they love oil, they love imported goods, they love foreign holidays. But then they say, not in our back yard, and stop using fossil fuels. Yet they take no action themselves.

Maybe she should ask the gas board to cut her off. Only eat locally grown goods. Switch off the TV (as that was made abroad), stop eating that chocolate (imported cocoa), stop drinking coffee and tea, stop eating bananas, stop eating cereals and soy products. How much of the Amazon was knocked down to grow produce and how much are these XR/NIMBY folks consuming from that region?

I've yet to meet more than 1 person in my life who is a true eco warrior who does not use anything imported, doesn't use oil or gas. His only foible was burning wet logs as that creates CO2. But the XR folks would have you think that they are whiter than white.

I've been to a few XR marches to see what they have to say (not a supporter) and I can tell you that I've witnessed a cross-section of society who are sporting better than your average fashion (especially when it comes to shoes and coats. I've seen them dropping plastic litter that would make folks ashamed. I've observed that their BMI is higher than average. Most clearly live a better than Joe Average lifestyle. In my view, they are the worst sort. Doing one thing then slating the rest of us.

As a family, we are very careful and considerate about our household waste, energy use, consumption, product choice, etc. We have just 1 car now instead of 2. We buy locally sourced meat (without exception) and veg (with few exceptions). We set our thermostat to 16C and wear an extra layer (its not cold, trust me I've been to some cold places and 16C is very comfortable). We do not buy any goods "made in China" (and that was pre-covid). We have our own allotment (100 square metres). We compost all household waste, and we recycle all plastics, paper, metal, card, etc, etc.

I bet if you visited the XR folks on a spot visit, you'd find that they are doing very little themselves.

I'm all for pressure on the Government to reduce CO2 and to improve recycling and to promote home-grown. But that also requires use of home-grown. Why should we block development of home grown in favour of imports? Anyone with an ounce of sense will know that home grown and domestic product is better than imported.

So , for Miss Finch, go switch your gas off, stop eating all that food that's imported, and think a little bit about who you should take on next time. You took on SCC when the matter was clearly a national matter. Thats like taking your local butcher to court for the deforestation of the Amazon. Duh!!!!

To put it to you in simple terms. "Red is better than green".
Why?
Well it is because it just is. Ok.
Why, do you not have an argument and facts to back up your opinion?
No, I don't need to. Red is better, that's it. ok.
Well, I am not so sure, how can I form an opinion and make my own educated and informed decision?
You don't have to. Red is better than green, and thats it. XR is cool, join us.....

Mirasol, let me be clear, I am 100% for democracy, and for councillors to be given a right to vote based on their opinion. Ok, you can take that as read, I am 100% in favour of councillors being able to vote for or against. End of Story.

What I am against, is councillors behaving unreasonably. The chap I referred to acted unreasonably, as did Povey, as did the other 4. They made up a motion citing 2 reasons for refusal, neither of which stand up to scrutiny. It was not a reasonable motion, they did not behave reasonably. If they are in that office, then they should, in fact I will say, they "must" read the literature and understand what they are being asked to review and vote on. Failure to do that, and failure to understand the basic principles set before them in such applications, leaves them in a position where their decision is not based on reasonable argument. It also leaves them completely open to criticism in lieu of pre-determination.

Saj Hussain, actually voted against the application in June, and then changed his position to vote for it in November. Did he realise that he voted the wrong way in June by mistake (I truly believe that he did vote the wrong way due in part to the convoluted motion and confusion created in the session. The fact that he changed his position shows that he did actually listen to the information given to him (e.g. by the representative from the highways agency) and to the report from his planning officer.

How could 6 councillors vote for a motion that included a component relating to the highways issues, when they had been told unequivocally by the highways representative that there were no issues during the committee session itself. Seriously, if that does not constitute unreasonable behaviour and provide evidence of pre-determination, then nothing will.

Highways rep - THERE ARE NO CONCERNS
Councillors - We are going to ignore what the highways rep said, we are better placed to make that judgement and are all experts on the matter and a national authority.

LMAO. It simply does not stand up to scrutiny.

Democracy and right to an opinion = YES, all for it.
Acting unreasonably in a public office = Not on your nelly.

Tony, they need only replay the 2 committee sessions; it is very clear that they councillors acted unreasonably. Especially the daft moron who was sub'd in for the 2nd session who did not understand the fundamentals concerning the 3 stages of onshore development; exploration, appraisal and production. The guy thought it would be possible to find out what was in the ground without performing exploration through drilling. So in his opinion, the exploration of Loxley through the application by UKOG was a waste of time, they could find out what was there through other means (and Penguins you do not need to respond with the same old stale info concerning other historic drills in the region). UKOG have every right to explore that region, using their PEDL from the O&GA. The fact that he doesn't get the very basic point, a point that a 8 year old with average intellectual capability would understand, means that he's really unfit for the role and his decision to vote against the application with unreasonable. In simple terms, he didn't do the homework / acquire the knowledge to make an informed decision, and despite the recommendations of his own planning officer, he decided to vote against the matter.

Penguins,

Yes it is all laid out nice and clear at HMRC:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rates-and-allowances-beneficial-loan-arrangements-hmrc-official-rates

Povey should have been paying interest on those director loans to the company. The fact that he did not means he is taking advantage of a loop hole. Maybe he did declare the benefit in kind in his self assessment, maybe he didn't. As that is not a public record, we cannot check.

His accountants would have prepared his accounts, of course. That is standard practice and a requirement. You cannot prepare them yourself can you. Having run my own businesses and taken advantage of the occasional director loan, I have always declared that and always paid interest at the HMRC rate. That is standard practice and provides clean accounting. I've used 4 different accountants over the years and each and every one of them has insisted that I keep it that way as it provides absolute clarity. The approach taken by Povey is abhorrent in my opinion, but as you know HMRC do make provision for people taking that approach. Frankly it sickens me that a councillor would want to take advantage of a loophole. It does offer itself to speculation as to why he would have done that if there was no benefit to be had!!!!

As for his constant head shaking during the entire meeting, what is your comment on that? Head shaking like that from minute one is a clear sign of pre-determination, something that their very own legal counsel warned against. Good old XR agenda to the fore. The guy cannot and should not be trusted in public office if his actions lead to the council incurring substantial costs.

That said, the costs to SCC will probably come in around £200k, which as it happens is the same value of the directors loan that Povey took out, interest free. So maybe once he has repaid that in full, his business can provide SCC an interest free loan (yes I know that is not possible).

Enjoy the weekend. xx

p.s. I note that not Penguins did not comment on Councillor Povey and his business filings on Companies House. Why not Penguins? For a person of your calibre it would be a mere few seconds on analysis....

Ozzy, I take my information from Twitter, and saw that someone already reported Councillor Povey to HMRC. You can look at it yourself if you wish. I dont need to file a second report do I? But then again, I have a quiet day tomorrow, so may pick through Councillor Povey business filings and make a detailed report to HMRC. It was clear from twitter that he was benefitting from interest free loans; and it is clear that HMRC do not permit interest free loans to directors. Period!

Skwizz, I disagree. UKOG need to ensure that the SCC council get a royal slapping. It'll set down clear directives for future applications. Morons on the committee think that they are above the law and can make ridiculous decisions; well they have just brought a huge case upon themselves and they will be publicly outed. They can stop playing the role of pantomime sweatheart, as we all know that they are playing the role of the nasty imposter with an evil agenda against development by British companies. They are a laughing stock really. go look at them, seriously, they didnt even listen to the advice of their own planning officer. If Have I Got News For You did SCC committee meetings, then I'm sure many would be represented as ameoba.

Hope9, that is an excellent post. I truly hope that UKOG pursue the councillors in the roles and not just SCC. It was a disgrace to witness their pre-determined actions, which were certainly aimed at impacting the business affairs of UKOG in favour of their XR agendas. Councillor Pocy to the fore, the guy was shaking his head is dispute with formal statements from the highways agency representative, he knowingly objected to the application in the face of expert and authorative statements from the highways agency.

I hope that Councillor Povey is audited by HMRC< his primary business has given him over £200k in interest free loans across two years. That is against HMRC rules and he should have paid interest and taxation (through the business).

Yet again, we see pre-determined decisions. And in one case, a councillor who should be prosecuted for his duplicitous involvement in granted himself an interest free loan via his business.

If Jimmy Carr was roughed up by the media, then why should a councillor in a public position be permitted to get away with what he has done. Its a bloody disgrace, the standards these people set should be of the higher order, but yet again, they are in some cases known to be offending our own laws. Disgraceful. How dare he promote himself as a councillor.. How dare he.

and as for Ms Finch, enjoy your sprouts on Xmas day, I'm sure they will taste sweet compared to the knowledge that you have wasted a lot of good money and the time of good people in a pointless XR showboating pantomime. Still, it was good for a few laughs wasn't it.

Maybe you can go chain yourselves to the rails where Heathrow 3 runway will be built,

And remember to turn the gas down, 14C is plenty warm enough in an XR household. And don't forget to boycott Amazon, Apple and Tesla, as these big companies are creating huge amounts of CO2 in their supply chains. And you cannot shop in the Supermarkets either, too much CO2 created in their supply chains in delivering goods for the UK. Just think of where that mange tout comes from, and those nuts and cherries in your Xmas pud. Biggest bunch of hypocrites in the history of mankind; XR, do as I preach, but please don't look into my own private life and use of energy and CO2 output.

Then again, Ms Finch, have you considered the "indirect CO2 emissions" you are creating in your everyday life? Bet you are not darling. Maybe go create an Excel spreadsheet and calculate your own household CO2 output... It will make for poor reading judging by your waste and excessive grub munching.