Member Info for deltavegatheta

The rules are calling an AGM are not an an AIM bylaw, they are contained in the Companies Act:

From https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/336

"Every public company must hold a general meeting as its annual general meeting in each period of 6 months beginning with the day following its accounting reference date (in addition to any other meetings held during that period)."

"If a company fails to comply with subsection (1) an offence is committed by every officer of the company who is in default."

The accounting reference date was Sept 30th 2023, so it should of be held by end of March.

20,000,000 shares are only worth £6k so that's not a very hight threshold.

From my reading of the situation RF/YA never want to hold more than 3% each in order to avoid having to notify their positions and 6% of 3,660,957,892 shares outstanding is 219,657,473.52, hence them requesting 200,000,000 shares.

"I reckon UKOG are stringing out the AGM so they can use the outstanding number of shares they can issue to pay off YA"

RF/YA seem to be able to sell around 200,000,000 shares a month, worth around £60k. So it will take about nine months to recover the remaining £545k.

UKOG directors are already breaking the law by not holding the AGM within 6 months of year end.

No one seems to police the Companies Act, but I doubt they can get away with the AGM being 10 months late.

There is also the £675k repayment from HH, which is really just moving money within the company, but might give the top-level company a couple of extra months.

UKOG's actual non-investing cash burn is shown in "Net cash outflow from operating activities" in the cash flow statement, as £2,936,000 which does include revenue and cost of revenue and was fairly stable between year halves. That's a cash burn of £245k pm giving an end of April figure of £905k with the cash running out in August.

However there is also £1,673,000 annual cash flow on investing activities, which is an additional £140k pm. If you include that end of April cash is -£70k.

So in summary UKOG are likely to run out of cash sometime between now and August.

If they managed to do a placing before the mythical AGM at 20% discount it would raise about £317k, not even enough to pay SS's salary.

The Companies Act says the AGM has to be held within 6 months of year end, so they are already breaking the law.

As far as I can work out none of the directors are up for re-election. SS is due for re-election next year (if UKOG still exists)

I don't think £400k that buys them anything, they would still have the RF/UA remaining liability due at end of year.

They either need some sellable bull$hite scheme to put to the shareholders at the AGM to be allowed to raise a many millions or admit defeat and file for bankruptcy.

“ Fees for the CLN were £502,000 ((Annual Report & Accounts)”

So UKOG misled shareholders as to the cost of the facility in the June RNS. I hope someone raises the issue at the AGM (if they ever get around to calling it).

Toyota's Hydrogen Future Is Crumbling As Owners File Lawsuits, Call For Buybacks

https://insideevs.com/news/708375/toyota-mirai-hydrogen-stations-close

*200,000,000 not 200,000

In case anyone is confused, this isn't new money, it's money they have already lost down a big dry hole in the ground in Turkey.

The loan balance is now £545k and 200,000 shares at current SP will yield £75k, so they need to repeat the process six more times.

So only another seven more months of relentless selling and the load will be paid off.

Ocelot that tweet just proves that SS is still spouting BS to the loyal believers so that they will buy it's number one product, new confetti shares.

No one except you is taking the Portland scheme seriously.

Portland is not going to happen, there is no hydrogen that needs storing underground in Dorset.

“ It is UKOG acting as a catalyst”

Add UKOG to your £1b project and see your investment disappear even faster.

"Does that mean UKOG will be remunerated for managing the submission to the first hydrogen storage allocation round and the acceleration of its project schedule?"

Why go with an established company with a track record in delivering large infrastructure projects when you can go with UKOG that has one small oil well and has lost £100m+ of investors money.

The whole Portland thing is just ridiculous.

No work has been done on Portland by UKOG except getting an agency to produce a slide deck and showing it to a revolving door of energy ministers.

DYOR research into the realities of the project, like is there even a requirement to store hydrogen in Dorset? Don't just believe what SS says.

"Does that mean UKOG will be remunerated for managing the submission?"

If you had £1 billion to invest in a project would you entrust the project to SS?

Portland is just a wheeze to keep the believers believing.

Remember UKOG gets it's money from shareholders not customers.

The Companies Act says the AGM must be held within 6 months of financial year end, so they will miss the legal requirement by at least 5 weeks.

SS must be scared of meeting the shareholders. I hear he wears brown trousers these days.

Are they more likely to:

A: invest £250k in HH

B: take all the cash they can out of HH as load repayments to keep them afloat as few more weeks

Yes UKOG had revenues of £1.5 million last year but had costs of $4.9m resulting in a loss of £3.4 million.

It needs over three times the number of tankers leaving HH if it is to keep the lights on.

Latest NSTA figures show HH production declining.