London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

"Dick, When will you be visiting the island?".................

.......not sure, Didas. Maybe when I'm scattered (in the form of ashes) on the golden sands of St Brelade's Bay, close to Fishermen's Chapel. I won't be on my own because two of my close personal friends (both with 4 legs) will be making the journey with me and we shall evermore patrol the sands at leisure, come rain or shine and light or dark.

There'll be no more fretting about the incalculable damage that's being willfully caused to our country by a dishonest bunch of politicians who'll do anything to secure votes, because votes bring money and (in some cases) power. The herd (which includes us) is there to be exploited. This is not conspiracy theory, it's fact - as amply demonstrated last week when the Conservative MP for wherever walked across the floor to join Labour, as this gave him the best chance of being re-elected on 4 July. That Stoma welcomed him with open arms speaks volumes.

Anyway, here's to the forthcoming scattering I say - preferably not until JOG and fossil fuels generally have "done a Lazarus" so at least I have something half decent to leave to loved ones who'll need everything they can get to help them survive the massive wealth confiscation that is a racing certainty when the UK's idiots vote in a party they know nothing about except that the key people came from Corbyn's camp. Talk about turkey's voting for Christmas

dyor

JC - the Labour Party isn't investing in oil and gas - it's doing the opposite. It is closing down the North Sea, because its politicians are ignoremi who know nothing about how the industry works; oil & gas are discovered and extracted, how long it takes develop alternatives, what energy security really means..........or anything else. All it is focused on is raising short term cash by stealing it from those who invest in unfashionable fossil fuels. It also thinks it will win votes, because a big percentage of the UK population has an IQ level in the 50-70 range (dimwits who'll believe anything they think will might them more money from people who go to work and might even have some savings). The latter will very quickly be tapped by Stoma, Rover Reeves (the chancellor whose legs touch all the way up from her ankles) and the ginger amazonian who left school with more children than GCSEs.

When I saw Stoma being interviewed by someone who challenged him on banning new production licences, he responded by saying he understood the need for fossil fuels as part of the transition to net zero by 2050, which is why he wasn't withdrawing any existing licences. The disingenuous dimwit clearly thinks that once a well is drilled, it carries on producing forever. Britain is now reliant on someone with sense in the Civil Service (from the Treasury perhaps?) to correct his stupidity, if our country isn't to be brought to a halt in the disturbingly near future. When it was pointed out to him that (i) Britain is only 17th in the list of countries with measurable emissions (ii) it has actually reduced its carbon footprint by 50% in the last 25 years (iii) it has consistently been No.1 in the list of "reducers" and (iv) it is responsible for less than 1% of total worldwide emissions.....he responded by say Britain owes it to the world to set the example. My take on this comment is that it's ok to ruin your country economically and wreck the living standards of all its citizens, as long as it's in a virtue signalling cause unproven by science or logic.

Today's latest Labour liar doing the rounds declared that British Energy (which Labour is saying it will set up with money from "windfall tax" on UKCS producers - what windfalls does he speak of?) will make Britain "energy secure" by 2030. Utter b.ollox. He also declared that it is now cheaper to produce renewable energy than existing means. Really?

Labour doesn't bode well for Britain, least of all for UKCS producers. Sunakhunt and Stoma have been flogging the wrong horse. The ones who made money out of the feared O&G shortage (which never materialised) following Ukrain, were the retail energy suppliers. Centrica's profits were multiple times higher after than before. Were those profits taxed at usurers' rates? Nah - that would have cost the masses more.

I don't think JOG is a lost cause. But it has to think smart. CC or similar comes to mind - not that I like the idea

jmofwiw

dyor

"After thinking about it DU, I respectfully disagree that a delay is on the table, unless it's the month until the election. Then it probably won't be RNS'ed."............

..............with respect Greener, I didn't express any views on whether or not there will be a delay on the table (or indeed the chair). I recorded my interpretation of what a bloke in shorts said when I met him in the holiday isle last Sunday.

What I wrote was: "There didn't appear to me to be any signs of giving up if Miliband gets the real (as opposed to "shadow") job in Energy. A hurdle to overcome that might result in a project being put on hold, but not a show-stopper".

I might have got it completely wrong because, at the time he said it - or I thought at least hinted at - I was sitting on a terrace overlooking a sandy beach, the blue sea was sparkling, the weather was glorious and the table we were sitting at was no more than 30metres away from a stack of deckchairs I let out to holidaymakers in the summer holidays of 1965 and 1966 (I was paid £12 a week for my efforts). They probably weren't exactly the same chairs but you know what I mean. Collecting the chairs at the end of the day was sometimes a bit physically challenging - try 3 deckchairs either side tucked under yer arm for 100 yards on soft sand - but I didn't mind because I got to keep the deposits. The way it worked, a two-part ticket was issued when the deck chair/s was/were hired, one part for me to retain and the other given to the customer who would get his deposit back on presenting his/her half when returning the chair/s. I won't go into how windbreaks were accounted for, as it's a bit complicated but, with hindsight, I definitely showed early promise as an accountant - more like bookkeeping actually, even though I didn't keep any books. I was able to advise the concession owner how the system was open to abuse, were a deck chair attendant to be less than honest (it was around re-issuing tickets after deck chairs and/or windbreaks had been returned early. We closed the loophole after discussing the matter for some time. The concession owner gave me a week's wages at the end of that season, which must have meant a lot to me because I'm still boring people with the story now, some 59 years later.

I should have invested in a fledgling company like BP or Diageo - or something equally as boring - and I'd by now have been rich.........

Never mind, there's always JOG :-)

The two links below are to a recent address given by Professor Richard Lindzen, who is a true expert in climate, climate change, meteorology - you name it. He sets out, with amazing clarity the reasons behind the global brainwashing that has resulted in people like me being sneeringly referred to by compliant freaks with brains the size of a pea as: "climate change deniers". I am proud to be such a person. Both meteorology and astronomy have been lifelong subjects of interest to me, so I probably understand more about a planet that's been around for about 4.75bn years than most of them ever will. Their ridiculous notion is that the earth will be practically uninhabitable within a few decades unless everyone is forced by law to follow the example set by countries like the UK, which are doing everything possible to reduce their inhabitants' living standards, killing economic prosperity as they do so. Politicians (and others with public influence) blindly and unintelligently believe that developed world countries will be able to control carbon emissions (and thus prevent harmful increases in levels of CO2 - the so-called greenhouse gas - by banning things like oil & gas production, modern agricultural methodology etc etc. This will save us all from being fried alive in about 26 years' time.

As if the undeveloped world countries gives a monkey's about anything except what will make them less poor. Sorry - I shouldn't have said that. I meant "of course they will do all they possibly can not to use any coal, coke, gas, oil, electricity - have I missed anything. Yes, that's better - of course they will. And furthermore, they won't be cutting down any trees any time soon. Phew. Keir Starmer is going to save us. He's a terrific chap and only a bit of a socialist - he'd never expose us to any dangers (as a nation). Silly me for thinking he might

The two videos make compelling viewing/listening - the panel discussions following Professor Lindzen's address (2nd link below) are remarkable - they come at the situation from an EU standpoint. Incredibly clever people. Britain is a lot worse than the EU in its destruction of society (as we have got used to it - a new form is on its way).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s4j2JDtncM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywBPrY0KMhY&t=1051s

Greener - it's the closure of what Labour says are "loopholes" in the existing EPL set-up that will stop NS projects dead. These (according to Labour) are (i) capital allowances that have for many years been available to offset at 100% against profits made by NS E&Ps (effectively saving them 40% of capex cost) and (ii) the enhanced investment relief offered by Sunakhunt as a sop to the Industry. The relief was offered after Sushi (the UK's former PM) deceitfully and dishonestly jumped on the desperation bandwagon and chose an industry the ignorant masses have been brainwashed to hate, to milk for some quick cash and votes he was never going to get as long as he had a hole in his whatever.

The "loophole" in (ii) above was introduced by Sunakhunt to encourage investment in new projects which at least the Conservatives could see will be needed to ensure at least an element of energy security for Britain. "Extra-concessionary" rates were offered to UKCS producers paying the 35% EPL, which meant that qualifying Capex (eg £900m of infrastructure spend involved in getting to first oil in "Buchan") would cost an effective 9p in the £ .

This is what interested NEO and SQZ. Take capital allowances away and disallow "re-investment relief" and the whole picture changes. Labour have (as a concession) now said they have dropped their plans to retrospectively disallow everything claimed before the clever people of the UK vote them into office with a landslide on 4 July - a day celebrated in the US for obvious reasons, but maybe forever becoming the day Britain (as we knew it) "crashed and burned".

I haven't been around for a few days, as I decided it was time to revisit my native holiday isle (situated about 10 miles west of Granville) - I last visited more than 5 years ago. While I was there, I happened to meet an interesting chap who was full of optimism about our company's future. And who continues to give his all to the tasks ahead. There didn't appear to me to be any signs of giving up if Miliband gets the real (as opposed to "shadow") job in Energy. A hurdle to overcome that might result in a project being put on hold, but not a show-stopper. There is a determined and skilled Board still intact, plus some other key players. My guess, after reflecting on the meeting, is that active searches are underway to identify cash-producing opportunities leveraging contacts made during the FO process. JOG would have money in the bank and tax losses to offset against whatever profits came in (I guess from a WI in a non-UKCS conventional field, or perhaps more likely a "favoured" project that doesn't get hit by the EPL). This ignores the 25mmboe or whatever of 2P reserves JOG will hold post FDP approval (assuming it's granted), albeit potentially no commercial case to be made for getting the oil to the surface.

To me, the shares look under-priced, but the market thinks differently. One of us will be wrong.

all imo only

dyor

You're missing the point, CHF.

With the enhanced investment allowance, spend on infrastructure on new projects (like Buchan) can be carried out for a fraction of the cost. Tax relief @91.4% on £900m of spend?

" The introduction of the energy profits levy was accompanied by a specific investment allowance, which gives an additional 80% deduction against the levy for qualifying expenditure. When combined with the existing regime, this results in tax relief of 91.25p for every £1.00 of relevant expenditure".

Labour calls it a "loophole" and intends to withdraw the allowance, at the same time increasing the tax rate to 78% on all profits made by UKCS producers - not just the long gone windfall gains).

It is one the most dishonest tax I have ever seen imposed. Every bit of the legislation is fundamentally flawed and is dishonestly presented in all official descriptions of what it is. It's funny how no reference is ever made to the windfall losses the entire industry suffered for years, as a result of the political spat over market share, followed by Covid.

Here are a couple of examples from the .Gov site:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-the-energy-oil-and-gas-profits-levy/energy-oil-and-gas-profits-levy

"There are not expected to be impacts on individuals as this measure only affects businesses".

" Victoria Atkins MP, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, has read this tax information and impact note and is satisfied that, given the available evidence, it represents a reasonable view of the likely costs, benefits and impacts of the measure" (who TF is Victoria Atkins and what does she know about the O&G industry - about anything in fact):

"Victoria Mary Atkins was born on 22 March 1976 in London. She is the daughter of Sir Robert Atkins, a former Conservative MP and MEP, and Lady (Dulcie) Atkins, a Conservative councillor and mayor. She was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes at the age of three. Atkins was privately educated at the Arnold School, a co-educational independent school in Blackpool in Lancashire, and read law at Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.

Atkins was called to the bar (Middle Temple) in 1998. She worked as a barrister in the field of fraud in London (ah - I see now - she's good at fraud) and, best of all:

"This ensures oil and gas companies that will benefit from the prolonged period of increased prices continue to pay their fair share of tax".

Sushi stated about 4 months before stealing a policy he thought would be popular with the masses etc: "windfall taxes are not something the Conservative Party believes in". This was in response to a Labour spokesperson saying Labour would impose a WFT of 10% on the gains made from increased O&G prices, with the WFT being scrapped when prices returned to normal.

What more can one say about politicians and integrity?

dyor

I hope you're right about something in the offing that will persuade NEO and SQZ to go ahead with the Buchan project, Greener.

But I can't see how "Super-tax allowances" on money spent on wind-farms will do NEO and SQZ much good as I don't think Buchan will be regarded as "green". I know the "Western Isles" FPSO vessel will be designed to allow "hook up" to a renewable (electric) energy hub that Scottish Crown Estates are planning to build in the Moray Firth. If the past is anything to go on, they'll still be planning it 10 years down the road, when most of us will have long since ceased to have any interest in any company registered in the UK, because they'll all be regarded just as money pots the government of the day can tap into to raise extra dosh to dish out to people the UK is now full of - people who've spent every last penny that's come their way (a lot in welfare payments and from the black economy) on themselves, without any thought of rainy days in the future.

That's where we come in - and the companies we have invested in until now (in my case at least). To pay for it all. I'll see out my present oil plays then call it a day on investing in the crooked markets governments rely on to provide it with money stolen from people's pension savings via the crooked practice known as "shorting".

Most people investing in funds run by pension providers have no idea about stock lending and the harm it causes them. They have never given their consent to shares held in fancy-named funds (Uranus Long Term Brilliance Fund etc) being lent to hyenas like investment banks and hedge funds to make a fortune out of.

HMRC can't tax people's savings held in a pension "tax wrapper" like ULTBF, except via tax on dividends that could be reclaimed before Brown decided he'd rather like to lay his greedy socialist hands directly on £6bn a year previously belonging to pension savers - funny how the Conservatives never reversed this scandalous act of theft.

The trick is to allow stock lending by pension providers, without the beneficial owners' express or even implied authority. The provider doing the lending (of shares owned by people saving for their retirement) pockets the generous fees. The borrower makes a fortune out of selling the borrowed shares and buying them back at lower prices caused by dumping the borrowed shares on the market, or more slowly over a longer period to cause MMs to drop the price to encourage buyers. The borrowed shares are returned to the lender, who tucks them back into his fund at much lower prices than they were when they were lent, claiming it doesn't matter because he's investing for the long term and short term drops in SPs don't matter.

HMRC wins by taxing the indecent profits on the crooked exercise made by the investment banks and London-based hedge funds. It also taxes the 7 figure packages their employees are on.

The losers? People saving for their retirement.

Nice one

Greener - I don't disagree with your sentiments. But my experience is that politicians rarely back down, regardless of the harm their policies might cause the Nation. Their personal position and that of the Party they represent (in that order) always come before the long term good of GB.

Because oil & gas plays out in decades, politicians won't have to deal with the fall-out from destructive short term policies they put in place - that's for someone else to fix. We've been there before, but no lessons seem to have been learned. The industry is slow to forgive politicians. There'll be no coming back this time. The NS was dying anyway, now it's all but dead - and it won't be doing a Lazarus anytime soon. Brown and Osborne both increased tax rates on tax on oil & gas cos' profits (2008, Brown - to 60%, then 2010, Osborne - to 62%). Tax revenues from the NS dried up altogether, but it took a few years.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/350890/united-kingdom-uk-north-sea-revenue/

Things became so bad that a new quango was set up (called the OGA, today its the NSTA) whose sole mission was "MER" - maximise economic recovery: IE - increase the tax take from the NS.

Around 2014/15 the spat developed over US fracked oil taking a 4% world share without asking for OPEC's consent. Fracking was feasible with oil prices at $100+ with extraction costs of $70-80pb. F*** off, said the US. The Saudis (sorry - meant OPEC) with extraction costs of $6pb and 30 years' worth of SA's total annual GDP sitting in its coffers in different currencies turned on the taps and flooded the world with oil. In the end no-one wanted it except China. BC fell to $25pb. F*** off back with knobs on, said the Saudis. More than half the new US fracking fields shut down. Billions were lost by US banks. Then it was Covid

Losses to HMRC in tax on much reduced or non-existent profits were immediate . The result was as the graph shows.

Now they've gone and done it again. The industry will NEVER forgive Sunak's blatant move to steal what he knew would be a Labour WFT he thought would be popular with the masses and raise some easy cash in the process - and buy himself popularity.

Sunakhunt was so dishonest, however, that it imposed a tax on the entire profits of all UKCS producers. He thought the thickos (like the BBC) would never be able too work it out - a tax on windfall profits only (deceitful b'tards. And what profits? Oil prices were back to normal market prices after 8 months). A dishonest floor price scheme was then set up to ensure the EPL would last 8 years, by including the US vs OPEC and Covid years (when prices were rock bottom) in the 10 year or whatever period used to establish historically "normal" oil & gas prices.

Dishonest & rotten to the core. All of them, esp Sunakhunt. The hopes and aspirations of 100k families in GB in tatters, as the skilled provider loses his job? Just collateral damage. Votes are at stake.

Utterly despicable

dyor

The trouble with ST's assessment, and with the "risked NAVs" the ANALysts have come up with - which are not "risked" in ways I understand - is that they don't seem to take into account the risk that Buchan doesn't get off the ground. The "Buchan Project" NPV10 I calculated, based on numbers JOG has given us and what Labour have told us they're going to do (which I've assumed doesn't disallow Capital Allowances altogether, which is what Miliband has said they will and no-one has contradicted him) shows a minus NPV of £0.5bn (I used forward DCFs for 9 years to get to that number). The half a billion is to split between NEO and SQZ. Would you say "yes" to these numbers when it came to FID? JOG has a +ve NPV (around £4ps if the oil comes to the surface) because it wouldn't have any capex.

The hope is that JOG sells to an E&P that is more interested in energy security than losing everything it might make in tax (don't kid yourselves the EPL will ever be lifted - there'll be even more Greta Thundertwats than ever by 2030 and Britain will be under the control of the IMF, which will forbid the relaxation of any taxes, so desperate will it be for cash to give to life's shirkers and people who've spent all their vouchers and will be mercilessly after yours if you've been daft enough to save anything for a rainy day.

I'm outta here if I read any more nonsense about buying into renewables (off the shores of the holiday isle). Utter folly - Jersey itself would probably go bust trying. Never be a pioneer - invest into something that finally makes it about 4 tries down the road in about 20 years' time.

My advice? Convert whatever you've got into Krugerrands and hide it somewhere where Labour's sniffer dogs won't be able to find it. Leave the country before you die, but FFS don't forget to take it with you.

Cash alone will be worth close to £1 a share post FDP approval, so no point selling at 145p. Then there the tax losses (c.£70m @ 40% = £28m). Oh ........and didn't someone say JOG has 25mmboe of 2p (on FDP approval) 33° API sweet light crude that will come out at some stage - not sure in whose hands?

It's worth listening to the linked lecture - frightening, but educational

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClDrkcSfKjk

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for dickupham

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for dickupham

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)

Please enter at least 2 characters

No results found

Search results

Recently viewed

Trending