Member Info for dickupham

That feels better..........dusterinmong filtered. Join the list - "depart from me ye cursed" etc. I'm fed up with people with double digit IQs.

Benitz as good as told us this morning how the FO discussions are going when he said: "preparation of the Environmental Statement for the Buchan redevelopment is on-going and it is expected that this will be submitted to the regulator prior to the end of the year, along with the draft FDP."

How can the above be done if the parties haven't got funding in place?

The $9.4m milestone payment alone is worth 20p a share and JOG's free (12.5%) of the cost of the FPSO - after refit - is probably worth close to its market cap. The shares are up 23p. Gee whiz.

Why have we got so many intellectually-challenged (ie thick) people involved in ownership of this company.

People won't be able to ignore the fundamentals - as if they even know the meaning of the word - eventually. All depends on when "eventually" happens I suppose. We need some big institutional buy-in to the JOG story, but the sector has been destroyed by politicians and fund managers are more interested in following the herd and protecting their bouseses than in investing in a great capital growth opportunity that's staring them in the face.

More news later this month or early next would be my guess.

Keep the faith

GLAL

The other 5k shs were dealt on Aquis:

https://www.aquis.eu/companies/JOG.GB?securityidaqse=JOG.GB

......added more (2 x 5k shs) just now at 188.9p

Sit back and wait now...........hopefully not for too long

GLAL

I wasn't wearing my glasses : "NEO is keen to progress" etc

I decided to buy a few more this morning (10k shs). Timing might not be totally right but the way I see things is that NEO Energy is definitely keep progress as quickly as possible and are likely to be in control of FSPO matters.

Whether JOG manages to sign up a second partner - who might pick up (say) 30% in return for a carry on the remaining 37.5% of development costs to first oil, plus a lump of cash - is of course important, but whatever happens the worst outcome is that JOG gets to retain 12.5% of the Buchan assets with a 100% carry. The terms of NEO's farm-in gave it the right to acquire an additional 37.5% of the licences for the 37.5% that JOG isn't presently carried for. That option comes into play if JOG hasn't got the funds to meet its present 37.5% obligations on development spend, when the time comes to move to FDP. Whilst it is only an option (not an obligation) the clear evidence is that NEO is raring to go asap.

JOG with a fully carried 12.5% of the Buchan Fields is worth considerably more than £60m (which is about a single year's projected profit before tax when production starts.

I might add more later depending on how the price moves from here. The market will get it eventually, but certainly will when the next news is released, hopefully telling us the FPSO deal is secured and JOG has a second FO partner and is fully carried - preferably having retained a 25% ownership of the Buchan assets.

jmofwiw

always dyor

"Purely circumstantial Dick"............

............is it also a coincidence that NEO holds 23% of the Harris and Barra licence (NEO seems to have bought it from CIECO, JOG's former partner in Licence P2170 - aka Verbier), CHF?

If it is just a coincidence, I'll buy you a pint of Cripple Dick (St Austell Brewery) at the forthcoming £5 party . It's mainly known for its emetic properties, although its 9.9° ABV tag makes it a popular choice for the hardened imbiber.

I'm not for a minute suggesting the vessel in the article is destined for Buchan but, if it was, some might find the proposed timing interesting....................

"The FPSO preparation and sailaway activities are expected to begin in late 2023, subject to commercial agreements and contracts".............

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/projects/western-isles-fpso-decommissioning-project/#Western%20Isles%20FPSO%20Decommissioning%20Details

dyor

Can anyone hazard a guess as why investors in NS energy cos should be expected (so disproportionately) to: "pay for our public services like schools and the NHS". £375bn Shouldn't other sectors be given the opportunity to make valuable contributions:

"When approached for comment, a Treasury spokesperson said: “The continued investment by generators in the industry is vital to our long-term energy security and this levy still leaves companies with a share of profits at times of high wholesale prices, while our Contracts for Difference scheme is supporting our renewable energy sector by protecting generators against price fluctuations.

“The Energy Profits Levy on oil and gas producers has helped us pay around half of the typical household’s energy bill between October and June, while the £375bn the sector has raised in production taxes since its introduction pays for our public services like schools and the NHS”.

Warped thinking on an epic scale afaic.

https://www.ogv.energy/news-item/global-uncertainty-strengthens-case-for-uk-oil-and-gas-says-industry-boss

Back to sleep now. Wake me up when the WI is signed up, along with the second FO partner. Hopefully not too long to wait now. NEO seems keen to move to FDP.............

dyor

Einbert: "Cauliflower Eruptor" is the wine of choice in these parts (a relative stone's throw from Buckfastleigh). Presenting your "Elderberry and Parsnip Bubbly" as an alternative would imv be a popular move, although not necessarily one that would meet with the approval of - how shall I put it - some with a more refined sense of smell, were they to walk in on an extended session of consumption of the kind you perhaps envisage on JOG achieving the kind of SP you have in mind?

Our fellow investor from Cornwall might wish to add his thoughts. I was at the Turtley Corn Mill near Avonwick recently. It might be worth considering when the big day arrives..................

PC01 - you sound like the kind of chap who knows the difference between a Bordeaux and a Claret................

...........you can't beat a good 'Hobart Runny" in my book - forget this Petrus and Rothschild crap.........

:-)

.........a sea of green messages - talk about verbal diarrhoea.............

NKOTB posted what's below on the SQZ blog yesterday. He's a clued-up investor who occasionally posts on this board.

https://www.nstauthority.co.uk/media/ch4f5oil/33rd-licensing-round-tranche-1-potential-awards-by-block.pdf

NEO Energy is among the awardees, but I don't think Licence 30/13b is anywhere near Buchan or the other licences JOG is interested in.

dyor

.......first time I've seen any reference made by NEO to Buchan. Thanks for providing the link Shredders - a good find.

Tells me Buchan is definitely going to happen, which is good news afaic. Subject to completing the FPSO deal (which seems only to be a matter of time - basically the NSTA getting off its ar*e and approving phase 1 of Dana's decommissioning plans for the topside elements of the Harris and Barra operations, which were filed last February) NEO can move onto the FDP/FID stages and it should be all systems go after that for first oil in 2026/27. As JOG shareholders, what's of major interest to us is whether JOG manages to sign up a 2nd FO partner to bear the 37.5% infrastructure cost NEO hasn't underwritten and still retain 20-25% of the relevant licences, before the FDP is ready to go.

NEO has an option to underwrite (or 'carry' JOG for) the 37.5% it hasn't contracted to so far, in return for JOG signing over a further 37.5%. NEO can exercise this option if, by the time the FDP is due for submission, JOG can't demonstrate it has the funds in place to pay its 37.5% of the funds needed to get to production (and beyond). I think I've read somewhere that the FDP is due for submission in Q1 2024.

Given NEO's seeming intent to move forward asap, the worst that can happen to JOG is that it ends up owning 12.5% of the licence, with more cash in the bank and fully carried on the costs of getting to first oil. That would only happen if JOG doesn't manage to find a 2nd FO partner offering better terms than NEO does in the option.

Even with 12.5%, JOG's P&L would still be impressive. Using an oil price of $80pb, 40kbpd of production and opex of $20pb and 330 days pa of production, JOG's annual profit (before tax) would be [80 - 20] x 5,000 x 330 = $99m............or c.£80m. More than JOG's present total value, according to the SP.

Double everything if they find a partner to provide the carry and manage to cling onto 25%.

However one regards tax and EPL. And however you view the farm out chances, JOG is worth a lot more than its SP says it is

jmo - dyor

Reference earlier posts about the FPSO vessel (tied in to Harris and Barra fields or vice versa - not sure of the right terminology), I read in an oil magazine recently that production is scheduled to cease in about March 2024:

https://www.offshore-mag.com/production/article/14296946/north-sea-western-isles-production-set-to-cease-next-year

Reference decommissioning of the field/s, there's information on the situation to be found on Dana Petroleum's website, which sets out the position quite concisely. Readers will note that the decommissioning of the PFSO vessel (Western Isles) is dealt with separately by the NSTA. Decommissioning plans for the sub-sea structure/s followed the February submission of a Decommissioning Programme for the Western Isles.

The relevant info can be found on Dana's website - click the box on the bottom right:

https://www.dana-petroleum.com/who-we-are/media-resources/public-notices/

As redeployment (rather than scrapping) of FPSOs is the NSTA's declared preference, it surely shouldn't take too much longer to approve Dana's/NEO's plan for the vessel, which was first commissioned (at a cost of $2bn) in 2017, not 7 years ago. I'll open the bidding with $50m...........

dyor

Last updated: 30 September 2023

Any person with a holding of 3% or more in any class of AIM security (excluding treasury shares)

Name Percent

Hargreaves Lansdown, stockbrokers 17.04%

Interactive Investor 8.25%

Mr J Baldwin 6.77%

A J Bell, stockbrokers 4.69%

Barclays Smart Investor 4.33%

Mr Nicholas Robinson 4.15%

HSDL, stockbrokers 4.07%

UBS 4.01%

Janus Henderson 3.65%

Ronald Lansdell 3.28%

Ravenscroft 3.04%

New holder: https://www.ravenscroftgroup.com/

Last time (30 June holdings)

Hargreaves Lansdown, stockbrokers 16.23%

Interactive Investor 8.37%

Mr J Baldwin 6.77%

Mr Nicholas Robinson 4.54%

Barclays Smart Investor 4.46%

A J Bell, stockbrokers 4.44%

UBS 4.08%

HSDL, stockbrokers 4.07%

Janus Henderson 3.66%

Ronald Lansdell 3.28%

Good to see an investment organisation (Ravenscroft - who look to be "switched on") are confident to invest c.£2m of their investors' money in an oil junior - more precisely JOG............

https://www.jerseyoilandgas.com/investors/shareholder-information/

"you're".........not "your"

Einbert...........glad to learn your not guilty of cunctation, where wiping your dipstick is concerned .............

Interesting article, surprised - thanks for posting it.

Sadly I won't be around in 2045 to enjoy seeing countless numbers of extremely clever people (in their own estimation) having to eat their words about all the end of the world rubbish we're constantly forced to put up with. Even more sadly, they'll all be nowhere to be seen when the penny drops that whatever effect mankind might have on nature doesn't make a jot of difference to what goes on naturally, as it has done for the last 4.75bn years at least. History will record a period of a few generations between the 19th and 21st centuries, when the result of a meteorite slamming into what became the Gulf of Mexico led to the formation of two sources of energy called oil and gas that technology 64m years after the event made available to humans, who used it for all sorts of energy-demanding purposes until it ran out. Thus it had to be replaced as the reservoirs and other sources dried up - oil first, then gas. Other ways to harness the Sun's energy had to be found. History will also record that during a very silly period, when the world's leaders followed the advice of a Swedish schoolgirl (who eventually became very rich very, but so fat that not even ugly dykes fancied her). What to about dwindling supplies came into sneaky focus - and who was going to pay for it. UK politicians (for instance) thought it would be a winner to make NS oil toxic in the eyes of the gullible masses. Energy prices would go through the roof, but the costs of the expensive alternative energy would be borne by the masses and private sector organisations, not by Government. Use it as an opportunity to raise more taxes even. How about 75% tax on NS oilco profits just for starters?

People who held shares in North Sea oil companies were left high and dry. Collateral damage. Tough. Happily one or two NS companies were still able to generate positive cash flow despite the tax heist and eventually found a value based on investment yield.

Phew. Just have to hope Mercuria don't do the dirty now.

Apologies if a bit disjointed. It isn't easy to express conspiracy theory clearly

GL - we'll need it with Labour now a racing certainty with Sunak et al exposed to the light

dyor

Have a great trip, MPO (and Mrs MPO). See you in Nov.................

Desertsands - thanks for your comments.

Fwiw, I reckon your comment: "you both had valuable input that you contributed" ................"says far more about you.. than you might realise".

I too welcome debate, but it's not worth debating anything with people whose views are worthless because they don't tell the truth, lack an understanding of the basics and present as fact what is wholly untrue.

You say: "I rarely post on bb’s unless I feel I have something worthwhile to contribute. There is usually a measure of informed opinion and debate which is what they are supposed to be about". I see you haven't posted on this board before, so presumably haven't felt you have anything worthwhile to contribute. Are you saying it's worthwhile telling people JS has a valuable input here?

James Simon has openly admitted to having lied about his holding in JOG. He claims a present holding of more than 3% which, if it were true, would oblige him to notify the Company and hence the Market of his holding, or he would be in breach of the Companies Act (ie breaking the law - not that there's any penalty afaict). My recent debate with JS has not been about self-aggrandisment - it's been about trying to ensure no-one is influenced in making investment decisions by anything he states, because he has little or no understanding of the industry, knows nothing about how companies are valued and the facts he presents are untrue.

I wish you well with your investments, but I doubt you will prosper if you think people like JS provide valuable input

Subject closed. I shouldn't have taken him off the filter but curiosity got the better of me.

James - I have often asked myself why I bother posting on blogs like this one, which I have been contributing to for many years. The answer is that after hanging my boots up early in the accounting profession, I felt it would be a waste of a lot of accumulated knowledge if I didn't go on the do anything with it. So I decided to share some of it with others, many of whom, in turn, shared theirs with me and indeed others.

I first started posting on another site (interactive inv, or ii) in 2007. The result, I quickly found, was that I started to get to know my investments better as a result of the time I took thinking about posts made by others (particularly those who had worked in the relevaant industry) and how I was going to respond to their views. You may have noticed that I always do my best to present my views in ways that are gramatically correct, set out in paragraphs and hopefully, therefore, easier for anyone to read and understand.

I strive to avoid making predictions (unless tongue in cheek - eg £43 soon - I do have a sense of humour despite my great age - according to you; I presonally don't regard age as an illness, rather the opposite).

The reason I was perhaps a little short with you, James, is that you have made countless statements about not only JOG and the people who run it over quite a long period. Your views lack consistency and have no substance to them. Many are insulting. Recently you have, without qualification, effectively suggested JOG holders should follow your lead and move their funds into a company (PANR) which you present as a racing certainty. You apparently don't know the difference between prospects and reserves, which is fundamental to an understanding of any oil & gas company. I don't want to waste my and others time adding any more to what I stated about PANR in my recent post that seems to have upset you.

People who read these boards sometimes take action based on information presented by others in support of companies they believe have potential. It is my strong belief that the information presented as fact by all posters should be "true and fair" (to use a term used frequently in the world of accounting). What you have stated about PANR is neither true, nor fair. Nor is what you have written about JOG's senior people, one in particular.

You should be ashamed of yourself. PANR is valued by the market at more than £300m. It has significant debt and very little income. Maybe this will change and I hope for your sake that it does. But it is anything but a certainty - it is fraught with risk. As was JOG when it had a market capitalisation that was less than the value of a modest house in Feb 2016.

Enough said

GL