Member Info for dickupham

It would be more interesting to know who is lending the shares.............

Internet brokers joined the party a while back - investors own shares being used as weapons against them. "Crooked" doesn't even begin to describe the markets (and the City generally) today

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/shortsalebenefit.asp

dyor

"Refit costs will be significant whichever vessel is chosen, out of JOG's latest estimate of total development cost to first oil of $900m"...............

.........brain not working properly (never has)............

No-one's going to be paying $800m for a redundant FPSO, Greener. A fraction of that would be my guess. Refit costs will be significant whatever vessel is chosen, out latest estimate of total development cost to first oil of $900m. I don't know what else is involved in getting to the latter - others with a background in the industry might be able to lift the mist if they feel so inclined?

By the time the FPSO comes up for sale, hopefully a second FO partner will have been signed up.Maybe NEO will elect to pay for the vessel and lease it to the partnership? Or maybe the new partner would be expected to contribute pro-rata to its interest in the licences, plus whatever % it is carrying JOG for? It's all just guesswork at this stage. Too many unknowns. I'm sure something that's fair and acceptable to all parties will be agreed when push comes to shove.

Any chance of a precis of what the upstreamonline article had to offer, bullson? You must already be rich if you've got a subscription.............

jmo - imip

dyor

..........ffs Greener - it's only $1285 pa for a subscription. You owe it to us to take one out and keep us wised up.

Might as well subscribe to Energy Voice at the same time, just for the sake of completeness. When JOG's stock is riding the highs in a few months time, the cost will seem trivial and you wouldn't want to be called mean.........

Have to say you lost me with your 12.5% in exchange for something and this being tax efficient (18.58hrs: 9 Aug). I'm a simple type and the way I see it is that JOG intends to farm out a further 25-30% of the GBA licences in return for a a free carry on the 37.5% cost of getting to production it is presently responsible for (although ultimately NEO will have the option of acquiring a further 37.5% of the licences, in return for giving JOG a free carry on the same 37.5%. This option would only be exercised in the event of JOG being unable to sign a second partner on better terms).

I think that's what's intended anyway. So I doubt very much JOG will be involved with paying out cash to acquire a second hand FPSO vessel and whatever else comes with it because it doesn't have any cash to speak of. The idea (I think) is for JOG to end up with 20-25% of the 3rd or 4th biggest field in the NS "Capex-free", meaning that when it gets to production, only Opex will count as a cost of extraction, leaving JOG with a spectacular P&L account with Brent Crude prices at current levels or higher (or even a bit lower).

Profits of course would be subject to tax, which is the current game spoiler. Maybe politicians will come to their senses when NS tax revenues dry up a lot quicker than they think they will and they find themselves looking for money to dish out to the masses who'll be bleating they want their ever-increasing home energy bills paid (because they do - and it's only fair anyway).

One can but hope..........I doubt JOG's shares will be this cheap for long..........

jmo

dyor

The linked article is dated 26 July. I didn't see it until yesterday.

https://www.oilandgaspeople.com/news/story/dana-petroleum-announces-end-of-production-for-western-isles-fpso

Might this be relevant to JOG?

If (and I say "if") the WI is the FPSO referred to recently, then it seems unlikely there'll be any announcement until Dana's/NEO's decommissioning plans have been approved by the NSTA.

Some history relating to the Western Isles:

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/81372/danas-western-isles-project-two-years-late-and-busts-its-1-6bn-budget/

$2bn initial cost?? Anyone care to open the bidding? I guess adapting it is likely to be expensive. Isn't everything in the UK (except shares in JOG)?

wdik??

dyor

Xyz

No offence was intended in my post, Cyril. My post followed the theme of the thread title- ie it was a rant - I was addressing the world at large, not specific individuals.

It had not occurred to me for a second that anyone would choose to apply the filter to Einbert, whose posts I generally find erudite and his sense of humour appealing. He's comes across to me as someone who can tell readily tell the difference between Mobil Super and Castrol.

I've highlighted goodness knows how many times the reasons there are to be optimistic as to outcome, where JOG is concerned. I've also pointed out the risks. I don't think I can usefully say any more.

I hope everyone gets the result they want, but there's no such thing as a racing certainty in this or any other sector. As long as JOG's directors' aspirations align with those of the majority of shareholders, a more than decent result is more than possible. JOG's published aspirations to rise to mid-tier in a sector that's less popular than tobacco is fraught with risk (political more than any other) and imv need to be revised. They could also do with beefing up their non-existent PR

jmo - dyor

Einbert, the data you have kindly provided can only cause one to question why UK politicians are trashing the UK's economy, when the UK has reduced its carbon emissions the most of all 209 countries listed and the UK's per capita emissions are the lowest of all the developed countries except France - assuming one regards France as "developed" And the UK is responsible for only 1% of total carbon emissions worldwide anyway, so whatever Britain does makes no difference to anything. Do these clowns not have access to the data?

The trashing I refer to by the current UK Government will be as nothing compared to the one Labour will deliver to UK citizens when its turn comes next year. People will vote them in (turkeys and Christmas come to mind) having been brainwashed into believing that fossil fuels are going to destroy the planet and end mankind, so we'd better stop it now. Instantly. Bloody dimwits. They will quickly come to realise, however, that much of what they take for granted in their selfish, consumer-driven lives will no longer be affordable when the North Sea has been shut for business. Imported energy might fill some of the gap, but energy will quickly become much more expensive (assuming it can be successfully sourced). Just to cap it off nicely, carbon emissions will be higher because, as the data shows, the UK is a lot better than most other oil-producing countries at fossil fuel extraction (if that is the right term) and importing our energy from places like the US and wherever else we manage to get it from will come at a much higher carbon (and £) cost

Cheap energy is the cornerstone to any successful economy. It drove Britain to its one-time position as the world's leading economy. It's time people woke up and stopped pretending that today's shuffling around of money around represents wealth creation - Britain is a busted flush; its people don't want to work - it's their entitlement, see? But they do want everything cheap and they're not going to get it cheap unless people like Sushi Rishi or whatever his name is and Stoma are roundly kicked out and told to go and ruin another country instead.

Further question posed by the data provided by Einbert (which of course no-one recommended except me because it hurts to think, doesn't it?):

Why are Greta and her friends Just Stop OIil, Greenpeace and all the other virtue-signalling igroremi not protesting in: (a) China (the world's biggest carbon footprint by a street) and (b) North Korea (where the increase in carbon emissions is the highest year on year?

Funny that................

Suggestion: send the link setting out the relevant data to the rhyming Hunt and Sushi, tell them to read it and then stop ruining this country

dyofr

Slightly off topic (don't want to create a new thread) but some might find the linked article interesting:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-climate-scaremongers-wind-farm-operators-start-backing-out-as-they-get-cold-feet-about-costs/

Slightly off topic (don't want to create a new thread) but some might find the linked article interesting:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-climate-scaremongers-wind-farm-operators-start-backing-out-as-they-get-cold-feet-about-costs/

I'm all for civility on the board unless severely provoked. I apply the filter to those who irk me; keeps me sane. Each to his own - we're all different.

Hopefully we'll soon have more detailed information about the cost of the FPSO vessel, the terms attaching to its procurement, how much of a saving (after the work needed to adapt it for use in Buchan) will arise as a result of securing the vessel - and a revised estimate of the total cost of the infrastructure needed to get to production.

When this information is to hand, JOG should be be in a position to agree favourable terms with a second farm-out partner that will result in JOG retaining a fully carried 20-25% WI in the GBA licences.

The first step is an announcement on the FPSO vessel swiftly (I hope) followed by details of the second partner agreement.

Exciting times ahead. Patience is still required, but the stars seem to be coming into alignment. It would be surprising if the market didn't react positively to news flow as described above. No doubt the various analysts who cover JOG (all positively) will be ready to give JOG's enviable position the full "thumbs up" when the news is to hand.

It's difficult to understand why there doesn't seem to be much enthusiasm for what's on offer for not very much. Then again, the money in investing isn't made by those who jump on the bandwagon when the news is already out. There's more than a dog's chance that a good number of people will be kicking themselves in the not too distant future when they reflect of their nervy sale of shares at prices that didn't make sense, or their failure to buy and add at those same levels.

As always, time will tell. My personal view is that the eventual outcome here will fully justify the risk and anguish longer term shareholders in JOG have had to endure these past few years (from the outset in my case). The analysts covering JOG have put forward values I see as fully justified. Fundamentals aways play out in the end.........

I might sell a few at £8.

GLAL

dyor

"Markets geared up for an OPEC+ meeting this week, where de facto leader Saudi Arabia is expected to extend its voluntary output cuts for another month. On the demand side, latest data showed that US fuel demand rose to 20.78 million barrels per day in May, the highest since August 2019. The report also indicated that US gasoline demand jumped to 9.11 million bpd, the highest since June 2022. Moreover, analysts upgraded their global oil demand forecasts for this year and next year, citing stronger growth estimates in major economies".

https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/brent-crude-oil

..........eat your heart out, Greta. And the rest of the CC freaks who are calling "the end is nigh". Seems to me some G20 (G7 even) countries aren't listening. Why is she not shouting out her warnings in Tiananmen Square?

............."The risk is that NEO don't end up going ahead, and that the farmout is only 12.5%".............. where do you get this from, Greener? What level of experience do you have in contract law? Why selectively choose the 12.5% carry - as if it's written in tablets of stone - and tell people on here NEO can just walk away from the rest?

This is what was announced publicly on 22 June. JOG's legal team, instructed by experienced and very capable senior members of JOG's carefully assembled team of professionals, won't just have given control of its only asset, on the premise: "NEO will probably go ahead with what they've undertaken to but, if not, c'east la vie". Business isn't done like that in the adult world.

RNS: 22 June 2023

"In exchange for entering into the agreements to divest a 50% working interest and operatorship in the GBA licences to NEO, the Company will receive:

§ $2 million cash payment on completion of the transaction - now received

§ a full carry for JOG's 50% share of the estimated $25 million cost to take the Buchan field through to Field Development Plan ("FDP") approval

§ $9.4 million cash payment upon finalisation of the GBA development solution

§ $12.5 million cash payment on approval of the Buchan FDP by the North Sea Transition Authority ("NSTA")

§ a 12.5% carry of the Buchan field development costs included in the FDP approved by the NSTA; equivalent to a 1.25 carry ratio

§ $5 million cash payment on each FDP approval by the NSTA in respect of the J2 and Verbier oil discoveries

The real risk is that Sunak, Hunt, Schapps et al just don't get it and they're killing the UKCS. They're now adopting the tactic: "we're doing all we can to make the UKCS an attractive basin to explore and develop" when it's as plain as a pikestaff the result of their greedy and ignorant meddling has been to immediately drive investment away from the UK. It's already gone. The risk/reward metrics simply don't add up. They didn't really add up even when the tax rate for UKSC focused O&G companies was 40% (twice that charged in all other sectors - 30% Ring Fence Corporation Tax and 10% Supplementary Charge). What Schappes seems to be saying to people twice as clever as he'll ever be and who work in the real world, not the corridors of Westminster (where it's the degree of slipperyness and deceit of politicians that gets them to the top": "we're going to tax your profits at 75% but in return we expect you to reinvest the profits subject to this rate in new exploration and developmen in the NS. After all, you'll be able to avoid paying the 75% - for a while at least, until the 1 in 20 exploration drills that lead to a commercial discovery makes it through to production, when we'll tax all those profits at 75% forever too. But we all know it doesn't really matter because we're not going to get in at the next election and Labour will tax the sector even more.

Luckily JOG has a unique offering.

jmo

dyor

Everything about Sunak lacks substance. As well as honesty and integrity, he also lacks courage. A pathetically weak specimen if ever there was one. Starmer and the brain-dead Labour woman who's spouting rubbish about renewables quickly "filling any gaps" caused by banning new licences are even worse.

Happily (it would seem) JOG is ideally placed to provide the means for existing UKCS producers effectively forced to continue to produce, or face writing off billions of pounds' worth of infrastructure spend, to sidestep a chunk of Sunakhunt's tax heist by paying the £900m estimated cost of getting to first oil from Buchan.

If I was i/c of JOG, I'd be looking to take the money and run at the first available sensible opportunity post FDP approval in H1 next year. A 20-25% working interest in the GBA licences might amount to 30m barrels. $10pb fully funded anyone? If so, this would value JOG at $300m - or £234m. Fully diluted: 670p per share. Bottom end of analysts' targets.

190p looks decidedly cheap to me.............

jmofwiw

dyor

I won't

Don't be fooled by whatever Mr Bouncy Big Ears has to say about securing the future of the North Sea. If he had a semblance of integrity he'd apologise for imposing a 75% tax rate on the whole NS oil and gas industry (regardless of whether the taxable profits are windfall or not) that's already caused companies like HBR, Neptune, Enquest, Total, CNOC, Ithaca and others to cut their losses in the UKCS and announce they're concentrating future E&P activity in other, less hostile (friendly even) territories abroad. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Shell move its listing and HO to the US - with others likely to follow. Neptune (PE funded - 3rd biggest UKCS producer) sold half its UKCS ops to Italy (ENI) and the other half to Norway. Clever Rishi.

I might revise my opinion if he announces the EPL was a bad mistake that had the effect of shooting Britain in the foot and restores a tax rate of 40%. I'm not holding my breath. The bloke is a lightweight who's focused only on himself, no doubt with more than half an eye on lucrative key speaker activities when he deservedly gets kicked out of office by an electorate fed up to the back teeth with incompetence and dishonesty. The term "PoS" comes to mind. And re the rhyming Hunt, it's difficult to judge whether he's making as bad a job as Chancellor as he did as Health Secretary.

We should have news of the FPSO shortly, hopefully followed not too much later by the 2nd FO announcement. Then it's all systems go to get FDP approval as early as possible in 2024. Sell the Company any time after.

jmo

dyor

I've made a couple of posts recently on the subject of value, on commencement of production. It rears its head again.

I can't recall the exact numbers I used but, in memory serves me well, using a rate of production of 35kbpd, a BC price of $75, a JOG 20% retained WI in the GBA fields, 330 days a year of production and OPEX of $15pb (latest estimate I saw was $10pb - there won't be any CAPEX because JOG will be fully carried) I got to:

35,000 x $60 (net) x 0.2 x 330 = $138.6m..........or £108.1m

The figure of £108.1m is the pre-tax profit per annum JOG would generate if/when the (relatively conservative) assumptions I have made above become "actual" rather than "projected". Tax of course is a negative, but many now believe the economically illiterate politicians who are doing their best to kill the UK's carbon energy industry stone dead will soon come to their senses when they realise that telling people that a lot of what they like buying and using will no longer be affordable as a result of their actions, is not a vote-winner; it is the opposite. By then, however, it seems likely to me that the price of oil & gas will have increased considerably. So it's entirely possible the $75pb BC price I've used in getting to the numbers presented above are too conservative.

It's all in the future and it all involves risk. But the risk diminishes the closer we get to measurable value, which I take to be on FDP approval, when JOG's 2C resoreces turn into reserves. The Company will then be in play. There are a few milestones that will mark progress along the way, the first of which seems likely to be further info on FPSO, which should come shortly.

GLAL - keep the faith. I'm certainly not letting any of my shares go at the wrong price

all jmo

dyor

£43, CHF. Isn't it obvious? :-)

Further info on FPSO candidate (from when it first came into use about 6 years ago).

https://www.offshore-mag.com/production/article/16800116/first-oil-flows-from-western-isles

......."I wonder if this could have anything to do with JOG?"............

........I think it could, Einbert............

dyor

..........the filter's busy today..............