Member Info for drinky01

No one’s forgotten the suspension you silly sausage.

That’s what us as investors are trying plan for. When it come out of suspension what do you think the dilution will be and how will the market take it?

You are right of course.

No one listens to them but you have to wade through the crap to see what other people’s thoughts or research are. But oh no we have old sad sack here regurgitating absolute tosh that is no use to anyone. I’ll block the sad entity.

Ah, the classic “it’s all over, pack it up” routine — delivered with absolute conviction and zero substance. Impressive. If you’re so certain it’s done, I’m not quite sure why you’re still here repeating yourself. Most people who’ve genuinely moved on don’t hang around trying to convince others to do the same. Reality will reveal itself, as you say — but constantly announcing that like you’ve got some inside track just makes it look like you’re trying to reassure yourself more than anyone else. Anyway, feel free to switch off. Some of us are perfectly capable of making our own decisions without the running commentary.

I really can’t understand why people are posting such negative drivel. It’s like the wife buggered off and you invested back here when it was much higher and you got stung and now find it impossible to let investors who have a chance of regaining some of the investment back intolerable. I think there is a good chance I know who you are to be fair. But you just sound like someone that has given up on life.

I’m not sure they want the money sooner rather than later. After all that’s how they make money. The question is what will the dilution be? 40-60%?

Around 12-13 million I believe. I’d say that’s why the hedge is around that?

More like 155

I think the most important thing is to keep the volume consistent at this level for a decent period of time and with elevated prices. Not necessarily @ 300 but even between 120-150.

The Ukraine conflict shifted the base gas price higher. This may just stay above 100?

I’ve read that post and, bluntly, it’s mixing a few facts with a lot of speculation.

First, saying Trafigura “doesn’t care about shareholders” is obvious but not insightful. In any restructuring the secured lender sits above equity. That’s how corporate finance works everywhere. It doesn’t automatically mean they will wipe the company out if the asset is producing and generating cash.

Second, the idea that Trafigura can just “lift Saltfleetby out of Angus” and walk away with the field is massively oversimplified. Even if they hold security, transferring a producing gas field is not like repossessing a car. Licence transfers need regulatory approval, environmental liabilities must be addressed, and operatorship and transport agreements need to be reassigned. It’s a legal and regulatory process, not something they just do overnight.

Third, pointing to Aleph Saltfleetby existing as proof that the asset will be moved there is a stretch. Lots of financing structures create subsidiary vehicles around assets. That alone doesn’t mean the lender is about to strip the field out.

Fourth, the claim that Angus would be left with all the liabilities while Trafigura walks away with a clean asset ignores how regulators work. Decommissioning obligations and licence responsibilities don’t just disappear because a lender wants them to.

The management resignation argument is also weak. Leadership turnover during a restructuring is common. Boards change when lenders want different oversight or when negotiations are ongoing. Treating that as proof a creditor takeover is imminent is reading a lot into something that happens regularly in distressed companies.

The biggest flaw in the post is that it ignores the actual economics. Based on the grid data people have been tracking, Saltfleetby is currently producing roughly 68k–71k therms per day. With gas prices around £1.20–£1.30 per therm, that’s roughly £80k–£90k of revenue per day. A producing asset generating steady cash flow is normally far more valuable kept operating than seized and carved out of the company.

Historically, when small energy companies get into this situation the more common outcome is restructuring: debt terms are reset, lenders may take some equity or warrants, existing shareholders are diluted, and the company eventually relists with a cleaner balance sheet.

The scenario in that post — Trafigura stripping the asset and leaving Angus as a shell — is possible, but it requires negotiations to completely fail and lenders to believe they recover more value that way. When the asset is still producing and generating cash, that’s usually not the first option lenders pursue.

So the post isn’t completely wrong, but it’s presenting the most extreme outcome as if it’s the obvious one, and skipping over the regulatory hurdles and economic incentives that make restructuring a much more common path.

02/02/2026 – 39,200

03/02/2026 – 38,600

04/02/2026 – 39,200

05/02/2026 – 38,900

06/02/2026 – 38,300

07/02/2026 – 36,000

08/02/2026 – 39,800

09/02/2026 – 39,700

10/02/2026 – 39,800

11/02/2026 – 60,100

12/02/2026 – 66,700

13/02/2026 – 70,200

14/02/2026 – 69,600

15/02/2026 – 70,100

16/02/2026 – 70,600

17/02/2026 – 70,400

18/02/2026 – 70,300

19/02/2026 – 70,500

20/02/2026 – 68,800

21/02/2026 – 69,600

22/02/2026 – 69,400

23/02/2026 – 68,500

24/02/2026 – 64,400

25/02/2026 – 69,600

26/02/2026 – 69,500

27/02/2026 – 67,100

28/02/2026 – 69,400

01/03/2026 – 68,000

02/03/2026 – 69,300

03/03/2026 – 49,900

04/03/2026 – 71,000

05/03/2026 – 70,900

Summary

Early February production averaged about 38k–40k therms/day.

From mid-February onward production stabilised around 68k–71k therms/day, roughly a 75–80% increase after the workovers.

No your numbers were incorrect.

Looks broadly right. But numbers and a play on words are 2 separate things.

Gas price 135

On 3 March 2026 the National Gas data for the Theddlethorpe entry point (Saltfleetby) showed system entry energy of 2,081,111 kWh.

That level corresponds broadly to around 6–7 mmscfd of gas production.

Like you say I’d make sure you are feeding it neutral factual information. You post you I’ll post me. Ok !!

I ran your Ai and it said you had Over exaggerated many of the points.

A rough probability view of the possible outcomes

Successful restructuring and relisting with a modest re-rating 40–50%

but with heavy dilution or a weak market reaction: 25–30%

Long suspension with relisting happening much later: 10–15%

Delisting or administration: 10–20%

I checked the UK National Gas grid data for Saltfleetby (Angus Energy’s field). On Gas Day 1 March 2026 it shows 2,030,000 kWh flowing into the grid, which converts to about 69,300 therms per day, or roughly 7 mmscfd.

Trafigura probably doesn’t want Angus to go bankrupt. If the company went into administration, the Saltfleetby gas field would likely be sold cheaply and they might only recover £10–15m of the £29m owed. Probably 33 million now? The field is already producing and connected to the UK gas grid, which makes it a valuable asset.

If gas prices stay around 130–140p, the field could generate roughly £12–15m a year in cash flow, meaning the debt could realistically be repaid over a few years. Because of that, lenders often prefer to restructure loans or convert some debt into equity rather than force insolvency, since keeping the field producing gives them the best chance of getting their money back.

Hello Pal

I think it’s positive!