Member Info for Gerry65

Lol not taking any bets on how long you'll be around, but thought you might be back when I noticed the number of posts on VOD today.

There are many with a glass half full view on many shares that are around for years ( me included ).

Why do you think your appearances are so short lived ?

LC - welcome back to LSE - 45 posts on your first day back on the VOD bb.

How long are you expecting to remain this time.

Btw - have you worked out why you get closed down each time ?

Just done another dummy buy and got offered 0.839p

Looks like 0.81p ish to sell. So pretty much all buyers this morning are already under water.

Lol shedulike - guess you are right - about my post, I suppose being locked in and under water with another jam tomorrow r n s is much more tedious.

Peop!e are focussed on the ippc permit, what about the re stimulation permit ?

Not only that how long could it take for any future permits to come through for the opening up of any additional wells?

At the moment this is a loss making venture.

How many wells do you calculate will need to brought production for any company to produce a cash positive position here.

Also if depletion on wells runs consistent with what we have witnessed with well p g - 10, how long will each request for well received stimulation take in future ?

Gla

Sorry volatile day - opps

I see someone bought 1000000+ at 08.03 at 0.94p - very risky to trade early coordinator the open.

I have done 4 dummy buys at 0.875p in the last 5 mins.

Think it's going to be a voliate day.

Still take the view that if you are locked in then hold.

If you are out wait and see how the dust settles, after this latest " it will be very soon - really guys very soon" r n s.
Gla

Https://southwoodbusinesspark.co.uk

Another acquisition for the portfolio

Reso - a resort near Side - still got a few days left to relax and enjoy the sun.

Reso - thx for the reply, i had decided to leave out the net finance costs, within the 6 month period quoting only the loss from operating activities.

I guess there has been no debate or discussion as those on here with a glass half full view on AST are outnumbered by pi's with differing views or those hoping to recover their investment in AST.

I suspect that those with differing views can see where a debate may lead and are wisely staying clear.

I'll look in tomorrow to see if there is any response - to me as someone who has day traded this share I am looking at how the asset may actually get fully developed, in the future and what are the barriers. The timeframes on permits remain an issue to me.

I would imagine any remaining companies in the SR will wish to understand the present permitting situation and whether anything will change to improve the process moving forward.

Surely if AST is looking to achieve a T/O or a J/V then the break even revenue point from production is an important factor looking to the longer term. How many wells will be required in production in future to maintain a sustainable delivery to market with potential dep!etion rates based on the performance of p g - 10 ( AST must have considered it as potentially one of the best well to begin to production at this early stage ) is a key issue.

I suspect many on here are hoping for an r n s soon on perrmits followed by further news on the SR to escape and move on. As I am on the outside looking in I could buy at any time on news or sentiment if I see a short term profit, but the longer term development of the asset also interests me.

Anyway that's me done for this evening. Will look in tomorrow.

Gla.

Reso - a fair and balanced post ( yours at 15.01 ).

Ref your later post ( wed 15.52 ) I too noticed the failure of the poster to clarify that with you.

Clearly any balance from anyone with a glass half full view of AST is hounded by so me on this bb - it's always been my view that if one disagrees with a post one should challenge it or provide cogent argument to support ones views.

There are other options I guess - maybe why some threads get pulled. In truth one should consider all views - filtering or closing down threads leads to a blinkered view.

However there is a saying - " In the land of the blind the one eyed Man is king"

Have you any views on my post ( 13.21 )

Gla

Gino - I notice you haven't replied to the questions I posed to you in my post 09.44.

No problem you may not have read it yet.

Maybe others on this BB may wish to provide their opinions

These are the facts as i see them - despite the headstart with the £1.5m placing at the end of Oct 2017, AST production income has been unable to cover costs. The interims for the 6 months to the end of June 2018 show a loss from operating activities of ( £610m ).

The Armageddon the on the 6th Aug advised that with the cost cutting exercise income from the two wells "could" allow the company to continue trading until the end of the current year.

It would seem clear that AST will post a substantial loss for the full year. My question remains - what level of average monthly revenue would be required to create a break even position on an operational level, and based on the depletion levels seen with p g -10, how many wells would be required to create this revenue return.

Any parties remaining in the SR will surely have carried out these calculations. But the length of time it takes to get permits agreed must surely be a concern. If any additional wells that may be bought online in future require re stimulation in the same timeframes as p g - 10, permits will need to be submitted to ARSO on a regular basis.

Can anyone provide factual information to confirm that future re stimulation permitting requests will be dealt with more quickly that present. Haven't the existing re stimulation permit requests been ongoing since May 2017 if i am reading the 9th Aug r n s correctly ?

For this project to develop at any reasonable pace in the longer term, both further Funding and a speedy permitting process are required.

I can understand those pi's under water here focussing on the short term resolution of the exist permits, perhaps I anatomy to look at this project with a longer term outlook - this is aim after all.

Gla

Gino - I am not the one that stated to this b b that the Slovenians are losing out.

I have asked for data to justify the statement - not unreasonable Imv.

I may be unusual but I tend to base my investment decisions on facts, its just the way I operate.

I can only observe matters the same as everyone else.

I have not seen any rush by the Slovenians to help move this project forward, ARSO consider documents presented to them and make permitting decisions following due diligence.

Do you personally have any figures as to how many wells would need to be up and running to create a break even position on a financial basis with this project ?

Considering that p g- 10 must have looked one of the best options to get gas flowing initially, we now have an understanding of how quickly it has depleted, requiring re stimulation after what 8 - 10 months according to the r n s.

Can you give anyone any facts to indicate that future permitting requests for re stimulations will be dealt more quickly..

I am assuming permitting will be one of the areas that any company remaining in the SR, will be giving due consideration.

Gla

Stockdale - you posted a statement which you have no facts available to you to back up. At best it could!she considered an unsubstantiated ramp.

Please feel free to report me, for challenging you to back up your statement that you made to this board.

Or post factually - its entirety your choice

Gla

Stockdale - your insults demonstrate to me you posted that statement without factual data to back up your assertion.

If you don't have details of the present gas supply contract to the Slovenians from Russian oil how can you state that they Slovenians are missing out financially.

They have a secure reliable source of gas the moment.

You have provided no details if the terms of the deal , nor its timeframes., nor unit costs so I must treat all posts by you as hot air - sorry.

Again I ask you to consider my question - based on the depletion rates at well p g - 10, how many wells would you suggest would need be bought into production, to provide a sustainable and reliable source of gas to enable the Slovenians to reduce / amend its present safe gas contract with Russian gas.

To date the Slovenians have not shown any desire to move permitting forward at any speed that would suggest they have an urgent need for AST in the short-term.

They grant permits following due diligence, when they are satisfied and not before.

We know that the 2 wells bought into production, ladst year for a nmber of reasons have not covered costs, that, plus the shareholders vote to prevent further fund raising has bought, matters to a head.

Let's say for argument's sake that in the longer term 20 + operating wells are needed to optimise the field and allow for closedowns for re stimulation,whilst maintaining market delivery of sustainable gas that will require continual permitting applications, to allow re stimulation of each well in production, as and when required, how long has the present re stimulation permit been ongoing ?

Gla

Stockdale - you were suggesting earlier this morning that the Slovenians were missing out, in receiving gas from AST. You seemed so confident in your statement made to other pii's on this board that I assumed that you had figures and data to back up your statement.

Are you now infering that you don't have any factual data ?

You raised this point stating that the Slovenians are missing out, i merely challenged you to provide facts to justify your statement.

Now you are saying that, any benefits to the Slovenians is irrelevant !

Why have you changed your mind - this morning it clearly seemed important enough for you to post your view on this BB - hopefully you were merely looking to make a positive slant, and not looking to mis lead people with claims you cannot back up.

I await your detailed response or your acknowledgement that you have no actual supporting evidence to back up your claim.

At the moment I am on holiday in Turkey - lovely resort but intermittent internet, so I'll aim to sign in later for your response.

Gerry

Gla

Stockdale - re your comments regarding the cost to the Slovenians imported Russian gas - do you have specific figures as to the present contract with Russian gas supply.

In particular the actual unit costs, in addition the term of present contract for supply. Also whether there are any minimum / maximum figures built into the contract.

How much gas are the Slovenians importing, how much could Ast deliver following a
Processing plant build ?

What % of Slovenia's annual requirements could AST deliver ?

Bearing in mind the present depletion levels seen in p g - 10, how many wells would you calculate would need to be up and running to maintain a consistent regular supply to the Slovenians to encourage them to reduce or amend their present Russian gas contracts ?

Could you provide you calculations to confirm how much cheaper gas supplied by AST would be in comparison to their present deal.

Thanking you in anticipation.

nokesa - don't get me wrong though i have a soft spot for DEB and use the two stores local to me.

would love to see it beat the institutional shorters, think they are roughly at 11.1% at the moment.

i remember holding TLW through it's dark times and buying on the dips, to bring down my average, whilst ODEY & co were trying to kill it. think it got shorted up to 15.5% during the tough times, but it now looks much more risy over there with the shorters down to 2%.

i still hold TLW, and am now sitting on a healthy paper profit.

hopefully DEB can go the same way, everyone loves a recovery story,lets see how it pans out.

gla

noksea - yes correct - that's the long and short of it.

Rdajee - sorry for the misspelling of your name - bloody predictive text !

Framed - thanks for the link.

I see what they have done. They have separately listed goodwill at 820m

So goodwill at 820m plus the remaining intangibles at £172m brings the total to the £991m figure

So regrettably as goodwill is an intangible asset, that does mean the total intangible assets are quoted at £991m Inthe 2917 accounts.

Not sure what realistic value can be placed on these figures, but I personally would treat the net asset figure quoted in last year's accounts with a deal of caution.

Be interesting to review the 2018 finals.

Am grateful for the link, very helpful - thx again.

Gla