Member Info for Gerry65

Ninvestor - i would suspect that at the time the YA loan was agreed, both UKOG and YA had high hopes for BB, The outcome was not what they expected, and everyone is on the back foot, though YA have pretty much managed to get out their conversions in line with the �3m a quarter, deal to date I know some over on the advan board are raising concerns about administration, but its a much more punchy bulition board than this one - and views seems to be more polarized. I would fully expect that as this year has moved forward YA have been kept in the loop. The timing of the funding its structure and why its needed at this moment in time, will hopefully be clarified, this coming week. I hope that the deal can be done- there is speculation regarding appetite, in the market for the deal, but i know nothing on that. So any comment is just speculation. GLA

Hi ninetails - just picked your post from last night re jbg's post at 15.00 yesterday. My first thought is that ukog have not committed or communicated on the actual amount required - the �5m figure may well be right or they could need more. Ukog placed last year in may for �6.5m when three months earlier in the Feb 2017 finals r n s the bod statement on ongoing funding advised they had cash to cover 12 months through to Feb 2018. Those that believe the bod statements this time round - funded through to year end do so at their own peril. I guess I must have driven many to dispair with my posts on cash burn, I know I get a lot of flack, but but these companies burn through cash at an alarming rate - it's just the way it is - it's a costly business. I have urged all to wait and see the interims report out at June end, to see cash in the coffers. The early draw down of the second tranche of cash from YA at the end of Dec 2017 was the first red light for me. We don't know the financial strength of each of the consortium members, maybe the oga has concerns, I have posted my thoughts on this yesterday. What seems to be clear is that the oga are looking to tighten financial requirements going forward. I would have thought the remainder of the YA loan would be dealt with as part of new funding, kiv we did not see YA drop another conversion into the higher trading volumes on Fri. It could be a placing of a re jig. I believe the probs at BB followed by the delays in getting the EWT at HH have forced the bod's hands, I had anticipated work to have started at HH in May giving ukog the chance to get an initial positive r n s out on progress to lift sentiment followed by a call for more funds. I am not surprised that funding is in the offering less than 3 weeks before the interims are out. We are all speculating at he moment, Fridays r n s was clearly a delaying tactic forced on the bod by the leak to the media. SS must come clean asao - pi's s deserve respect. ( There may be ongoing delicate negotiations info accept ). Any buying or topping up before the full facts are out is to me a pure gamble. But each to their own - this is aim ! Gla.

Penguins - yep - looked up existing OGA requirements ref financial capability, a little while back following a discussion with Eddie on here. Whats your take on the new OGA consultation document.

JBG - agree the YA debt will probably have to be dealt with as part of any re financing deal. That's from both UKOG's and YA's perspective. It could be a placement to lift them out plus additional funds, or it could be a re jig - Another point - the �5m figure is only media speculation - UKOG may need more they haven't actually commented or committed on a figure ! Who knows ! - the last R N S was less than helpful in truth - only a delaying tactic - which has just led to more speculation and uncertainty. I took a look at the full 29 page OGA consultation report last night ( briefly ) and have downloaded it to review further. At first glance it looks like the OGA wants to tighten up on funding requirements, moving forward, it seems have some concerns and wishes to ensure future approved projects get to end game throughout the UK. It will clearly understand that most of the aim explorers, require ongoing shareholder support, due to lack of revenues, whilst in the early stages of development. Guess all will become clear fairly soon. GLA.

Another observation - no YAnew conversion into the large volumes of trade yesterday. As far as I can tell. Is that because they believe their outstanding debt is in the process of being up lifted by new potential outside funding ? Or perhaps that they are in new negotiations with UKOG to re jig the present loan borrowing? Like everyone - just speculation any thoughts anyone.

Boyzee - have to agree with your take on the Final accounts ( your post 11.20 ) We will know more regarding the latest funding in due course, surely an R N S on Monday - PI's deserve clarity. I have read the various speculative possible reasons for more funding at this time, i guess most are possible. Surely though not for more spending sprees on additional licences at this time, focus must be on HH. Possible that the OGA consultation report, has determined greater funding ? Or is there a weak link in the consortium that requires a UKOG buy out ? Or is it that UKOG is running on fumes ? Those that blindly believe end of year ongoing financial statements from these" small oilers" need to read the wording carefully. KIV the previous statement put out last year - R N S Final Results dated 28th February 2017 - words to the effect that at that time UKOG was funded through to End Feb 2018. Then less than three months later on 19th May 2017 we had the �6.5M placing. All for good reasons of course. Perhaps its a case of same old same old here - don't forget we are only 21 days away from reporting of cash in bank in the Interims due out 30th June.

Heid - cheers - to be honest like everyone at the moment it's a guessing game, until we get an r n s. ( Or something gets leaked to the media ). Think ukog need to be as open and honest as they can be with pi's ( excepting that the bod are probably in the middle of sensitive negotiations ). Any announcement re additional finance need to come from an early r n s. Today's r n s - responding to media speculation didn't look good - PR is not this company's strong point.

Heid - shall look forward to Eddie's detailed appraisal. Would imagine he has already digested the consultation report - he's usually on top of the detail when it comes to planning and approvals. Will check in over the weekend, for me it's beers down my local this eve. Looks like it might be an interesting weekend on here btw. Gla

Nonlingu - you are probably right, it's been a bit of a bun fight on here today. The consultation report may well be the reason for the delay in approval. But at 29 pages long I suspect few will have the attention span to read it in detail. Gla.

Newboy / nomlungu : Ref the OGA's recent financial guidance consulation dated 1st June, on a licensee's financial capability. That is some read - 29 pages. Have had a glance through it, too early for me to make any real conclusions. But it could explain much though. Not doubt as the weekend progresses more and more will take a look at it and post their views on here. Gla

Red - Its deffo a guessing game till the full EWT flow rates, depletion expectations, water cut figures are published. You are right in what you say about the Portland flow. My concern is that the 1680 figure has been used by some on here, to mislead, i would expect / hope for decent figures, the 2016 EWT though limited, was promising. I have continually suggested it would be wise to wait for actual flow rate figures rather than as many have on here plucked figures out of the air to suit their agenda. Another point - UKOG have roughly a 1/3 stake in HH - therefore only 1/3 costs of overall EWT and as things stand 1/3 of actual oil that flows. As things stand in the consortium at present. Not sure if the present structure of the consortium will change over time though.

Red btw: Avington had 600 bopd at EWT with flows at 500 bopd when production commenced, then 2 years later it was down to 100 bopd, its now shutdown. Horndean peaked at 670 bopd, some years later it produces a steady 140 bopd, for its 4 production wells. Hopefully HH will prove to be a totally different beast, after all its really has to be for UKOG doesn't it.

Red - two more crossing posts - again we are in agreement lol

Hi Red - looks like our posts crossed and we seem to be fundamentally agreement. Cheers buddy.

Red - think you fully understand where i am coming from - i know exactly how long each zone flowed for, so do you. What i can't allow is mis information re the 1680 barrels per day flow. Its a lovely head line figure though isn't it. Surely the whole point of the potential up and coming EWT is to try and prove up the previous flow rates over longer periods, to demonstrate commercial oil at HH.

Red - you yet again misunderstand me but hey ho Good luck Buddy.

RED h- extract from the 21st March 2016 RNS: " High quality Brent Crude produced: light, sweet oil (40 degrees API in Kimmeridge, 35-37 degrees API in Portland) 1,940 barrels delivered to the Esso Fawley refinery" If it flowed at 1680 bopd for days and days on end back then- Where did all the oil go !!

Newboy - i have raised this many times - but the disciples will not have it - FACT - 1940 barrels got to market in total from the previous EWT, in 2016. People forget that in an EWT there are many stages - including rig set up / drilling / evaluations / time to allow pressure build up / work overs / clean up etc. I can't change that - neither can you, being rude won't change it either buddy !

Red / Newboy How many barrels of oil flowed from HH last time round in total ? - facts only please.

Red - read the final RNS - 1940 barrels got to market, from the whole of the testing. As i say stats and stats - we don't want people believing that it flow for days on end at 1680, back in 2016 do we - unless we have an agenda !! GLA.