We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Pretty much as expected. Existing debts paid off, with the exception of £2.88 million remaining as owed to PF, hence the remaining available balance being £5.9m rather than £3m.
And again as expected, it is indeed a 5 year amortising loan ( with no payments required in year one), so the overall interest payable will be in the region of £7.9m over the complete term.
And the 8% royalty on all SFBY production in perpetuity but NB only from EXISTING wells persists. At current production rates/pricing, that equates to around £1m per annum of outlay on an ongoing basis.
Details on the revised hedges/new offtake agreement aren't particularly clear at this stage.
It'll be interesting to see what the market makes of this.
Okay, but if this were true and this "enhanced payment" was merely "interest" on the overall payment for the DaaP and it's been agreed and paid over, why not announce a combined total of c. $230 million for the DaaP?
Hang on just a second...
EXHIBIT A.
23rd November 2022
The Company is delighted to confirm that the combined value of its DaaP sale and licensing deal transactions is US$275million.
As of today’s date, there are 988,223,763 shares in issue.
EXHIBIT B
2nd November 2023
Further to the update of 20 October 2023, the Company reconfirms that there are two separate deals. The first is for its licensing agreement and the second will consist of proceeds from the DaaP sale. The Company is pleased to herewith confirm details for the distribution of the first payment tranche to shareholders for its $50m licensing agreement.
EXHIBIT C
11th January 2024
The Company is pleased to confirm that shareholders will receive 4.8 US dollar cents per share, after costs being an income from the distribution of licensing money.
EXHIBIT D
21st February 2024
The company is pleased to announce that the enhanced payment for the DaaP of circa $4.5 million has been approved by the buyer.
So... the overall deal for both the licensing sale and the DaaP sale was allegedly going to total $275 million dollars (as per Exhibit A above).
The licensing sale part was allegedly worth $50 million (as per Exhibits B and C above... though Exhibit C effectively states eye-watering costs of $2 million.
Therefore, if Exhibit A were true, the value of the DaaP part of the sale had to be in the region of $225 million...
...except as Exhibit D above (today's update) states, it's only apparently worth c. $4.5 million... or less than half a cent extra per share.
What's with that?
(I suspect the problem - as with all habitual porky pie spinners - is that they invariably forget to take account of the contents of all the porkies they've spouted to date).
Interesting question, SB. Mind you, it presumes that certain individuals are genuine investors, rather than company mouthpieces...
Petebo, you say "Met a few of them in London for beers at least 3 times Liam, Mr Selfridge and Dreamboatwarrier were genuine investors and conned like the rest of us."
You're sadly wrong about one of those. I've kept an eye on CTAG for a long time (as have others). As has already been posted in this thread, MrSelfridge set up a company with AberdeenMan (called Knightsbridge something or other, from memory), whose sole purpose was to "aid pre-revenue companies in gaining investment", (i.e. ramping the living bejaysus out of AIM dogs).
This was discovered by eagle-eyed sleuths about a week after the company had been incorporated (with both MrS and AbMan as the two named directors) and it was promptly and equally rapidly disbanded.
Someone said that the CTAG fiasco should be made into a TV show. I agree... I've always said that, such have been the murkiest of murky twists and turns, this should be made into an investigative documentary which highlights the all too typical shenanigans and hustles run on AIM (and which also would inevitably underline how utterly useless the FCA is as any sort of PI-protecting and rule/law-upholding regulatory body).
Simon, I suppose that's fair enough - though I'd very firmly say that your two unknowns - namely, the assumption of a mysterious "major storage partner" and a "huge revenue from Balcombe" (!) - are a whole lot more nebulous than the two I listed, which should become known knowns on Friday.
What I've actually done is, having watched the company's share price reduce by over 96% from 11.5p down to 0.4p over the last 5 years, to look for reasons why. It helps with understanding reality - perhaps you should try it one day?
BV for the record, I've never asked for anyone's post to be deleted. I'd rather all posts stayed live and visible, because readers can then easily see the type and nature of those posting. People need to own their own words.
I will say this though - LSE only deletes posts that are abusive or otherwise disruptive. So, perhaps if those having posts repeatedly deleted by admin based their comments on evidence rather than playground insult, they wouldn't get removed.
Maddog, the interest rate on the prospective £20m refinancing loan is indeed materially lower than the interest rates on either the original £12m Mercuria loan or the two junior £3m and £6m loans.
However, before anyone breaks out the champagne, what is not yet clear is:-
a) the shape and size of the "fixed offtake agreement" that will replace the current hedge arrangement - that's also going to limit ANGS's ability to benefit from market-value revenue from produced gas sales... but we don't yet know to what extent.
and
b) what happens to Mercuria's 8% royalty in perpetuity on all SFBY gross field revenues - is that going to remain in place, and if not, what is it going to cost to get out of this existing contractually enshrined term?
So we need to see the detail underpinning the replacement financing, which hopefully should now be concluded (finally) by this Friday. It'd be hard to imagine Richard Herbert having to ask for a fourth extension on the second junior loan, owing to his again missing yet more self-set deadlines.
They've already stated it'll be a 5 year loan at an annual interet rate of SONIA + 8%. Presuming that's an accurate statement, such a loan would be subject to approx £7.9 million of interest over its 5 year term.
Errr.
I don't think anyone's been "caught out" at the news that the already 7 week late refinancing deal apparently needs a further week (presumably at an additional cost of £15k for having to extend the £6m second junior loan for the third time). Similarly, I really don't see how Richard Herbert deserves praise for missing self-set milestones (in what has to be said is very traditional ANGS style).
I do wonder why it's been so obviously tricky for ANGS to get this over the line?
However, if the £20m refinancing is announced by Friday, at least we'll all get made aware of the detailed terms - because those are just a tad important.
Although there's no requirement to pay anything back in year one, It's still a a 5 year amortising loan at c. 14%. Year one still attracts interest.
There'll be a total of £7.9 million to pay back in interest, plus of course the £20 million principal.
Actually, it'd be £465k per month averaged over the full 5 years (but bear in mind there's be nothing to pay in year one allegedly, so the monthly payments for years two to five would be at least £582k).
The current average isn't 0.59p, because of the existing hedge.It's sub 0.5p per therm at current production levels and current gas pricing. Again at current production levels and current gas pricing, this would drop down to sub 0.42p per therm between Apr 24 and Sep 24.
However, that all becomes moot if/when the replacement financing gets agreed. The existing hedge will allegedly be replaced by "fixed offtake pricing" - and we currently have no idea what that fixed pricing will be, nor for what monthly volume. We also don't know what becomes of the 8% royalty on gross field revenues in perpetuity that Mercuria will be owed, once its original £12 million loan is fully paid off.
Nobody can do any detailed forward financial modelling until the terms of the refinancing are made known.
Begs the question why ANGS so badly needs to borrow £20 million, which according to its own RNS it specifically needs to pay off the £17 million of debt it has already incurred.
For the record, becoming bored by anyone's repeated and arrant stupidity and ignorance isn't "being stumped for an answer". I'm not sure why you'd even need an answer, since the issue is fully covered via RNSes... a thing which any genuine holder concerned with actual realities would know.
Here - let me help. As stated by ANGS via RNS on 19th Jan...
"The Company has been granted an extension to the existing £6m Subordinated Debt Facility (the "Bridge Loan"), which is due to mature on 19th January 2024, in order to allow time for completing documentation and drawdown under the proposed facility with Trafigura. Accordingly, Aleph Finance Limited has agreed to an extension of the Bridge Loan for one month until 19th February 2024, for a fee of 1%, which is proportionate to the fee paid for the previous extension of the loan in October 2023."
The bridge loan referred to is the 2nd junior loan for £6 million taken out for three months on 14th July 2023 at an interest rate of SONIA + 15% (which we'll generously call 20% total). That detail was in the 21st July RNS.
This 2nd junior loan was extended for a further 3 months as per the RNS of 28th September, and then again by 30 days as per the RNS of 19th Jan quoted above. As such, and as of right now it has already attracted interest of £660k minimum, together with other arrangement fees and roll fees (as per the RNS of Jul 21st last year, roll fees are 3%, so min £180k).
This entire amount totalling somewhere just shy of £7 million is currently fully repayable on Monday. If the lender agrees, if may be extendable for a further 30 days (for further fees, of course).
As clearly already stated, the extra £60k would be immaterial. The c. £7m due for full payment on Monday, unless another extension is granted or the global refinancing kicks in then is not immaterial.
Looks like I've gained an obsessional stalker...
I have zero concern, other than believing that it is more useful to post immediately verifiable facts rather than inane and evidence- free fairytales.
As to "watching Angus transform in front of my eyes"? I've certainly done that. I've watched the company's share price "transform" (or more accurately, decline) from 2.72p 15 months ago to 0.375p today.
That's an over 86% drop in value over that period... yep, pretty transformational.
The additional £60k is not particularly meaningful... the £7m that - currently at least - needs fully repaying on Monday certainly is.
As to all this alleged free cash that cheerleaders assure ANGS is swimming in, less than 5 months ago, ANGS was forced to repay the first junior loan (half the size of the remaining one) in confetti.
And that was done a) despite the BoD having stated that it had taken out that loan instead of diluting shareholders and b) the confetti rate used was 33% less than the contractually enshrined 1p floor price.
So ANGS really doesn't seem to be swimming in free cash, does it? Which is pretty much why it's desperately trying to borrow £20 million.
If the apparently highly elusive global refinancing package is not concluded by Monday the 19th Feb, ANGS is going to have to get yet another extension on the 2nd junior loan.
Currently as things stand right now, the last extension granted runs out on Monday, at which point ANGS will immediately have to pay back Aleph c. £7 million.
I expect there'll be an RNS on Monday confirming yet another month-long extension at a cost of a further £60k to the company.