Member Info for HeadInTheSand

By the way, RT003 states "Angus could be producing 2.9 Million therms by end of June..."

Err, absolutely not. Not even ANGS has claimed it can start and complete a successful sidetrack within 4 weeks. The estimated possible production out of the field for June is stated by the company as being 1.5 million therms, and even then, only if it starts full production on June 1st.... in 15 days' time.

It is currently "hoping" that any drilled sidetrack - if successful - might kick in by some time in August.

But hey, never let the truth get in the way of a ramp, right?

It's not even yet confirmed whether it can attempt a drill without suspending production.

Again, any rise (or fall) in gas pricing is literally utterly irrelevant to ANGS unless it manages to produce more than the quantities hedged for the next three years.

Average Dave, your calcs sound pretty accurate.

It's really easy to work things out.

The amounts hedged (by monthly therms) and the fixed pricing for such are publicly viewable on p 49 of the Oct 26th 2021 valuation report on the ANGS website here:- https://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Angus-Energy-Saltfleetby-Reserves-Valuation-Report.pdf

Latest future gas pricing by month is available updated on a live basis here:- https://www.barchart.com/futures/quotes/NF*0/futures-prices

It's 2 mins work to knock up a spreadsheet showing what ANGS and SEL are left with in terms of gross revenue, depending on the amount of therms produced per month.

If the field only produces 1.5 million therms a month, then ANGS and SEL are left to share c. £6.6 million of gross revenue between them in the year to end June 2023. Clearly, that's not going to cover the c. £14 million of loan plus interest.

Speaking of fibs or not (or if you're being generous, possible continued wild over-optimism)...

Just 15 days until George's most recent assurance that Saltfleetby will have started full production.

I wonder if he'll finally get a projection right? Not long to wait to see either way...

And no, not even George in his most wildly optimistic moments has ever mentioned 5 million monthly therms as a possible production level. 3 million therms absolute max - and in fact that's all the equipment on site could handle.

I see tradedesk is attempting to get more misleading by the day...

As George said, debt being cleared by year end is absolutely conditional upon there being a successful sidetrack. Strange that you should fail to acknowledge that vital condition?

Average Dave, I think you're mixing up mmscfd with therms. The hope from the existing production wells was stated at 5 mmscfd which roughly equals 1.5 million therms a month. As gas is more normally priced in therms, that's the more useful metric to use.

Tradedesk states:-

"The 1.5m therms from the side track is completely unhedged from start to finish"
True, but only provided that the field produces 1.5 million therms from existing wells and that the sidetrack is successful and that the sidetrack doubles monthly production.

"....theres a June/July side track for that, that production could be on stream from August."
See above. The sidetrack needs to be successful. As for timings of the attempt, an answer is awaited from ANGS to the recent IQ as to whether it has come up with a way to drill a sidetrack without suspending production.

"The initial 1.5m therms is unhedged for the whole of June and then hedged for three years."
Any production in June is unhedged, true. 1.5 million therms is the hoped-for production level over a full month. 15 days to go before June 1st.

"...the debt will be settled in yr 1. "
It simply cannot be, without a successful sidetrack. There's not enough gross revenue left to ANGS and SEL after the hedge at a total of 1.5 million therms a month total to pay off £14 million in a year. They only get gross revenue of c £6.6 million between them in the 12 months to end Jun 23, unless production is increased past that 1.5 million therm monthly level.

It'd be a tad tricky to disagree with that, because it's not an opinion - it's basic maths.

If ANGS only produces 1.5 million therms per month ongoing, the price of gas over the next three years is literally entirely irrelevant (well, literally entirely irrelevant to ANGS and SEL anyway - but not to Mercuria).

Why? Because the effective sale price of the first 1.5 million monthly therms is already set from July 22 and for the following 35 months after that.

And the gross revenue left after the hedge (which would be c. £24 million) from those first 1.5 million therms per month would seem to be insufficient to cover debt plus interest repayment (say £14 million) and 3 years of field op costs (shall we be very optimistic and say £1 million per annum?). That would then leave £11 million, so £5.5 million each for ANGS and SEL).

... and then you've got ANGS's own requirement to repay the £1.4 million CLN repayment due next year (so, £4.1 million left), plus its own three years of G&A costs... and don't forget the 8% revenue over-ride once the loan is mostly paid off.

For ANGS (and NB not the field) it really does all hang on the success of the yet to be attempted sidetrack.

Also it would be only logical to work out what revenues ANGS and SEL are left to share, if the field only produces 1.5 million therms a month ongoing.

Clue: it's not very much at all. Perhaps best not to count 3 million therms a month chickens before they're hatched...

BV, you don't think that possibly - just possibly, mind - one of the ramptastic squad decided they could mislead as usual and so copied WG's moniker for use next door on AD?FN?

Please...

Gideons/SparrowHawk, it's not difficult.

If ANGS cannot meet any part of the three year hedged volumes during its 36 month term, elevatyed gas prices are bad for the company.

If ANGS can produce in excess of the three year hedged volumes during it 36 month term, elevated gas prices are good for the company.

Rising gas prices merely increase the risk/reward in equal measure.

It certainly means that what Mercuria is owed by ANGS and SEL in Jul, Aug and Sep this year has gone up to £2.0 million, £2.3 million and £2.65 million respectively.

I imagine they're delighted.

I notice that, instead of George's much parroted "full production by June 1st assurance", the ramptastic squad is now adding wiggle room like "early June" and "first week, give or take". Not a surprise.

However, irrelevant of his Lordship's permanently rose-tinteds, ANGS has until July 1st as a drop-dead date. Mercuria is owed c. £1.7 million for that month alone due to the hedge, regardless of the volume of gas that does or doesn't get produced.

"Listen to the recent interview"...

That'd be the LSE-hosted one where George stated that "shareholders could expect 1.5 million therms of production from May"? BZZZZT - wrong.

Or the equally recent statement where George claimed that "1.5 million therms of gas in June would equal £7.2 million of revenue"? BZZZZT - wrong, and by a mile. Try £2.52 million.

He's not going to make it onto University Challenge, is he?

A masterful and concise appraisal Oktane. I think we're still waiting on the Joule Thomson skid - and then of course plumbing and wiring everything together before conducting dry/wet testing and getting sign-off from the regulatory powers that be.

Although I doubt there's now any chance of hitting the promised June 1st full production date (and suspect George already knows that for sure), I think there is a fair chance of the company meeting the drop-dead July 1st date.

The more important questions to me are:- how much production will the two producing wells output? And (directly related), will the sidetrack be successful by its own Oct 1st drop-dead date?

Still waiting on a clear answer from ANGS to the IQ on whether it's yet found a permissible way to attempt a sidetrack drill without having to halt production. That's pretty damn important to know too.

Given that there is no update on progress towards George's latest promised full-blown production date (now just 19 days away) and given that the only certainty is that ANGS and SEL owe Mercuria c. £1.7 million in July (and Aug and Sep and so on), regardless of how much or how little gas the field may produce, a little concern at ANGS's radio silence is more than justified.

What a bizarre comment from Gideons? Yanis is referring to matters of clear fact, nothing more (namely the lack of promised updates showing progress towards the latest promised outcome date).

What's also clear is that Gideons believes that his own posting of endless, misleading and utterly ramptastic BS on ANGS can "do something for the SP". Which is both crushingly naive and also explains a lot.

Gideons as you know, the possibility of selling the asset has nothing to do with progressing the asset.

360, very true. July 1st is the drop dead date. Even so and as always, the company is exhibiting its typical lack of transparency by failing to produce evidence showing that it can and will meet its latest set of much revised timescales.

There is literally nothing regulatory that would prevent ANGS from posting updates - Twitter pix or otherwise - about progress at Saltfleetby. Gideons' bizarre claim that ANGS has been ordered into radio silence by its Nomad is a simply farcical and increasingly desperate attempt to explain away the lack of updates.

Occam's razor applies here obviously- the simplest solution is by far the most likely. George doesn't have any further meaningful progress to show, so he's not showing any.

After all, ANGS must know that for obvious reasons it has a very poor reputation for credibility, so if it had any further progress-demonstrating evidence, it would publicise this immediately. One really hopes this isn't a reprise of a Brockham style last minute dropping of a bombshell - the company does have form for not releasing bad news until the very last possible second...

19 days until George's promised start of full-blown production... we'll see soon enough.

The silence of Radio ANGS is a little surprising, no? I'd have thought George would be publishing a constant stream of Twitter pix to show that for once and at last he might meet a self-set deadline, rather than leaving it until the last minute to say that things have been delayed again.

20 calendar days to go until his Lordship has assured anyone who still prepared to listen that Saltfleetby will be in full production... when's the rest of the kit arriving?