Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Jollifant, that's acknowledged (though it might prove problematic for the 9 months the hedged volumes are 1.5 million therms). This has been true (for a given value of true) since George dropped his original estimate of 70% of production being hedged with a sidetrack down to 50%.

Of course if the sidetrack us unsuccessful, that then means ANGS share of revenue from the field drops to approx £350k per month (1.5 million therms x 0.45p x 51%).

JamesII, don't you understand the hedge either?

At best case and with a sidetrack doubling projected p;roduction, ANGS has effectively contractually committed to sell half of all produced gas at an average of 45p, so your profit forecast is just wildly off.

More nonsense.

IF a sidetrack is drilled successfully AND IF it doubles production to 3 million therms per month, that would deliver ANGS around £24 million of revenue (yes, revenue, not profit) in the 12 months from July 2022 to June 2023. And that presumes the field produces 1.5 million therms in June, prior to the hedge kicking in.

Do we REALLY have to go through this again and listen to all these ignorant or wilfully deceptive forecasts?

After George's comments in the love-in paid for inverview with LSE, ANGS itself has unsurprisingly felt the need to clarify this in its a very recent answer to an investor question. Here's what ANGS actually stated just the other day (and the text is up on the company website for all to see):-

"Assuming the side-track is successful, how much cashflow will be generated (including hedged production) in H2 2022?"

"The average hedged sales price is 43 pence/therm over the life of the hedge and the unhedged forward prices are presently not far off 300 pence/therm for unhedged sales in H2 2022. On the basis of a side track completed and online by mid August then H2 gross revenues (Angus share 51%) might be in the region of £24m which would ignore any benefit of unhedged production during June, potentially worth a further £4.5m at 300pence/therm. "

And there you have it from the horse's mouth. Providing the sidetrtack performs as hoped, ANGS expects £12 million of revenue in calendar July-Dec this year (51% of £24 million), plus maybe an extra £2.25 million if they can have a full month of production in June 22. As it happens, if everything goes to plan, ANGS would then benefit from nearer £13 million of revenue in H1 2023. A best case total of £25 million of revenue for ANGS from Saltfleetby then in its first 12-13 months of operation. Unarguable fact.

Again, this is revenue, not profit. But hey, such a result would be absolutely fine and dandy for ANGS and its investors. So... it remains all about the sidetrack being successful. That's crucial, because if it's not, Mercurial will be owed around £600k per month on swap contract/hedge shortfall from October and for the next 8 months following that.

Ignore the likes of Gideons/Sparrowhawk1 with their deliberately deceptive nonsense of £50 million annual revenue forecasts. As the company itself has had to make clear, those are just blatant lies.

@Jollifant, I did say "in excess of"... but yes, I do accept that's a very cautious appraisal. The more bullish could rationally argue for closer to 9p per share, should that sidetrack deliver at the levels George hopes for.

@Spicy that's a very good question.

First off, if one assumes the sidetrack is successful, does what George has projected and comes onto line by Oct 1st, then it's a given that the £12 million loan plus accrued interest gets paid off.

Assuming all that, the only encumbrance on ANGS in the future will be the capped peicing under the three year hedge (though of course, if there's a massive reverse in gas futures pricing and they fall below hedged pricing at some point - staggeringly unlikely, I agree - then the hedge would of course work to ANGS's benefit.

If the above all happens as is being assured by George, IMO I could see in excess of 5p per share. However, to me this remains a digital situation and it all hangs on that sidetrack being successful and delivering what George has promised. Because if it's unsuccessful, things would look extremely bleak indeed.

I'll happily answer that. Because I think it's ludicrous, offensive and just plain wrong for multi-ID know-nothing ramp squads to claim farcical revenue figures that are literally impossible for ANGS to achieve.

BV I'll happily agree with you that £25 million pa would deliver very well for investors. Yes, as is now very clear, it's all down to the sidetrack, but if successful, that £25 million will bring rewards for holders..

Why, Gideons/Sparrowhawk? Because others have bothered spending 5 mins with a calculator and workign out that £25 million per annum is indeed the realistic revenue figure from Saltfleetby for ANGS?

Not quite the £85 million that you and your cohorts have been busily assuring anyone mug enough to listen, is it?

The real stupidity from you and your ilk is that with £25m pa of revenue, ANGS would be just fine and dandy. But no, you have to exaggerate and lie...

Things are looking up. Round of applause for Jollifant. That is the second entirely realistic revenue prediction for ANGS that I've seen posted on here.

Yes it is still entirely dependent on a successful sidetrack being drilled and that doubling monthly production, but if that does happen, then that annual revenue figure is pretty much exactly what ANGS will achieve.

And if it does achieve that level of revenue, then it should be able to clear off the £12 million loan by year end (well, it would clear off its 1/2 and SEL the other 1/2).

It still remains all about the timing and level of full production and then the timing and level of extra production that an entirely necessary sidetrack has to produce.

Credit where it's due, Drinky. That caused a chuckle.

Finally! A realistic revenue projection (presuming the sidetrack succeeds). Well, it'll be closer to £25 million a year, but let's not quibble.

Tony, I agree. I cannot understand (well, actually I can) why others are posting such wildly over-inflated nonsense.

Again, the ramptastic squad show their virulent allergy to plain, clear, easily verifiable and indisputable facts. Hardly a surprise.

I'm looking forward to hearing the confirmation that full production has been achieved in 30 days' time, allowing the production of 1.5 million therms in the month of May, as the recent glut of new posters are trying to convince the unwary. I won't be holding my breath.

People would rather have input from the liars then, BV? Their continual falsehoods are just fine?

This is more nonsense.

With the hedge, 3 million therms in October would deliver around £2.35 million to ANGS at current gas pricing (and £2.35 million to SEL, but £4.3 million to Mercuria who sit on the other side of the hedge).

Which would be perfectly fine... so why continue to tell wildly overexaggerated porkies?

Those trying to maximise their short term trades by lying really are disgraceful. Here are the facts:-

George never said in his interview that Saltfleetby will produce 1.5 million therms by May. Not even he is that over-optimistic, because to get a full month of production (1.5 million therms, ANGS would have had to finish off the site, reach first gas and complete all its wet and dry testing within the next 30 days. That's simply not going to happen. The very best case is that ANGS gets to full production by early June.

As to the sidetrack? This has for months been planned for non-producing well SF07. George hopes this can be completed within August, that it will be successful and that it will double monthly production up to 3 million therms. As the company has previously clearly said, there are complex issues with drilling a sidetrack even from a non-producing well while the field is in full production. It is not impossible, but it is fraught with difficulties - so it remains to be seen whether this can be achieved while full production continues, whether the sidetrack will be successful and whether it does in fact double produceable volumes.

Despite all the ramptastic BS being spouted by those looking to make a quick buck, this remains brutally simple. ANGS has to produce at least 1.125 million therms a month from July 1st (George reckons it'll manage 1.5 million). But it then has to produce at least 1.75 million therms a month from Oct 1st - and that all hangs on a successful sidetrack being drilled without production having to be halted.

"95% chance that this will complete in what is now just next month"...

Next month is May... so all you're saying is that it's very likely that ANGS will get to first gas by May...

Why is this news? George has been saying May for first gas is nailed on.

And why only 95%? Your fellow rampers have spent most of this week yelling that, never mind about first gas, ANGS will be in full production from early May (not possible) and will produce 1.5 million therms of gas within May (also not possible).

It had better be 100% that ANGS reaches first gas by the end of May. Because that then gives them June to do their dry and wet testing in time to get to full production by Ju.y 1st in order to meet the start of the hedge, a thing which is quite literally crucial.

Next, George then has to start and complete a successful sidetrack drill to be able to meet the increased hedge quantities from Oct 1st, a thing which is equally quite literally crucial.

Sageman, you are more than welcome and I'm glad it proved useful.

You might also want to look at my opening post in the "Revenue from Saltfleetby over the next 15 months?" thread, which summarises some of the calculations surrounding production volumes, revenues and the hedge, because that also may prove of interest.

There are two types of posters on here - those concerned with the factual (which you and a few others obviously fall into) and those who just want to make stuff up. Exactly why the latter are so keen to do that is a matter for people to decide upon.

Urraca, being new here (like so many other posters), you're clearly not aware of my stance.

I want SFBY producing as much gas as possible as quickly as possible. In fact as I have said many times, my greatest irritation is that it wasn't brought back to production many many months ago.

There is a massive difference between the potential within Saltfleetby and the potential of that for ANGS. The two are very separate things. Gas from Saltfleetby will without doubt make a lot of money for someone - and the sooner, the better. The question remains who?

"PMSL" isn't a particularly good counter argument, Gideons. That is, unless you're 12 years old and in the playground.

Under the hedge, at current future gas pricing, Mercuria will be owed £44 million by ANGS and SEL between July 22 and June 23. That's the difference beween the value of the swap contracts on the fixed hedge volumes at the fixed hedge pricing over that period. And Mercuria is owed this, regardless of how much gas is got out of the ground during that period.

That's a cold, hard and easily verifiable fact - and not particularly laughter-inducing, I'd say.

I've told you my "agenda", Urraca. I'm one for facts.

Come what may, at current gas pricing (280p per therm), Mercuria is due £44 million from ANGS and SEL betwen Jun 22 and Jun 23, regardless of how much gas the field produces.