The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
Only two???
A new low for Ocelot... doubleteaming with Adrian Mk 34,276 in the ongoing attempts to polish the unpolishable.
"...no more deramping angles left..."
You're so right, BV. As you have been screeching at the top of your little lungs for several years now, ANGS is a litany of unbroken positives with not a single cloud on the horizon or fly in the ointment. Anywhere. At all.
(Possibly his most deranged comment so far - though there are a lot of others vying for that not exactly proud title).
As for "deramping", I am still unsure how referring to simple and oh so easily verifiable facts can possibly be viewed as deramping? Your own fact-free 'jam tomorrow' assurances? Now when it comes to the genuine stakes, they're very different...
Apologies Helx... I hadn't spotted that you and Dagenham were so similar.
Seems to have become more stable, but the new average productions is now apparently sub 80,000 therms a day.
"...when he delivers..." A not at all subtle assumption there, n'est-ce pas?
I think you'll find that's it's still very much a big, fat "if".
I'm pretty sure that honesty would be most holders' first choice for the virtue that Amit himself should try adopting for a change.
More made-up myths from BV... again, how predictable.
It would be nice if some here understood the meaning of the word "earning ".
And like clockwork, as predicted...
Phil, in case you haven't worked it out, BV, this bulletin board's resident company PR man, will instantly accuse anyone with a less than glowingly positive opinion of ANGS of being a multi-ID troll.
As we all know, very easily and instantly verifiable history shows exactly how well or badly this share has done over recent months and years. So BV has to rely on making stuff up and playground insults in his desperate efforts to polish ANGS, in the face of all those evidenced facts... It's all he's got.
There's at least one on every board...
It's a good and important question.
The average monthly production volumes that ANGS recently stated it expected amounted to c. 2.7 million therms a month. However over the last week or so, their average daily production gives rise to a monthly production of c. 2.1 million therms a month.
What with the current price of gas (c. 114p per therm) and current hedge commitments. that 2.1 million therms a month production figure gives rise to post-hedge monthly revenues (NB Tony - revenues, not earnings) of £1.38 million, rather than the £2 million that some have been claiming.
There's a marked assumption here that 1984Investor is actually a genuine investor...
Tony, first and foremost I am aware of the difference between revenues and earnings.
Secondly, I am also aware of how current reduced production is affecting current generated revenues. As I clearly stated, should production return to the hoped-for c. 2.7 million therms per month, then monthly revenues (but not earnings) would in hand return to the c. £2 million per month levels, post hedge settlement.
"Earning £6 million a quarter"... not really.
Currently, post hedge commitments, ANGS seems to be generating revenues (NB revenues, not earnings) of around £1.65 million a month at current gas pricing and production levels. If production returns to what one would hope is "normal" levels of c. 2.7 million therms a month, then that would indeed give a monthly revenue figure of £2 million.
However, out of those generated revenues it (needless to say) needs to pay its field-specific OPEX costs, its general G&A costs and in particular its financing costs.
"... so you will need to provide your name, address, contact details and bank details."
Rock and a hard place.
A whole heap of short-term cash needed in Jan to meet already incurred liabilities, but over-rev field production and that'll then make things worse in the short-to mid-term.
Where oh where is that alleged replacement global financing (which probably won't be much cheaper - if at all - but which would give ANGS the time it needs).
The bears have been correct all along. Every single time. The sole question is, are they also correct this time?
I reckon we need a countdown clock on the website...
(The clever money says it's going to need an awful lot of digits).
Au contraire. Those with a less than positive opinion on CTAG have got absolutely everything right to date.
As the cheerleaders know (and rely on), it is impossible to be right about an event that hasn't happened yet.