Member Info for HeadInTheSand

I see the ramptastic tagteam have now decided to double-team on up against on genuine, well-researched and long-term shareholders...

That pretty much tell you all you need to know about this sort of pond scum.

You're welcome, Yanis.

I am aware that genuine long-term holders are more than interested in the factual and not the endless "Shell! BP! Putin's GRU agents! 15p!" ramptastic dribble being endlessly pushed by the recent crop of shills and swing traders.

I'm absolutely pro oil and gas. Feel free to check my history. I'm not pro incompetent operators though.

Back to reality for a second (you know, that thing the ramptastic squad are so violently allergic to)...

There's a new letter up from the EA (dated 25th Feb) on the Lincs CC planning website ref the planning variance that ANGS is seeking approval on.

This seems to cover two things. The EA is asking for a rewording of a noise emission condition that will be incorporated into any new PP id/when granted. Separately, the EA reconfirms that it is awaiting more requested details from ANGS regarding the latter being able to secure the separately required EA sign-off.

The above is factual and freely publicly viewable. Check it out yourselves at:-

https://lincolnshire.planning-register.co.uk/Planning/Display?applicationNumber=PL%2F0176%2F21

It's in the Associated Documents - Representations Received Consultees section.

So hang on.... those posting the truth (i.e. incontrovertible and easily verifiable facts) are now apparently not only Nimbys or crusty green activists, but also Russian agents? Oh please.

The ramptastic squad is getting ever more farcical, both in its claims and its attempts to discredit those simply posting facts.

This drivel is beyond farcical. What offshore boiler room do you post from?

**********
EarlofAim
Today 09:37

Angus No debts yet Sluggish this morning.
*********

As I've pointed out, ANGS has got two very well-publicised loans of £1.4 million (CLN) and £12 million (at 12.05%).

And I should be ashamed of "posting negatives", while you post the blatant fabrication just three hours ago that ANGS is carrying no debt???

Try telling the truth. It's not negative - it's just the truth.

EarlofAim is simply not worth listening to. His agenda is clear. He wasn't even aware that ANGS was carrying any debt until two hours ago when this was pointed out to him (yes, really).

Truly laughable.

"according to Stockopedia website Angs has no debts.

look at the website Stockopedia"

Why don't you make yourself aware of information RNSed by the company before spouting your know-nothing ramptastic BS? As anyone with the slightest knowledge of ANGS knows (even your fellow rampers), ANGS has taken on a £1.4 million CLN from Knowe (which it recently had to get repayment of deferred) and of course the £12 million loan for Saltfleetby at 12.05% (plus an 8% revenue override) which comes to term in Dec 24.

Still pathetic.

"ANGS no debts"...

Well, that just sums up how utterly ludicrous and how utterly deceptive this latest crop of rampers is.

How about the £12 million loan at 12.05%? How about the Knowe £1.4 million CLN?

Pathetic.

I've rad and understood the RNS, Gideons. I've even quoted the exact relevant passage from it. Let me do so again.

Jan 27th: "The Company continues to hold and encourage suppliers and contractors to work to a First Gas date in Q1, but will advise further on this date when able so to do, and does not presently anticipate any delay to shift more than 20-30 days into April."

You either are incapable of understanding what this says (and what it does not say - for example, nowhere does it say that first gas will be Q1) or (far more likely) you are quite deliberately choosing to misrepresent things - as is the same with all of your posts.

Never mind. According to you (and only you... not the company), ANGS will achieve first gas within the next 32 days. Let's see, eh?

All this talk of bids from multinationals is just bizarre and an entire irrelevance - the only "possible offer" that had any (very) slight substance to it valued ANGS at the time at around £15 million of confetti from SOU, another micro-cap cash-strapped AIM O&G company.

There really is only one very simple question that matters, namely:- when (if at all) can ANGS get to full production and what volume will that full production deliver?

Forget first gas. If ANGS gets to sufficient volume of FULL PRODUCTION in time (and that's by July 22 at the very latest), then things will be fine. If it doesn't get to full production by then, or if produced volumes are too small, then to me it's very clear that company will promptly implode in a cloud of unfulfilled debt and hedge obligations, leaving the lenders in full possession of Poundland to do what they like with.

It's that simple. And that binary. And it's the same question that has been in play ever since ANGS acquired its 51% stake in Poundland..

The next two weeks - specifically - are going to be fairly interesting. Surely George hasn't got the gall to run the same schick twice? Or has he?

It kind of does matter just a tad who owns Saltfleetby at the time... because if it's not ANGS and instead the debenture holders, how's that going to help any ANGS shareholder?

Mira more to the point, the latest ANGS Jan 27th RNS does not promise first gas by end March at all, despite what Gideons/Adrain tries to make out and is simply desperate to fool others into believing.

It simply states that ANGS is "encouraging" its various suppliers and contractors to aim for that date... before immediately going o to say that the ANGS board is "presently anticipating" (very useful non-committal phrase there) that delays won't push things further back than the end of April.

Q2 at best is indeed the most realistic expectation for first gas (NB not full production).

There is still time (just) for ANGS to pull this one back from the brink - but to do so requires no more c*ck-ups, no more delays, no more sudden cost increases and everything (especially flow rates) going the company's way.

To employ the Chuckle brothers tagteam's false logic, I note that Gideons/Adrian is busily sl*gging off UKOG (again).

Does this mean that he must inevitably be some sort of green activist then? Or perhaps he's simply less than impressed with the company's management and lack of achievement?

The latter, of course. And that's precisely the same with those who are deeply sceptical about ANGS. The "green nimby" accusation is merely a trite attempt to discredit those expressing more negative opinion, because such opinion cannot be discredited by the production of any facts.

BV although it's rare these days, I entirely agree with you re DoD.

Re Saltfleetby, even with the latest Vladimir bonus to future gas pricing, the question remains - can ANGS get enough gas out of the ground in time? Even if it does to fulfil the hedge, it's going to need to produce a comfortable excess over and above the hedged volumes in order to benefit meaningfully from current futures pricing.

I would definitely rather be the lenders in this scenario, because they're on a win-win, come what may. On the one hand, if ANGS does produce enough gas in time, they're sitting pretty, because they get their capital repaid, plus 12.05% interest, plus an 8% revenue override. On the other, if ANGS doesn't, they get ownership of an asset that's grown in value potential and that's largely been commissioned that they can then sell to whoever they want. And if they are also on the other side of the hedge that they insisted upon as a condition of the loan, then they really are laughing.

The same old rampers' myths.

There are no PI shorts. There are no green activists posting here.

ANGS has CATEGORICALLY NOT SAID it will achieve first gas in Q1 (the end of which I would remind everyone is just 5 weeks away).

Instead in usual non-committal room terms, ANGS has said it "continues to encourage suppliers and contractors to work to a First Gas date in Q1", immediately followed by "the company... does not presently anticipate any delay to shift more than 20-30 days into April." (Gotta love that "does not presently anticipate"... talk about having wiggle room).

Anyone pretending anything different from the above and claiming the company is promising first gas in Q1 is just plain lying - and deliberately so.

I'd say, First gas May at best, providing there are no more delays or c*ck-ups. Full production June at best, with the same caveats. It's still just about do-able before the headsmen's axes of debt repayment and hedge fulfilment fall in July, but it's getting squeakily tight...

I would also point out that "first gas" does not equal "full production". There's an inevitable further timelag between those two points.