Member Info for HeadInTheSand

BV that's entirely accurate (except for the trading part - not for me).

As to it being ridiculous to release an RNS just prior to announcing a placing? Not so much.

UKOG and "Uncle Stevie" (who some here know very well)... July 1st Basur-3 Drilling Update RNS. Okay, the drill was rushed and in entirely the wrong place and nothing has happened at Basur ever since (they're allegedly evaluating new seismic to decide where they should have drilled) - but that RNS undoubtedly helped get the UKOG placing away that was announced as "successful" on the following Monday July 5th.

It happens...

No need to be an expert, ED. Just to have a basic awareness of what the responsibilities of the directors of an AIM company are.

If UJO is involved, I'd expect to see some of the UKOG to UJO chameleons heading on to post over here, under some of their varios IDs. In fact I'm fairly sure one voluble player is here posting away already.

What was that you were saying the other day, Mira? "Doing a .... ?" What was it now? Never, mind. Probably just another load of old bunny...

There's actually no regulatory need for any company to release any info about having allegedly received any form of indicative, informal, non-binding, non-committal or otherwise casual offer. There's no real point in doing so at all.

(Unless there's any reason to see the SP rising, at least in the short term, that is...)

So what you're pointing out here is that we have formally been told that George has received an informal offer... how incredibly useful.

PS Mirasol, the imminent (E)GM resolution includes disapplication of pre-emption rights. Quite normal, but that specifically excludes ANGS from having to make any placing an open one, or having to offer first dibs on any newly issued shares to existing holders.

First time I've agreed with anything ED has said.

"They need funds, hence GM"

Too right. The shenanigans of the last 48 hours haven't changed anything fundamental at all.

I must admit that ED's complete ignorance of 419 scams is rather amusing.

Is there one single formal announcement anywhere of any offer? At any price? Please provide details.

And no, pointing at some tweeted guess from someone whose Twitter account just so happened to have been used to support getting the December placing away is definitively not hard, verifiable evidence.

I wouldn't presume to criticise anyone for being a short-term trader (provided they're not trying to mug others off while treading). After all, hasn't ANGS presented a very nicely lucrative quick flip opportunity over the last day or so?

I think the key issue to ponder here is, SP spike aside, what has actually changed?

Don't be ridiculous, ED. You don't get to decide what flavours of opinion are permitted.

As for ANGS? Well, let's see how many suitors (if any) come out of the woodwork and what sort of level of cash (if any) they're prepared to stump up. As ever, the value of a thing is primarily defined by the price that a third party is prepared to cough up for it - and nothing else.

Meanwhile, despite all the noise and fury, it is (and has to be) business as usual for ANGS. Getting Saltfleetby to an adequate production level as quickly as possible. There's still deadlines to hit and debts to service. And if that's going to require a further placing this month for whatever reason, then that's what they'll still have to do, for better or worse. Today's non-committal news doesn't make a blind bit of difference to any of that.

A couple of other points. Re "love for hire" Malcy - the choice of words in this particular comment of his was decidedly odd:-

" ...but the way that the market has UNSURPRISINGLY hugely undervalued its assets..." Unsurprisingly, eh? There's a thing...

Secondly, anyone thanking the likes of Heid for anything, what with her history, has obviously had a judgement bypass.

Gary, I am categorically not a long-term holder and am unsure where you've got that idea from? I've been entirely transparent with the fact that I got out of ANGS last summer when I was (finally) able to sell at 1p (with a not significant £ note but irritatingly high percentage loss). And all things being considered, I still remain happy that I did so.

Like several, my view on ANGS remains that it's only fit for a short-term trade. Having said that, I'd still love to see LTHers be able to exit at a level that's acceptable to them.

BV I stated a week or so back that I expected some quick flip profit opportunity would present itself pre the Jan 13th (E)GM - but admittedly I didn't expect that short-term opportunity to be as sizeable as it has been.

Still, as I said earlier today, I'm not that bothered at having missed out, as you put it. I've never been one for day trading (too many other demands on my time, which means I can't pay the close attention required).

However, I grant you that there'll be a fair few short-term traders here who've either made a nice turn on their cash already, or who now have a chunk of shares on a free ride, after the kerfuffle of the last 24 hours. Well done to them, I guess - but I genuinely would like to see the few real LTHers posting here (and there are some - but far fewer than there are those claiming to be) being able to get out at least at no loss.

BV, let's wait until say the end of Jan and see exactly where the cards have fallen after the dust has settled, eh?

I'm still expecting a placing, if only because ANGS can hardly sit doing nothing and twiddling its thumbs while any alleged suitors decide if they're going to bother riding on up or not. What everyone seems to have forgotten in today's kerfuffle is that (SP aside) precisely nothing has actually changed... the same business drivers still all apply, the same deadlines that must be met still all exist, etc etc...

Well, this morning's RNS has certainly had the desired effect, eh? Almost too much of one, I'd say, but still...

A quick reality check. Saltfleetby is not a proven asset as of yet. Regardless of anything else, that's still about "How much gas at how much additional up-front cost and by when?", irrelevant of whoever the operating company turns out to be.

And although ANGS (for whatever reason) may have decided to announce a formal consideration of sale process, as today's RNS clearly states, it hasn't currently got any formal expressions of interest at all.

I still think the telegraphed substantial placing will go ahead this month. That's been further telegraphed by the phrase from today's RNS "The Company is not currently in any discussions with any potential offeror relating to an acquisition of the issued and to be issued share capital of the Company."

Plus it's not as if ANGS can sit on its hands and do nothing while hoping for a few suitors to gallop on up - they've got more delays and a further 10% cost over-run to deal with.

I'm thinking the actual state of play of things will become a whole lot clearer by the end of this month.

More to the point, Ocelot... by keeping copy n pasting from ANGS's own CPR, all you're doing is making the board's decision to (allegedly) be considering a formal sale look even more ludicrous.

As several have commented, if ANGS believes its own numbers and timescales, why on God's green earth would they even be considering any sale, with all these (alleged) riches (allegedly) imminently just around the corner?

So... as predicted there was an opportunity to make a nice little turn on what I firmly believe to be a pre-placing spike - and it absolutely should be said, nicer than I had guesstimated (I really didn't at all expect George to pull out and play a "we haven't got any formal interest, but we're formally considering a sale" card - grudging admiration from me for that particular piece of brazenness).

Did I take advantage? Nope. Am I kicking myself? Actually also nope, as it happens.

So I'm now waiting for w/c 17th Jan to see what's what.

Couple of things. There is no price of £25 million on any table. That's just ANGS's own issued in-house valuation.

Secondly, if George has been being truthful over the last many months, then it would make absolutely no sense to consider the sale of such a "jewel in the crown" asset when it's (allegedly) on the very point of delivering mammoth revenues.

That is, unless either A) it's not or b) the motive behind the issuing of this morning's RNS has literally nothing to do with a putative sale at all.

Sageman, with complete sincerity, the very best of luck to genuine and long-suffering long-term holders like you and Yanis. I absolutely hope you achieve the exit point that works for you.

In the light of this morning's RNS and my reading of its purpose, I'm very watchful of what I suspect will be announced w/c 17th Jan.

...but both ask more questions than they answer.

1. At face value.

The obvious question here is "Hold on a second, George? You've been assuring everyone for months that Saltfleetby is literally on the cusp of delivering transformatively significant revenue to the company (and thus presumably multi-bags for shareholders). Why on God's green earth would you even think about selling it now?"

The above "transformative" story is of course the one that Mr Multi-ID Ech and chums have been frantically trying to ram down everyone's throats - but if we're to put 100% credence in George's RNS of this morning, then things very definitely cannot be as 120% guaranteed nailed-on as they've been promising. In today's RNS, there are snuck-in mentions of further delays (albeit claimed as "not material" ones) and yet more "up to 10% of budget" cost over-runs (what does that mean? So far they've had up to £15 million quid to sort out Saltfleetby?).

So if today's RNS is to be taken at face value, I think it can be very safely assumed that ANGS has as usual continued to be very definitely non-transparent and also very definitely economical with the truth.

2. Not at face value.

The RNS is entirely non-committal about any there being any formally interested parties. It's merely informing that a formal sale is being conceptually considered by the board and inviting any offers.

The timing of this release is notable... just two weeks after the seeking of a new authority to issue up to 874 million new shares was announced, and just one week before such application gets voted on at the (E)GM.

Some here may remember my pointing out that the way major placings on AIM always seem to run is that a manufactured minispike occurs just before any placing announcement. An example I've given before - UKOG at the run-up to its unexpectedJuly 5th placing. On July 1st, UKOG trumpeted first drilling at Basur via RNS, duly spiking the price to 0.24 and enabling the placing to be got away at 0.18 (news that they'd had to rush the drill and so drilled in entirely the wrong place didn't become apparent until several weeks later).

Thus a cynic might claim that today's entirely non-committal announcement is solely aimed at causing a pre-placing spike to allow the well-telegraphed and imminent placing to be got away. making the city spivs their usual neat approx 15% gain.

What will be highly interesting now is to see if the Jan 13th (E)GM still goes ahead (I'm sure it will) and if subsequently a substantial "successful" placing is announced very shortly afterwards (I'm again sure it will).

AIM, eh? The one thing you can rely on is that it's always disgustingly murky.

GL to the genuine.

PS the 88e £12 million raise at the end of August that some are quoting as some sort of representative benchmark? Really not.

That placing only increased the number of 88e's shares in issue by a very modest 6.6%. That's because 88e has a market cap in excess of £250 million.

So, not exactly ANGS's identical twin then...