Member Info for HeadInTheSand

BV as I've stated before, to me there are a remarkable number of similarities between ANGS and UKOG (not least including management style and candour). The last UKOG placing was announced just six months ago at 0.18p - just after the SP had "strangely" risen in the short-term to 0.24p. Today's UKOG SP is around the 0.10p mark....

However, it's not going to take more than a few weeks to see what actually transpires re placing.

BV, I said I expected 0.5p or thereabouts.

I really have no issue either with transparency or with owning my own words.

BV yes, I'm still expecting a significant placing before the end of this month.

I would strongly recommend you look at UKOG's share price movement from June 18th 2021 to July 5th 2021, if you want an absolutely classic example of the way these things invariably run. 0.18p on June 18th up to 0.24 (with massive BB activity) at close of biz on Fri 2nd July, then down to 0.18p on Mon 5th July, when the "successful" placing was announced as having taken place.

Absolutely typical.

It's very obviously getting even harder for Mr Multi-ID to attempt to polish the unpolishable...

So we still have the usual mid-term questions that need answering sooner rather than later, those being "How much gas, George?" and "By when, George?" What do we reckon - mid Q2 at best for any answer to those?

And now we have a few additional questions that in my book will get answered a fair few months sooner, namely "How many more shares, George?", ""When will these get issued, George?" and "At what price will these need to be placed, George?"

Just for the record, I personally couldn't give a rat's behind about how many shares Prince Multi-ID ramptastic dilution supporter EchDelta alleges he has, nor his average. I suspect the answer is somewhere between "very few" and "none", depending on whether he's either:-

A) a trivial level short-term trrader who's called it badly, got himself stuck in the lobsterpot and is desperately trying to get out at the expense of others

or:-

B) a boiler room shill.

Either way, both it and he are an irrelevance.

An increase in output from Saltfleetby would be a good thing to achieve.

However, one would have thought that perhaps finally getting around to drilling the sidetrack (which George has repeatedly assured everyone would have a significantly beneficial effect on produceable volumes) would BY FAR be the first and foremost step to take, rather than some high-cost and speculative seeking of neighbouring licences, when ANGS hasn't even got its own licence area to production yet....

The purpose of the (E)GM is clearly stated in the accompanying doc and the detail supplied re the resolutions for which ANGS is seeking approval.

Simply put, ANGS is seeking the immediate authority to issue up to 874 million new shares for whatever purposes (NB that "up to"). That figure is worked out by dividing the £1.748 million figure stated by ANGS by the nominal value of ANGS's shares (that being 0.2p).

I find two things interesting about this.

1. The amount of authority being sought by ANGS. Being able to issue nigh on 900 million new shares would represent a near doubling of existing shares in issue, which would obviously be significantly diluting. NB this is categorically not to say that ANGS is obliged to issue all those new shares - but still, it's a surprising amount of headroom that is now being sought.

2. The fact that ANGS felt it could not wait until its AGM (just 10 weeks later at end March) to table this resolution for extra share issuing authority. Holding a specific single issue (E)GM is a time-consuming and costly process, so the only logical explanation as to why this proposal is being made now, rather than in ten weeks' time, is that ANGS must need more cash prior to end March.

This is why my personal opinion is that there will be a substantial placing within the next ten weeks max (and almost certainly within this month).

What is not in the least surprising and completely normal is ANGS seeking the disapplication of pre-emption rights. Pretty much every company looking to gain the authority to issue new shares simultaneously seeks such a disapplication. All it means is that the company is not obliged to offer first dibs on any newly issued shares to existing shareholders - instead being allowed to offer any newly issued shares to whomever it likes. As stated, that's completely normal.

BV, I have expressed a purely personal opinion and the foundations for such. Separately, I would have thought that endless cries of "multi-bags just around the corner" and "2.022p imminent" are far more like attempts at deceptive manipulation of potential investors.

However, are you expecting a placing, following the Jan 13th (E)GM, with its single agenda? If so, when, how large and at what price?

"HITS. Who are all your fact based opinions for?"

BV (and I am genuinely surprised that this needs saying), the value/lack of value within any expressed opinion is entirely determined by the person viewing it. I don't state an opinion "for" anyone - is this what you're trying to do with yours?

BV as I have stated many times before, I am expressing genuinely held and fact-based opinions (rather than ones based merely on "because George said so"). You'd presumably acknowledge that I have every right to do so - every bit as much as you do.

I cannot see any reasonable issue you or anyone else might have with this. You'd surely agree that taking a stance of "only positive posts allowed" would be beyond childishly ridiculous?

Especially given that - as you keep maintaining - nothing said on this BB makes any difference anyway? With respect, you seem to be spiralling into some form of illogical confusion here...

Well that makes no sense at all, does it BV? Because - as you've just restated - nothing said on this or any other bulletin board makes any difference.

You're almost certainly correct, WG. As someone earlier rather neatly named it, It's called "doing a Heid".

I do have to say that from my personal point of view, life's a whole lot nicer outside the lobsterpot...

Whut?

BV, first off, you've continually said that nothing said on any share BB has the slightest effect on any share price. I agree with that - so I've no clue either why you've changed your mind or why you get so snippy when others post opinions that differ from yours.

Secondly and even more weirdly, you now seem to suggest that WG's attitude (and his alone) is in direct control of the ANGS SP...

Again... whut?

WG I agree it (of course) shouldn't happen... but it does more often than not.

What you'll see between now and any placing is oodles of positive-seeming Twitter posts and maximum efforts from the usual suspects. Those city boys need something to sell into after all...

For a literally classic example of exactly this, check out UKOG's issued PR, RNSes and boiler room shill bulletin board activity, plus its SP movement from June 20th last year... right up until the "successful" placing was announced on July 5th.

Equally to the point, if there is going to be a substantial placing in the 2nd half of this month (as firmly telegraphed by the (E)GM RNS), a gentle SP rise until the point of said placing being announced is to be expected.

I'm merely expressing a genuinely held opinion based on facts, BV. For all that you may neither share nor like my opinion, I don't see how you can justify wanting it to be stifled?

I'm on record as predicting a substantial raise in the 2nd half of Jan at 0.5p best case. IMV this is already being worked behind the scenes, with a "successful" placing announcement being issued very shortly after the Jan 14th (E)GM.

Let's see, eh?

I think the questions occupying those of amore realistic persuasion are...

How many weeks? (ANGS is 70 weeks and counting overdue already against its first assured schedule on gas). And equally importantly, how much production?

BV the hedge is a contractual commitment to deliver a pre-agreed fixed monthly volume of gas for a pre-agreed fixed price over a pre-agreed fixed period (36 months). This is entirely regardless of how much ANGS owes to whom and for how long.

The only possible way out of the hedge commitment would be for ANGS to buy its way out (requiring the agreement of course of those on the other side of the hedge) - and if gas prices remain elevated above the pricing specified in the hedge, to do so would be significantly costly.

That's it. It's simple enough.