Member Info for HeadInTheSand

What's mildly noteworthy is the fact that there's apparently been a further 37.4 million shares issued/sold/given away some time in the last 3 weeks.

The Sept 18th update states that there were then 714.882.424 shares in issue.

Today's update states that there are 752,282,424 shares in issue.

Perhaps Amit thought he might like to trouser a few more million shares? Maybe it's a self-awarded bonus for all his successful hard work? Or maybe it's just another one of CTAG's shoddy ****-ups? Let's face it, Amit's never shown himself as having a competent grasp of any numbers whatsoever.

Not that any PI will now ever be able to find out the facts behind this... or indeed behind anything else to do with CTAG.

So basically, Parsley was plain wrong. Hey, at least he's consistent...

Parsley, I'm not at all sure you're correct re non-ISA held shares automatically being "transferred" to J P Jenkins. I think the onus is on the shareholder to get his intent to buy or sell registered. And if a shareeholder simply wants to hang onto his holdings for the moment, then nothing needs doing.

This from the AVN 5th Sep RNS seems to make things crystal clear:-

"With effect from Cancellation, the Company will implement the Matched Bargain Facility provided by J P Jenkins to assist Shareholders to trade in the Ordinary Shares. Under the Matched Bargain Facility, Shareholders or persons wishing to acquire or dispose of Ordinary Shares will be able to leave an indication with J P Jenkins, through their stockbroker (J P Jenkins is unable to deal directly with members of the public), of the number of Ordinary Shares that they are prepared to buy or sell at an agreed price.

In the event that J P Jenkins is able to match that order with an opposite sell or buy instruction, they would contact both parties and then effect the bargain. With effect from Cancellation, further details on the Matched Bargain Facility will be made available to Shareholders on the Company's website at https://investor.avantiplc.com/ and directly by letter or e-mail (where appropriate)."

Brad, not that I've been involved with a matched bargain facility before but...

I believe that the onus is on you, but not until you want to sell or buy shares.

If you want to sell, you'd have to get your existing broker to contact J P Jenkins and say "I am holding x shares on behalf of a private investor who would like to register his wish to sell them for a price not lower than y. Do you have any buy orders registered that could be matched up with this? If not, please keep this wish to sell on file." Very similar with anyone looking to purchase, but again it'd have to be conducted via a stockbroker, because J P Jenkins will not deal directly with private investors.

It's all in the 5th Sept RNS...

PS oh and your latest post actually made me laugh. I'm all for exquisite mockery, hence I recommended it.

Completely regardless of major differences in opinion between thee and me, can I just say what a pleasure it is to read your perfectly crafted and evocatively expressed posts and well-turned phrases. I know I'm ridiculously sticklerish about language (so sue me), but I cannot help but give credit and praise where it is so obviously due. Hats off to you, for whatever that's worth.

GL.

Buko, fair enough, but to continually quote AVN's final market cap is pretty much of zero relevance.

The question would be much better put thus:-

Even taking into account the value of current assets, what's a company with over $600 million of liabilities and that's losing around a further $70 million every six months (both figures according to the last HY report) worth?

Erm buko...

I'll wish you every success with your brave last minute punt, but there are a few teeny matters that you've failed to factor in within your stated calculations.

1. That historical big buy at 14.5p? Since that time, AVN has issued at least 12 times the number of shares then in issue (to give to the bondholders in exchange for roughly half the billion dollar debt that the latter were then holding in the D4E swap).

2. There's at least 500 million dollars of bond-based debt remaining - and the bondholders holding that debt take pre-eminence over mere shareholders when it comes to any claim on asset value.

3. The overall AVN debt currently continues to rise every six months (by almost 70 million dollars in the final half year report, once operating loss, d&a and most importantly, interest have been added together)....

As I said, best of luck, but IMV, you've bought into a house while failing to realise that 90% of it is owned by the mortgage company and which costs a fortune to run every year.

That's possibly true, Parsley. But the reason that no bigger fish has decided to swallow AVN up to this point (and the big and ugly fish have been watching closely, you may rest assured) is that no major operator has even started to want to buy AVN lock stock and barrel as a going concern. Why? Because of the massive debt millstone, that's why. Why would any other operator want to take that on?

So the big guys are waiting to see if AVN goes pop and if so, they'll look to acquire assets on the cheap from the administrator (the valuable assets absolutely not being the business or even the in-orbit hardware particularly, but the orbital location rights and frequency allocations).

If that happens, then shareholders are right at the back of the queue when it comes to return of value. Creditors and bondholders get paid out first, and only once that's happened, if there is anything left, does anything get distributed amongst shareholders.

Can't therefore see AVN being sold. Can however see it being liquidated.

AIMO.

Well, it's the last day for anyone wishing to bail out of AVN, before the company goes private and the only way to trade shares will be via a broker-run matched trade facility. The end of an era, I guess.

To those who've taken a hit on AVN (as I suspect most have), I hope it wasn't too painful. To those brave souls who decide to hang onto their AVN paper as the company steams into private obscurity, your stubbornness has my respect - even if I'm not sure that your acuity does.

I also have some sympathy for Kyle Whitehill and the rest of the newish AVN BOD. They've tried to set a much more sensible strategy over the last 18 months - but sadly as anyone but the most swivel-eyed and foaming at the mouth zealot (GCCRa, anyone?) could quickly spot, the appalling, profligate and frankly scandalous mismanagement by the David Williams regime made this doomed from the off.

It is of course typical of AIM that DW walked out with many millions in his pocket (all of which must have been effectively siphoned out of investor-provided funding, since this outfit has never come anywhere close to turning a profit). It is of course equally typical of AIM that PIs are left holding the bag.

Sayonara all. It's been... real. (And unfortunately for many, horribly real).

TwoFacedCoin repetitively spouting his usual schtick, I see...

To concisely sum up what TwoFaced has just posted, the SOLE basis for the opinion he currently claims he holds (shyeah right) is...

"Because someone at ANGS said so somewhere."

Jesus, that's laughably pathetic. ANGS has difficulty enough issuing accurate information via RNS, so you can sure as Hell entirely forget anything Georgie's said during some puff PR video interview and some throwaway claim made at some local parish council meeting.

(Just IMO... of course).

Yes, Tidswell is certainly still very much at the centre of things.

Ja51, you state "...but he is in charge of future accusations or something equally ridiculous"

At first I suspected you may have meant to type "acquisitions" instead of "accusations". But then, thinking about Tidswell's list of past extremely suspect dealings, I decided you were right first time.

More spin and misdirection.

1. Why is ANGS already late in submitting the planning application for Balcombe (promised to be in by end Aug?)

More importantly,

2. Why did Andrew Hollis (ANGS Technical Director) specifically and clearly state long LONG after the very short-term (= non-representative) well test at Balcombe that the company "would be delighted" if Balcombe could be made to produce just 300 bopd? That's a tenth of what DHC is trying to get everyone to believe - and much more recent company information.

DHC likes quoting interviews, so Hollis's categoric statement is from the recording of the investors' conference call a month or so back. Feel free to check it out on the ANGS website.

Those pesky facts, eh? Such an inconvenience for the P&D brigade...

That'd be RUPERT LabrUm...

Honestly it's a bit of a giggle when the PI-pickpocketing pump and dump squad (who are of course self-allegedly such well-researched long-term holders) can't even get the most basic of facts right in their ramptastic efforts.

Guess we'll just have to wait for DHC to sell (again) and buy into UKOG (again), start ****ging ANGS off (again) while pumping UKOG to the hills and back (again).

He's so depressingly trite and obvious...

Just IMO... of course.

Ocelot, a well-reasoned and udoubtedly factual post.

Having said that, the likes of DHC with his fake maths, convenient omissions and misdirections, flitting between pumping or ****ging off ANGS or UKOG, depending if he's holding and looking to sell into a minispike, or looking to enter at a lower price for a short-term flip, are absolutely toxic for sentiment re any company.

If ANGS can "less than entirely accurate" in info issued via RNS - as by now we all know it can - I hardly think any store can be set by what it said in a mere Parish Council Community Liaison Group meeting.

Two other things from that document however...

A confirmation that the planning application is still currently not submitted.

A confirmation that, before granting approval, "The OGA also assess operational competency looking at financial capabilities, money in the bank, insurance policies, CVs of technical staff etc ". I wonder how many of those necessary boxes ANGS can successfully tick?

Okay, over to the day traders, with no doubt the following on their endlessly repeated daily ramptastic schedule:-

1. Endless fake maths ("Brockham was 26% of our then asset value! Saltfleetby is worth a 4p SP alone! I know this because Georgie Porgie said so!"

2. Endless cries of "Ultra-cheap tickets available now for the Balcombe Express! Get in quick before they're gone!"

3. Endless finger-pointing at a "new HNW investor! Quick! Join in! He can't be wrong!"

(yawn).

Oh... just IMO... of course.

"What I do do though is stick to facts in videos, RNS's ..."

...which would be great, except it has been evidenced without doubt information given in video interviews and worse still, RNSes, absolutely cannot be relied upon as being in any way factual.

I prefer to deal in real facts, once they become clear and independantly auditable. Like the Brockham fiasco. I note that the first 25% of that May 2019 Georgie Porgie Lucan inverview that TwoFacedCoin keeps referring everyone back to is entirely focussed on ANGS spending one third of the then raised capital on the exciting Brockham opportunity... and we all know how that one turned out.

Heh rx.. that's my opinion also on good ole TwoFacedCoin, the long-term holder's friend... (not).

He's infested this and UKOG's BB for months with his flip-flopping rampathons, a bit like a mildly annoying personal rash that you just can't get cleared up. But it's so obvious - an 8 year old could spot his ever-changing current agenda from a mile away.

I've said before, I can have a grudging respect for an adept hustler and I have no issues at all with overt day traders (like Will, before he realised he ought to exit)... but this isn't even competent. The same old fake maths myths get trotted out time and again...

My personal current favourite though is the "in the fiilter bin you go", whenever he gets asked a direct question he can't answer or smokescreen. It's the exact playground equivalent of screwing your eyes tight shut, jamming your fingers in your ears and shouting "la la la" at the top of your voice.

Priceless.

Trump does fake news.... DHC does fake maths.

No answer to my question re your opinion on the amount of "cash reserving" that ANGS will need to make to saatisfy the OGA re Saltfleetby? What a surprise.

Jesus DHC, have you no shame???

This as just quoted by Ja51 from the latest Saltfleetby RNS:-

"Should the Company be successful in its application to the OGA, as referred to above, it would also need to agree an abandonment programme AND ASSOCIATED CASH RESERVING with the OGA at that time."

So do tell, what level of cash reserving are you forecasting that ANGS will need to make in order to satisfy the OGA?

Separately, this comment of your made me laugh out loud:-

"....I have no need to reeatedly justify my interest here as others know it and I've stated it often enough. "

Aaah okay, we should all absolutely believe that you with - your endless strategically timed bouts of ramping - are a genuine and committed LTH... just and only because you say it?

Brilliant. Just brilliant.