Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Absolutely correct, OP. And a bonus point for the extremely apt Voltaire reference.

I fail to see the slightest difference between yesterday's presentation and any of those given by Lord Pinocchio, when he was at the helm. And we all know how his Lordship's predictions and promises turned out.

Watch this (blank) space...

So...

After yesterday evening's eagerly awaited investor presentation laying out the nrave new world of Angus Energy and all its uber-exciting prospects...

We had a day where a staggeringly underwhelming less than £10k of share trades were executed (and to add insult to injury, the majority of this pifflingly inconsequential quantity seem to have been sells).

The Ocebot and attendant cheerleaders are clearly going to have to work far, FAR harder in an apparently futile attempt to polish the unpolishable here. Though in a worrying sign, I do note that today the most deranged of the pompom wavers has for the first time started to post in usual utterly blinkered positive style on that other much-lauded colossus of this country's oil and gas industry, UKOG.

If he of all people has started to think that Sanderson's farcical confetti-ridden picocap of an outfit is a better bet to try to ramp, then ANGS really is in serious trouble.

I think calling yesterday's puff fest "tripe" might be a little harsh. However, nothing new of any substance was revealed. Again as was known in advance, the reduced interest rate on the £20m replacement financing was trumpeted, but of course this saving in debt servicing costs has been entirely offset and more by the triggering of the 8% royalty on all gross revenues out of the existing wells.

I'm personally not expecting any market reaction to the presentation, simply because there was no new news, so the entirety of the information given was already known. The various bits of hoped-for future plans won't change the price of cocoa either IMO.

I did however learn a new synonymous phrase for "jam tomorrow"... that being "watch this space".

SB Corporate Finance Partners does exist, as can be seen on Companies House.

It's a micro company that, looking at its balance sheet, appears to be currently yechnically insolvent and it has just one director. No prizes for guessing while that is.

JDentist, the announcement of a relationship with Second Chance was a classic piece of ABH smoke and mirrors back in the day. Although an agreement of sorts may have been signed, Second Chance was categorically never a distributor, i.e. it was never itself going to buy in stock for subsequent resale.

Instead Second Chance was (and maybe still is) a mere sales agency, whose business model was/is to persuade US retailers to place orders for products on a supplier and then to take a commission on the value of any orders placed.

ABH also claimed to have signed an agreement with a UK "distributor". I can't remember the company's name, but they were infinitesimal and engaged solely in the stocking and selling of golf-related novelty items. Needless to say, no purchase order was ever forthcoming from them either.

ABH was very good at half-truths that sounded superficially great, but once those with even a modicum of experience in IT/electricals/FMCG distribution and routes to market scratched the surface, there was never a shred of anything of value in any of those. ABH also on occasion told out-and-out porkies, e.g. the notorious runway in the jungle (that never existed) and the senior health professional who was joining the board (who himself felt oblige to announce that he'd never even been so much as approached).

A final lesson on the correct use of language for you BV, because for the love of God, you clearly need it.

First off, "ridiculed" does not mean "having kindergarten playground insults squeaked at you, accompanied by LOL".

Secondly "many a shareholder" does not mean "just you" (though I will give some leeway for your multiple Ids and your multi-personality disorder).

Thirdly, the situation with CTAG (a company you clearly know nothing about) remains interesting. However, perhaps best to leave discussion on that one to the adults, eh? You carry on with your obsessional praise of nothing but ANGS.

Finally, I suggest you familiarise yourself with the fairytale of the emperor's new clothes. There's an allegory that fits your unswerving admiration of ANGS to a tee.

Good weekend to the genuine.

BV will you ever learn the difference between an assertion and a fact? The only two things that have fallen flat on their faces are:-

a) the ANGS SP

and

b) any last vestiges of credibility you may once have had. You've desperately pumping this stock for over three years... and it's only gone inexorably downwards.

Now I don't expect anybody to unjustifiably criticise any share they're invested in... but to claim in the face of all the obvious contradicting evidence that black is white and night is day just because one's invested? That's either disingenuous or deranged.

Agreed. It's one of the several words he clearly doesn't understand the meaning of, like "profit", "facts" or "reality". He probably thinks the word means "a bit like iron".

Oh the irony.

BV (in his usual demanding style) orders "so do explain to genuine shareholders..."

Except I don't think he has a clue who any are, himself included.

As ever, Malcy seemingly offers the best opinions money can buy.

It very much looks like you're solely relying on it being logically impossible to prove a negative, Helx.

On that basis and according to your thinking, it would be completely reasonable for people to carry on waiting for Amit and his mythical agent(s) until the eventual heat death of the universe.

"Just a little longer..."

Another kindly pointer for you, BV. "Facts" aren't the same as "hate".

Typical Malcy - love for hire as usual.

Take the irrelevant future derivative numbers out of that and the company actually lost £19m in the FY just reported on. Way to go...

Of course the market understands how to properly interpret an FY report, hence the utter stasis of the current SP. "Underwhelmed" is evidentially the correct term.

Dougb, I'm not surprised and find myself as usual in large agreement with your post.

Also agreed that this BB - albeit largely triggered by the never-ending nonsense posted on the CTAG website - shows an all too typical level of polarisation between the "It's happening - just have a little more faith and patience" squad (some of whom will probably actually be genuine shareholders) and the "Are you havin' a larf? The guy's repeatedly proven himself to be an out-and-out fraud" brigade. And of course, the endless and overly robust exposition of either point of view is utterly futile...

Far better to try to come up with some form of contingency planning (if any avenue is feasible) in the event that the brigade is right and the squad is wrong. Everyone will have their own views on how likely that is.

Hey Tim. I'd say dougb is very much a voice of reason if he's interested.

And hey Spartacus. Agreed that there's no real harm in giving something a shot (apart from almost certain wasted time in my personal rather bleak view... but then again, so what?). It of course remains true that doing nothing would be a self-fulfilling prophecy, come what may.

PS as you clearly have difficulty understanding simple terms like "profit", here's a helpful pointer for you. "Future possibilities" and "predictions" categorically and very definitely are neither facts nor reality.

BV I find it utterly unsurprising that in its FY report, ANGS is predicting to anyone that'll listen that it has bright future prospects.

Except...

a) that's what it's assured everyone in every statement it's ever made, whether via RNS or financial report (it's just that to date, it's been unswervingly wrong, when compared to the reality of things as they've turned out - every bit as wrong as you've been, in fact).

And...

b) what would you honestly expect ANGS or indeed any other company to say?

Shock news. Hold the press. ANGS is yet again forecasting jam tomorrow. For the bazillionth time.

That is unfortunately a very cogent point made by Pointz. How on God's green earth is anyone meant to compel a company to act according to the rules of corporate governance and law, when said company is seemingly no longer bound by any such regulation?

Again as Pointz highlights, nobody even knows if/where CTAG is registered (except that it's not where Amit says it is) and so under what alleged jurisdiction (if any) it is currently operating.

So let's say Tim (hi Tim btw) gets together shareholders holding say 25% of the significantly increased number of shares... then what? How does Amit get compelled to do anything at all? Precisely who or what body would that group of holders complain to/lobby in order to force anything to get done?

BV, are you honestly suggesting we get involved in something as trite as "the P&Ls I've run are bigger than yours"?

What'd possibly be the point? After all, you're hardly renowned for your love of reality and facts, instead preferring just to make stuff up. However and for what it's worth (absolutely nothing), unless the allegedly very successful business you've apparently built up has annual revenues in the ten figure range, sadly you'd be entirely wrong . (Yet again).

Regardless of the ever more frantic pompom waving, the complete lack of reaction from the market shows it is just a tad underwhelmed at this set of FY results.