Member Info for HeadInTheSand

So... why has the market not reacted at all to the refinancing news in the way the cheerleaders were screaming that it would? Well...

Presuming ANGS averages production of 2 million therms a month out of SFBY ongoing (that's the level it seems to be producing at the moment)...

And presuming that this rate of production doesn't decline...

And presuming that it can get an average of 50p per therm (somewhat unlikely, given the existing hedges or their replacements, but it keeps the maths easy)...

ANGS will (obviously) generate revenues of £12 million per annum out of SFBY.

Courtesy of the refinancing, ANGS now owes Trafigura £2.8 million (£233k per month, starting immediately) in interest only repayments for the next 12 months.

ANGS will also now owe Trafigura £6.56 million (£547k per month) in interest and principal repayments for the next 48 months following year one.

ANGS now also owes Mercuria and Aleph £0.96 million per annum (£80k per month, starting immediately) until the field ceases production.

And of course there's still the £2.88 million balance of the PF debt to be paid off one way or another in the next 16 months...

It's always helpful IMO to try and work out why the market reacts (or doesn't).

What on earth are you squeaking about, BV?

Anyone wanting to get an idea on ANGS just needs to look at the SP trajectory. The "amazing" global refinancing that you claimed would be transformational has done precisely nothing for the company in the eyes of the market, nor has the announcement of an MOU with a major that you've been assuring anyone dumb enough to listen would cause a sharp rise in the SP.

And yet the SP continues to circle the drain, at or around a 52 week low...

One doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to see that. But hey, you keep on averaging down and denying reality.

Quite the contrary, Adrian. The attempt to destroy the company is both successful and ongoing. Which is unsurprising since the individual leading that attempt is the company's CEO (whether he means to or not... i doubt it matters to him one way or the other, provided that he can still draw his handsome monthly reward for consistent and abject failure).

Accusations being thrown around by the kindergarten that posters are "rubbish at their jobs", I see.

Well, I think it can safely be said from the merest glance at the ANGS SP that those truly rubbish at their jobs are:-

a) the ANGS board (past and present) who have presided over such an ongoing (and yes, still unrelieved) destruction of shareholder value

and

b) the rabid yet hapless cheerleaders on here whose every single prediction of "transformation", "rerates", "multi-bags" and "sharp SP rises" have all proven to be utterly incorrect.. and in fact quite the reverse of reality.

Nice going, chaps.

Mind you, this very rapid edit does seem to confirm that it's all about adding that extra 10% of votes onto keeping Sando's gravy train creaking along until the very last knockings.

I'd actually lay a tenner that it was the ever-present and ever-cheerleading Ocebot that alerted the spivs to your post and hence their screw-up.

Delta, it may well be your post here that alerted the cackhanded spivs to that error.

In many ways, it may be a shame that you publicised it...

Oh look... a "resumed" GM, just a week after those 3+ billion new shares that have just been made to magically appear will be put into the EBT...

...and add another 10% of votes in favour of whatever the BoD spivs want to get pushed through.

This is laughably transparent.

Well.... to buy 25 million shares today would only cost c. £2k, which is pretty much chump change level (but with the emphasis very much on the word "chump")..

However, looking at the ever-worsening state of UKOG, it's still a fair question. You'd almost certainly get a better return by spending that £2k on 800 lucky dips for the next Euromillions lottery.

Yes, but as shares, they have voting rights attached. How very convenient, literally just after a failed EGM where obviously not enough support could be found for resolutions tabled...

Interesting comments... this was an announcement that came straight out of the blue, wasn't it? And it's all happening with unseemly haste...

I agree entirely with Deltavegatheta. It seems crushingly obvious that shares are only being very hurriedly added to the EBT in order to ensure that a resolution passes which was previously voted down. The appropriate term for this is blatant gerrymandering.

Again like Delta, I also ask where UKOG has come up with the ability to issue over 3 billion new shares all of a sudden? It didn't have that much authority left, did it? So, how come it is able to?

It had been hard to imagine how this company could get any more farcical, but one can always rely on UKOG to find imaginative ways to lower the ethical bar even further.

On the plus side, what this has done (albeit at a cost... c. 14% plus triggering the 8% royalty on all revenue from existing wells) is give ANGS time, by removing the imminently looming need to repay substantial amounts of already incurred debt.

That's a positive. Let's see what the company now does with the time it's just bought itself.

Pretty much as expected. Existing debts paid off, with the exception of £2.88 million remaining as owed to PF, hence the remaining available balance being £5.9m rather than £3m.

And again as expected, it is indeed a 5 year amortising loan ( with no payments required in year one), so the overall interest payable will be in the region of £7.9m over the complete term.

And the 8% royalty on all SFBY production in perpetuity but NB only from EXISTING wells persists. At current production rates/pricing, that equates to around £1m per annum of outlay on an ongoing basis.

Details on the revised hedges/new offtake agreement aren't particularly clear at this stage.

It'll be interesting to see what the market makes of this.

Okay, but if this were true and this "enhanced payment" was merely "interest" on the overall payment for the DaaP and it's been agreed and paid over, why not announce a combined total of c. $230 million for the DaaP?

Hang on just a second...

EXHIBIT A.

23rd November 2022

The Company is delighted to confirm that the combined value of its DaaP sale and licensing deal transactions is US$275million.

As of today’s date, there are 988,223,763 shares in issue.

EXHIBIT B

2nd November 2023

Further to the update of 20 October 2023, the Company reconfirms that there are two separate deals. The first is for its licensing agreement and the second will consist of proceeds from the DaaP sale. The Company is pleased to herewith confirm details for the distribution of the first payment tranche to shareholders for its $50m licensing agreement.

EXHIBIT C

11th January 2024

The Company is pleased to confirm that shareholders will receive 4.8 US dollar cents per share, after costs being an income from the distribution of licensing money.

EXHIBIT D

21st February 2024

The company is pleased to announce that the enhanced payment for the DaaP of circa $4.5 million has been approved by the buyer.

So... the overall deal for both the licensing sale and the DaaP sale was allegedly going to total $275 million dollars (as per Exhibit A above).

The licensing sale part was allegedly worth $50 million (as per Exhibits B and C above... though Exhibit C effectively states eye-watering costs of $2 million.

Therefore, if Exhibit A were true, the value of the DaaP part of the sale had to be in the region of $225 million...

...except as Exhibit D above (today's update) states, it's only apparently worth c. $4.5 million... or less than half a cent extra per share.

What's with that?

(I suspect the problem - as with all habitual porky pie spinners - is that they invariably forget to take account of the contents of all the porkies they've spouted to date).

Interesting question, SB. Mind you, it presumes that certain individuals are genuine investors, rather than company mouthpieces...

Petebo, you say "Met a few of them in London for beers at least 3 times Liam, Mr Selfridge and Dreamboatwarrier were genuine investors and conned like the rest of us."

You're sadly wrong about one of those. I've kept an eye on CTAG for a long time (as have others). As has already been posted in this thread, MrSelfridge set up a company with AberdeenMan (called Knightsbridge something or other, from memory), whose sole purpose was to "aid pre-revenue companies in gaining investment", (i.e. ramping the living bejaysus out of AIM dogs).

This was discovered by eagle-eyed sleuths about a week after the company had been incorporated (with both MrS and AbMan as the two named directors) and it was promptly and equally rapidly disbanded.

Someone said that the CTAG fiasco should be made into a TV show. I agree... I've always said that, such have been the murkiest of murky twists and turns, this should be made into an investigative documentary which highlights the all too typical shenanigans and hustles run on AIM (and which also would inevitably underline how utterly useless the FCA is as any sort of PI-protecting and rule/law-upholding regulatory body).

Simon, I suppose that's fair enough - though I'd very firmly say that your two unknowns - namely, the assumption of a mysterious "major storage partner" and a "huge revenue from Balcombe" (!) - are a whole lot more nebulous than the two I listed, which should become known knowns on Friday.

What I've actually done is, having watched the company's share price reduce by over 96% from 11.5p down to 0.4p over the last 5 years, to look for reasons why. It helps with understanding reality - perhaps you should try it one day?

BV for the record, I've never asked for anyone's post to be deleted. I'd rather all posts stayed live and visible, because readers can then easily see the type and nature of those posting. People need to own their own words.

I will say this though - LSE only deletes posts that are abusive or otherwise disruptive. So, perhaps if those having posts repeatedly deleted by admin based their comments on evidence rather than playground insult, they wouldn't get removed.

Maddog, the interest rate on the prospective £20m refinancing loan is indeed materially lower than the interest rates on either the original £12m Mercuria loan or the two junior £3m and £6m loans.

However, before anyone breaks out the champagne, what is not yet clear is:-

a) the shape and size of the "fixed offtake agreement" that will replace the current hedge arrangement - that's also going to limit ANGS's ability to benefit from market-value revenue from produced gas sales... but we don't yet know to what extent.

and

b) what happens to Mercuria's 8% royalty in perpetuity on all SFBY gross field revenues - is that going to remain in place, and if not, what is it going to cost to get out of this existing contractually enshrined term?

So we need to see the detail underpinning the replacement financing, which hopefully should now be concluded (finally) by this Friday. It'd be hard to imagine Richard Herbert having to ask for a fourth extension on the second junior loan, owing to his again missing yet more self-set deadlines.