Member Info for HeadInTheSand

As has been pointed out repeatedly, the definition of "shortly" has constantly moved into the future.

It's simply not worth using the word - "maybe, just maybe some time" would be a whole lot more accurate, looking at the numerous past lines in the sand drawn by Amit, all of which have been entirely washed away by the passage of time.

PS that's a very smart question from Malvolio. There are probably numerous good reasons why this shouldn't be done... but still, it's well worth an ask.

Ocelot may not be the best share-promoting investment guru there's ever been. He/she has been singing the praises of UKOG for equally many years, if not longer - and things really aren't looking too clever over there.

No. It's running at least six weeks late. Perhaps you might try doing the barest minimum of research?

The following from IQs on the ANGS website/

Has the new permanent pipeline been installed at Saltfleetby now and what impact will this have on costs moving forward? Thank you Asked on 1 September 2023

The pipework for the permanent flowline is being fabricated for installation during September, with a goal of commissioning the new line in early October.

...hedge contracts, not hedge ostracised. Gotta hate spellcheck.

Oofy, you are quite correct, if one factors in the 8% "royalty" on gross revenues (as one should). That 8% levy to Mercuria kicks in as soon as ANGS has paid off 85% or 100% (it's unclear which... ANGS has said both) of the original £12 million loan.

Your £1.44m of extra outgoings is severely underestimated BTW. The 8% is on gross revenue, which means that the hedge ostracised have nothing to do with it. At 3 million therms a month of production, gross monthly revenues will probably average around the £2.5 million mark, so £30 million a year. 8% of that is £2.4 million, and as you know, that 8% is payable every year until the field breathes its last wisp of gas for ANGS.

"Better placed to refinance now than they were when George Lucan negotiated the original £12m facility."...

If true, that then begs the question as to why the two emergency short-term bridging loans were taken out at interest rates of 20%. in March and July this year. A 20% interest rate is hardly any mark of being "better placed".

And then the next question. We're told that the "global refinancing" is being negotiated at a potential 15% per annum. Although better, that rate is hardly a confirmation that ANGS is "better placed".

(Still, I hope ANGS gets it signed, because they really REALLY badly need it in the short term).

True BP, though I'm sure we'd both agree that such a high level of incredibly low-priced new shares would hardly be welcomed by existing PIs, if that option were taken.

However as is abundantly clear, something new needs to happen re debt... and fast.

As I've said more than once before, this is all about timing and ANGS (currently at least) not having enough time for production revenue to meet the schedule of its current already incurred liabilities. With regard to debt, something has to change and quickly.

A very simple, purely factual and immediately verifiable case in point - just look at the shortest term debt the company had to take on. As things stand right now, purely going by info the company has RNSed to the market, ANGS needs to repay c. £9.6 million within the next few weeks. That's made up of £3.3 million of capital plus interest against the first short-term bridging loan at 20%, taken out for 3 months at the end of March this year but then extended by a further 3 months, and then £6.3 million of capital plus interest against the second short-term bridging loan at 20%, taken out for 3 months in July this year.

Now ANGS hasn't got £9.6 million spare, so renegotiation and/or refinancing is urgently required. That's obvious.

Tony_Currie, you say "nonsense being spread".... then promptly agree with me.

You state "Our debt is large BUT the revenue generated can cover this in one single year"...

...and I previously stated "...it'd take ANGS a year to generate enough revenue to cover its existing major debts."

Make up your mind....

Well... ANGS does need to generate enough revenues to cover its monthly opex and G&A expenditure as well.

It's a timing question more than anything. Which is why the replacement financing deal would be a seriously good thing for the company, because it gives the company 18 months to generate revenue, unlike the existing £9m's worth of short-term bridging.

Hope I gave you the only possible answer to your question below, namely that at current production levels and presuming an average gas price of 90p per therm over the period and taking into account the existing derivatives, it'd take ANGS a year to generate enough revenue to cover its existing major debts.

It's not simply about the number of therms needing to be produced, because the existing derivative contracts make the timing of production important.

PS the below calculation makes zero allowance for any opex expenditure, which would be on top.

Well, part one of any answer is... what are the current liabilities?

There seems to be about £7.5m to pay off (plus interest at c 17%) on the original £12m loan.

Then there's £9m to pay off (plus interest at c. 20%) on the two recently taken out short-term bridging loans.

Then there's around £5.25m to pay off to PF to cover the remainder due on the 49% acquisition.

Those are the big lumpy debts as far as I can remember. So, somewhere around £23m inc interest due?

Presuming production levels stay at 3m therms a month and that gas prices average say 90p per therm over the entire period AND taking into account the effect of the hedge derivatives in place, it'd take ANGS about a year to generate a total of £23m of gross post-derivative settlement revenues.

Feel free to pick your own average gas price forecast over the next 12 months.

Wonder why?

13th December 2021

The Company is delighted to announce that a licensing deal has been completed with a major multinational technology business. Further details will be announced in Q1 2022.

In addition, the Company is also pleased to update shareholders that advanced commercial negotiations to release the value of its remote monitoring DaaP continue. While it anticipated completing these negotiations in 2021, it will now do so by the end of Q1 2022.

Unfortunately, he's still got hundreds of millions of shares left to sell, if he so chooses.

And he may well end up getting his hands on hundreds of millions more, if ANGS again offers (and he agrees to take) yet more shares in lieu of cash re the next staged payment due to PF for the 49% acquisition. That repeat of a "shares in lieu of cash" payment is pretty likely, given the fact that ANGS is clearly not awash with free cash at the moment.

...though apparently never in a good way?

For all that I am wary about this company, even I wasn't expecting SP levels to hit 52 week lows, especially after the successful and production-doubling sidetrack (however late and over budget that turned out to be).

One wonders who know what and what exactly is going on? Sure as I've said several times, that 18 month/£20m refinancing deal would be notably beneficial to the company, but I for one wasn't expecting to to be as crucial as it seems to be... it almost seems to be of life and death importance?

Or has anyone got any other credible theories as to why the SP is at a 52 week low (and in a rising gas price market, however temporary that may be?) I've never given much credence to the theory of artificial suppression of the SP to enable a dirt cheap take-over by related parties, but I'm even wondering about that now...

You can pick your own gas price average over the next 12 months - it's probably worth working out the revenue differentials after hedge settlements at 80p per therm (if you're feeling conservative) all the way up to 120p a therm (if you're feeling seriously optimistic).

Regardless of all that, there's not much happening with this share currently and it seems to be stuck in the doldrums, despite the assurances of some.

As the Stranglers said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTIhiyurWEc

As I said, this smacks ever increasingly of delusional paranoia.

I mean, it's genuinely bizarre.

If anyone - and literally anyone - takes a look at the trajectory of the ANGS SP and asks the completely understandable question "Hang on a second - the SP isn't doing what I thought it would. In fact, it's doing the exact opposite. Why on earth is that?", they are immediately jumped on and insulted by the more rabid of the cheerleaders and instantly labelled as a troll or an activist. (Any facts raised will of course be ignored).

BV in particular has got to the stage where he 's seeing anti-ANGS activists literally everywhere with his endless cries of "Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me!" - and he includes in that ever-widening group people who are blatantly obviously genuine holders, but who have merely dared to comment on the crystal-clear fact that things with the SP aren't going the way they'd like. Someone else used the word paranoia - it seems to be very well-chosen.

Rather more unpleasantly, he's now mocking people for having bought in at higher pricing. Here's what he just said this morning to one holder:-

"I do find your 30th June 9.50 reply to me amusing, "I,ve been buying small & medium amounts from Sept 22 monthly" ouch. And I notice the 2p to 3p prediction seems to be getting further away on each output update to get your money back. P.S. don't delete that post before others see you are drowning buying at the high 2's at that time ouch!"

Unpleasant stuff - and especially since back in Sept 22, BV was just as busily assuring anyone foolish enough to listen that ANGS was a sure-fire nailed-on multi-bag certainty. More than a tad hypocritical, one might think...