Member Info for HeadInTheSand

PS I have also never asked for any post to be deleted. I'm a big fan of everyone needing to own their own words and opinions and for everyone else to be able to see what those words and opinions are.

Howey, I'll repost.

First off, I expected better of you, with your sadly trite loaded question. I might as well ask you "When did you stop beating your wife?"

However, I have no issue with transparency. Longer-term BB posters will know that I have invested in ANGS in the past. A few years back the UK O&G industry piqued my interest and since I'm quite a fan of doing my research before investing, I took a long look at a few AIM players back then, including checking out their respective BBs. I ended up plumping for ANGS.

But not before becoming aware of a few blatantly ramptastic and endlessly posting individuals at that time on other oiler BBs. That was immediately clear - so it's hardly the "detailed knowledge" you claim, but instead merely noting the bleedin' obvious.

I have posted a fair bit on UKOG before - but admittedly not in the last year or so. I've reserved my comments for ANGS, because that's the stock I've researched the most, so that would seem to me to be the most appropriate.

I have just the one LSE ID as has always been the case (it's never changed or been added to)... but if you want to fall for the Qanon-esque multi-ID conspiracy theory route so loved of the heavenly choir in their efforts to discredit opinion that doesn't suit their agenda, that's your inalienable right I suppose...

Shame my answer to Howey got deleted on this thread...

There's a saying somewhere about chickens before hatching. According to the market anyhow, today's news seems to have been worth c. 10%, which is reasonable for another necessary milestone having been reached.

Let's see where things lie, once it's known how this sidetrack will actually produce - so in about a month or so.

Oh and RT003? Seriously? Still determinedly trying to propagate the multi-ID lie, I see... if I were you, I'd stick to the fantasy world inside your head.

Asher, it's a tired and boring tactic to spread blatant lies about what someone has allegedly said in an effort to discredit them.

To deal with your claims one by one:-

No gas?
I've never claimed that.

Hedge won’t be met?
I've only ever stressed the importance of meeting the hedge from a financial point of view. Needless to say, it wasn't met in either Jul or Aug as we all know now.

Hedge won’t be deferred?
Indeed I did sat that - and I was right. As GL had to admit recently (before being hoofed upstairs), Mercuria did NOT allow the hedge on the missed production months to be deferred, despite earlier ANGS assurances to the contrary. As ANGS stated, that's the primary reason it had to do the Xmas megaplacing.

Balcombe Planning Appeal Will fail?
I've never given an opinion on this, one way or the other.

Sidetrack failure?
As anyone halfway rational knows, this is still up in the air until what the level of any increased flows are known. Plus again, all I've done is to opine on the effect of a fully successful and production-doubling sidetrack (SP of 3p+) versus the effect of a less successful sidetrack. Plus if you're honestly claiming that today's RNS is indeed news of a "successful" sidetrack, then looking at the SP, the market clearly couldn't give much of a damn about that. Nope, the market know that as I said, this is just an admittedly important stepping stone having been achieved - but it's not the most significant and final one of those.

But hey - why start bothering with the truth? After all, you never have before...

Well, although there were positives in this morning's RNS as already stated, the market demonstrably views the achievement of this latest stepping stone as being worth a c 10%-15% increase in the SP.

Seems rational to me. NB and unsurprisingly not the "multi-bagger by close!" nonsense that some are still trying to claim. The actual meaningful news which will much more radically affect the SP one way or the other is due in about a month or so.

Amusing as usual. Saner heads will not find anything in my post above to object to.

Brief recap - it's an important and positive step, but not the final one, crucial detail on which is still awaited and probably a month away.

That's because one has to see the RNS for what it is (and not through the usual over-egged rose-tinteds).

The big positive is of course that the next stage (and one of the more tricky ones) has been reached with the drill. It's got to where ANGS presumably wants it to be and that's clearly an essential stepping stone.

However, the key to ANGS's eventual SP is (deja vu time) "How much gas and by when?". That still remains an unknown because of all the subsequent activities necessary to actually get sidetrack gasflow started and (far more importantly) quantified. But at least we now know the company is one stage closer to being able to get that done.

Other news in the RNS? The eye-wateringly expensive (SONIA plus 15%??? Ouch)! short-term loan facilitybeing arranged will come as a surprise to many, especially so soon after the Xmas megaplacing, because after that and at this point, it's hard to see why ANGS should need yet more funding. However on the plus side, it's only a facility, so ANGS may not need to dip into all or any of it... and although odd, it's a sight more palatable than another £3-4 million dilutative placing, so that's good.

Also good IMV is George's being hoofed upstairs to fill in the departed Paddy C's "figurehead" role. Having someone with actual relevant experience in the CEO hotseat is a definite positive and can only be a good thing.

To be fair (which is difficult with Mr(add his IQ level here), he didn't post misleading info... he just asked some (particularly dumba$$) questions.

The answers to these are:-

a) We'll hear when we're told.
b) Nobody outside the company and its inner circle knows more than has been publicly communicated
c) See a) and b) above, but the answer will lie somewhere between "nothing" and "everything".

Tiresome, I agree.

By the way, the comment about posting information that is false or misleading applies to false or misleading information of either type, both positively or negatively slanted. There are more than a few who might be well saerved bearign that in mind.

Late to this thread, but all the very best wishes to you, Yanis. You're one of the good guys.

It shows nothing more than 5 million ANGS shares got traded within that period.

In other equally earth-shattering news, water is wet, death may limit one's future career options and the sun rose in the east today.

Robday, I don't disagree much with your latest revised prediction, now that you've decided to take the debt into account.

A fully successful sidetrack with audited production figures to back it up would IMV pretty much immediately deliver an SP of 3p+ in the short-term, and that set to further rise (provided doubled production stays consistent) as the debts get paid off and the hedge draws to a close, both by mid 2025.

Seriously BV... grow up.

Thank you (I think), Maddog. But it's (currently at least) a truth, not the truth.

Thing is, my opinion on the outcome of a fully successful sidetrack has never wavered. An SP of 3p+ would seem easily justifiable.

However, while things remain undefined one way or the other, I am also damn sure it's more than well worth considering the other "what if" (much to the apparent annoyance of dyed in the wool pompom wavers). Flipped coins tend to have two sides in play... at least until they land, that is.

Two things.

The only thing that no RNS today means is that nobody external to the company yet knows which way this particular cookie will crumble. That's all... no different to yesterday or any day previous re Saltfleetby.

Secondly, your claimed net profit (net!!!) figures per year are majorly overstated. A fully successful sidetrack that doubles production up to say 3.6 million therms a month would add at today's gas pricing an additional c. £30 million of REVENUE per annum.

Add that to the c. £1 million per month of revenue that ANGS will benefit from under the hedge and you'd get annual revenues (NB revenues, not "net profit") of around £40 million. Out of which (obviously) and over the next 2 1/2 years, field capex and opex costs needs to be paid, along with general G&A costs and also servicing of the various incurred liabilities/debts (c £16 million).

So no, categorically not "£40-£50m net profit per year"... for the foreseeable anyway. That's just cheerleading nonsense.

I really don't know why people insist on coming up with such over-egged exaggerations? Because a fully successful sidetrack would see the company in a very rosy position anyway, with an SP in the 3p+ mark IMO. There really is no need to overstate things...

"Angs fell 6.69% yesterday, which is not a good sign."

I disagree. Yesterday's violent and bizarre price yo-yo cannot be read as a sign of anything at all - apart from the fact that some very short-term traders (and bigger boys, I'd reckon) made themselves a very tidy sum on the day. What was it eventually? A c. 20% swing during trading hours? Very rich pickings if you know what you're doing.

No, all that can be gleaned from yesterday's price shenanigans is that the share is clearly very volatile, as such is apparently very easily influenced in one direction or another... and that no mere PI will ever be able to find out what actually caused the extreme movements on the day.

The LadyOfAIM has a lengthy track record of releasing fake news that suits his/her trading agenda.

Sadly he/she has all too many willing fools that publicise whatever BS she decides to tweet and (whether knowingly or unknowingly) help run her schtick for her.

As I think anyone would agree, RNS or nothing.

Surely we should be due a speeding ticket, no?

Push if you'd actually read and understood my answer to V-I-I's posed question, you'd realise that I said that I thought ANGS had probably managed to pay off the two missed and closed monthly hedge contracts with a combination of Dec placing money and revenue from produced gas.

What they've done with any remaining revenue from gas sales over and above that, of course nobody outside the company has a clue - though I'd suspect that next in line for payment would be the lenders of the £12 million loan.

The same maths that led you to claim last week that a successful sidetrack would generate an additional £80 million of annual revenue?

Me... I prefer facts.