Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Baits, you are delusional.

I don't have a pop at ANGS because they're trying to get fossil fuel out of Saltfleetby - quite the opposite.

I have a pop at the bunch of untruthful and deceptive incompetents because to date they've utterly failed to do so, and so far have missed every single timeline they've promised.

Yes nomlungu, that is exactly what cotango means. It won't have cost ANGS anything up front, but as you and I have both pointed out, at current Q1/Q2 gas pricing, if July 22's 1.125 million hedged therms have been pushed out, that's gonna cost the company an extra £2 million plus, because gas prices then are about 200p higher.

I should imagine Mercuria were pleased to agree that.

"GL does have excellent negotiating skills"..... what a farcical comment.

360Phil is completely correct. A vital but brief reprieve has been granted, without which I strongly suspect the company would not have had sufficient working capital to pay Mercuria the £2.4 million for the July hedge (as noted, the recent £6 million megaplacing only delivered £2 million of free cash, so that wasn't enough).

The most likely thing is that Mercuria allowed the July hedged 1.125 million therms to be pushed into early next year. As stated, that prevented the company from running out of funds - but it hasn't been done without consequence , because George was as usual through his and the company's own incompetence over a barrel.

Firstly, the deferment is at the very least going to cost ANGS an extra £2+ million early next year. Why? Because Q1/Q2 gas prices are about 200p per therm more expensive than this month's.

Secondly, pushing that hedged commitment forward into Q1/Q2 2023 means that the total volume hedged per those two quarters must now be around 6 million therms each (they were originally 5.25 million therms before yesterday's last minute shenanigans). That's way more than George's most optimistic forecast for the two existing wells.

Which of course means that the a successful sidetrack - still complete radio silence on that btw since the last promised and of course entirely missed spud date - is now even more crucial.

In the short term of course, ANGS still needs to produce the remainder of the Q3 hedge - or it's screwed again.

What remains fadcinating is thta the shills anmd short-term heavenly choir continue to ignore the now blatantly proven fac t that the company has entirely misled the market in its last several RNSes. As late as the July 12th RNS, George was STILL assuring that Q3 production would "comfortably exceed" the total of the Q3 hedge.

As everyone now knows for sure, that was a complete fabrication.

There has been a small reprieve. That xannot be denied - even if the volumes now hedged in Q1 and Q2 next year have been increased by the deferral naking a successful sidetrack even more crucial now. And of course, because Q1 and Q2 gas pricing is so much higher, ANGS is going to end up owing Mercuria even more in that period. Still, the company has temporarily at least avoided running out of working capital, which would have finished it off.

But in getting the hedge deferral that it so desperately needed, ANGS has clearly demonstrated to one and all that the info it has continually repeated in its last several RNSes over the last few weeks has been utterly untrue. July 12th - yes, just 17 days ago - was the last time it stated via RNS that production would "comfortably exceed" the total of the Q3 hedge.

We all now know for sure that statement was totally untrue (and the more rational here had worked that out weeks ago). But ANGS simply must have known that it's "comfortably exceed" statement was complete BS when it made it.

The market has just had it confirmed in the most obvious fashion that nobody should ever trust a single word that it and its executive dream team spout - including those spouted via RNS. They're not even worth the spit they're said in.

UKHeaven (by the way, good to see a ratrional poster)...

We haven't been told how much of the Q3 hedge has been deferred, only that part of it has. I personally suspect it's the July hedged quantity that's been kicked forward.

If so, ANGS now needs to produce 2.25 million therms within the next two months to meet the reamining hedged Q3 quantities.

Separately, I am honestly surprised that genuine PIs aren't a lot more upset at the realisation that ANGS has been telling the market blatant porkies for most of this month...

Baits, yes. ANGS desperately needed a get-out clause from Mercuria (even though they kept pretending they didn't right up to a few days ago with their usual total lack of transparency).

However, as today's RNS makes clear, only part of the Q3 hedge has been deferrred (and (I'd presume the £2,6 million ish owed for July). Sure, it's a reprieve and a vital one - because ANGS was about to run out of working capital entirely - but ANGS isn't off the hook. It needs to generate revenue, because it's still got significant liabilities to pay, including the balance of the Q3 hedge.

UKHeaven, I am not wrong. Mercuria a) isn't a charity and b) continues to hold all the aces. The deferment of part of the Q3 hedge won't have been agreed for free.

But you're also right - at least in part. This is good news, in as much as a reprieve that was so obviously desperately needed has been gained at some unspecified future additional cost. That was essential, as the realists have been pointing out for weeks.

The core issue still remains though - ANGS has clearly known the dire situation it is in for weeks - and yet it has issued RNS after RNS over the last couple of months still stating that everything was just peachy - remember July 12th? Less than three weeks ago and the company was still claiming that production would "comfortably exceed" the total Q3 hedge. As today proves beyond doubt, that was a blatant falsehood.

We'll see how the company now does with this stay of execution - but one thing remains crystal clear. Not one word that the company states can be trusted. It remains utterly non-transparent and disingenuous with its shareholders and the market in general.

I've been "kicked in the nads" because, as I've continually said, George could not possibly pay off the Q3 hedge? And because I pointed out that there was no way production would "comfortably exceed" the total Q3 hedged volumes?

I and all the other realists have just been proved 100% right and George has proven himself to have no working relationship with the truth.

ANGS RNS July 12th 2022: " Anticipated production during Q3 comfortably exceeds the hedge amount as advised on 28 June 2022."

Complete and utter disingenuous and deceptive BS from the company, as it has proven beyond doubt today.

George had to beg to push the hedge out more because - and in direct contradiction to what the company has been saying via RNS even on July 10th - there was no possibility of the Q3 hedge being met. How ANGS gets away with stating these blatant untruths is beyond me

RNS Tues 12th July 2022 " Anticipated production during Q3 comfortably exceeds the hedge amount as advised on 28 June 2022."

That was so blatantly untrue - as today makes even more clear.

Very obviously, you cannot trust ANGS or Lucan farther than you could throw either.

I wonder how much more this is going to cost ANGS in the long run? However, it had no choice - it had to get part of the hedge deferred because it clearly has not got the working capital to make up the shortfalls on the swap contracts in the short term (as all the realists have been pointing out).

Another can kick then, except this time it's not just "jam tomorrow", it's also "higher deferred costs tomorrow" too.

So who would like to explain how George was being truthful when only 19 days ago he was STILL claiming that production would "comfortably exceed" the Q3 hedge?

He was very clearly and as per usual not telling the truth. What he was actually doing is begging Mercuria to push the hedge back.

You cannot trust one word that comes out of his mouth - and the market very obviously knows this (how could it not?)

Without a doubt there is gas to be produced out of Saltfleetby. That's not the point.

Instead, the point is... given the very significant financial liabilities that ANGS has contractually tied into the field, all of which are either already racking up a few million pounds per month (the hedge) or are about to kick in (loan plus interest repayments, staged acquisition payments), will ANGS run out of working capital before it can generate enough revenue from sales of gas to meet these?

...we get an RNS today confirming that the two existing wells have started full production AND AT OR ABOVE George's recently conveniently increased production rate projection (I know, I know, don't all laugh at once... when has the serial wild over-optimist ever under-promised and over-delivered on anything at all?)...

...it will be mathematically impossible for ANGS to produce enough gas in the two months remaining to meet the total of the Q3 hedge. "Comfortably exceed", eh George? Really not looking that way, is it?

The market seems to be well aware of this. To coin a phrase and given that the festive season is less than five months away, more and more seem to be thinking that "It's beginning to look a lot like Brockham..."

James is of course correct... although it should be noted that over 40% of the last £6 million megaplacing was actually needed "to satisfy lenders and regulators", i.e. for ANGS to have a positive bank balance to the level required by both.

Only £2 million of the megaplacing was available to be used as working capital... and ANGS has some significant financial obligations it is contractually bound to pay out pretty much imminently which really do "comfortably exceed" that £2 million free cash figure...

The problem with this theory of course occurs when anyone expressing a more wary and entirely fact-based opinion is automatically labelled "a troll".

Having said that if people want to fly in the face of all factual basis and oh so easily verifiable red flags and buy in, naturally that's entirely up to them.

Honestly, the deja vu is getting tiresome.

Lots of pretty insignificant short-term trader buys earlier today at around the 1.23p level... then lots of pretty insignificant short-term trader sells this afternoon at around the 1.29p level.

If you're into your very quick in and out 5% gains, then rinse and repeat, ANGS remains a dream stock.

...and what's going on with the sidetrack? Not been mentioned in dispatches since June 10th, when the target spud date of July 21st was announced (and of course , this didn't actually happen).

Since June 10th, there have been five more (lack of) progress updates on Saltfleetby... and not one has mentioned the sidetrack or whatever the latest revised schedule is to attempt it.

Given how crucial a successful sidetrack is (and even more so now) , this is a little odd, even for ANGS.

People should indeed read RNSes very carefully.

What was actually advised in the 28 June 2022 RNS was that the Q3 hedge would be "comfortably exceeded" PROVIDED THAT full production started on July 1st...

Needless to say, by now ANGS has missed as near as dammit one whole month of Q3 production, so there's no longer any chance of "comfortable excess".

I note with some amusement that RT003 (this BB's chief fantasist and Green conspiracy theorist who endlessly calls anyone expressing a more wary opinion "multi-ID evil green scum) - has now decided to issue instructions to others on what and how to post.

I honestly don't know what's funnier... this blatant attempt to control the narrative or the equally obvious hypocrisy, since he spends most of his time utterly ignoring his own advice and hurling bizarre insults at literally anyone who's less than impressed with George and ANGS, despite the ever-growing mountain of evidence supporting such a view.

I think a large dose of self-awareness may well be called for.

Bensherb you should know by now that the heavenly choir of Lucan fanbois (made up of short-term traders and fantasist dreamers) get driven into a state of absolute fury if anyone asks a perfectly reasonable and utterly fact-based question such as yours.

That's because they are permanently and violently allergic to inconvenient truths being mentioned by anyone. For daring to pose such a fully justified question, you're very likely now to be called "evil scum" and to get accused of being some multi-ID green activist. That's the way they work and I don't know whether that's more laughable or tragic.

To correct you on one point, the average July gas price has been in the region of 275p per therm, so failing to produce any gas at all this month (despite countless and as usual entirely broken promises to the contrary) has actually cost the company over £80k per day.

Someone - and I think it was the clueless fantasist RT003 - said earlier today that some here believe that the lenders actually want ANGS to go pop, so they can get their hands on the asset.

This isn't true. At worst, the lenders don't care either way - they're sitting absolutely pretty, knowing that the c £14 million they're owed (loan plus interest at 12%+) is completely secure, because the gas field has been put up as surety. So they've got no risk.

Similarly Mercuria, which as well as being the primary lender is also the party sat on the other side of the hedge, knows that the sum it'll be owed on the 36 month hedge - which now looks like well north of £100 million - is also assured for the very same reason.

So, neither party will care very much either way - they (and especially Mercuria) are in a win-win situation, no matter what.

The only downside to ANGS going pop would be that the lenders would presumably then lose the benefit of the ongoing 8% revenue over-ride that they'd get to trouser once the majority of the loan is paid off.

However on balance, I don't suspect that Mercuria, by far the major player, cares either way.