Member Info for HeadInTheSand

1. There is no significant increase in production this quarter from the workover.

2. Production will struggle to reach Q2 levels, which themselves were 15% lower than Q1's levels.

3. Presuming that ANGS can arrest the decline in production volumes and get it stable at say 1.3m therms a month, then even allowing for new hedge pricing, ANGS is shaping up to be a company turning over perhaps £15m a year tops.

I have always thought that any form of RTO was about as likely as Ann Widdecombe winning the ladies 100m gold for team GB at the next Olympics. Solely on the basis that ANGS has nothing to bring to its side of the table.

As to OTM's latest prediction that "the ‘original’ debt will stand alone under the new terms", sure there'll be new and more usurious terms - because again ANGS has absolutely no cards to play in any "resculpting" negotiations. But in addition to that, ANGS direly needs the level of finance it has access to to be dramatically increased - I think they'll desperately be looking for that £20m loan (none of which they've managed to pay back as of yet) to be increased by at least £10m more, to cover other existing and already incurred liabilities.

The question then becomes twofold: a) Does Trafigura have an appetite to throw another £10m at ANGS? and b) Does ANGS have a snowball's hope in the tropics of paying that increased loan back?

An excel file? Don't flatter yourself, OTM, you're really not that important.

Any poster's entire posting history is visible by clicking on their ID name - always mildly amusing to do with your ID to see if you've ever been anywhere near right with a single one of your assurances and predictions (you haven't).

I remember you not really understanding what a smart phone was, so it's unsurprising you didn't know this.

As you're already aware Onetomany, you don't fit in any category that I was directing kind words towards.

It finally looks like the endless lies are catching up with Pinocchio Ben Haim and that this interminable saga may at last be reaching a conclusion (an unfortunate but utterly unsurprising one to many).

For all that it may have raked in a fair few million quid, this has never been a particularly well-constructed, skilful, credible or subtle hustle. Nevertheless, it has been a highly damaging one for far too many and one can only hope that ABH faces as many consequences as possible for his actions.

Noel, I'd actually like to be wrong as well, because - leaving aside the company shills - there are good people here who've invested their hard-earned in good faith and who've been consistently let down by the company for far too long.

However, sadly I believe that the most realistic approach is to extrapolate projections from fully evidenced mid- to long-term trends and cast-iron audited facts.

Your revenue numbers for H1 (Sep 24 to Mar 25) are of course correct, but they don't reflect where things are now. And it remains true that, even when generating nigh on double the amount of revenue it's now producing, ANGS were still incapable of making any payment back to Trafigura back against the (current) £20m loan.

Noel,

In Calendar Q2, ANGS produced 9.9601 mcm of gas according to the NSTA results, (with production volumes notably declining over the quarter, but let's ignore that).

That equates to something like 3.8m therms. Say all those therms got sold at the new hedge rate of £0.86 (they didn't - almost all of that got sold at the old and much lower hedge rate, but let's ignore that too).

That would give a quarterly turnover of 3.8m * £0.86 = £3.268m for the quarter. Take off the 8% owed on the eternal ORRI royalty to Mercuria and Aleph and you get £3.007m as a quarterly turnover out of Saltfleetby.

Let's assume that ANGS can maintain current production rates (all the daily production figures from Jan 1st this year indicate that it actually can't, but let's be optimistic). That'd give an annual revenue of just over £12m at current hedge pricing (and current gas spot pricing).

Add a bit for condensate sales and the trickle of oil out of Brockham and you'll see why I said "an estimated annual turnover of £15m" (and I was being generous).

Non news flash. OTM has no reliable sources. His "sources" consist of his own blinkered imagination, pluscwhatever tidbits he's fed by those who use him as a useful idiot.

Which explains why he is always and invariably wrong - and why he's so virulently allergic to facts.

Here's a fact-based question. How is a company that desperately needs to refinance and increase its borrowing by around 50% up to £30 million at sky high interest rates possibly going to be able to support that debt, when it's only tracking to have an annual turnover of c. £15 million even at the new hedge prices? After all, ANGS utterly failed to pay back any of the current £20 million largest debt, when turning over substantially more...

Dougb, your inside track is usually on the money. Interesting... I'll wait with anticipation.

As I said, classic company shill tactics.

Creating a new ID just 2 months ago (in fact, the day after suspension was announced), then spamming the board with multiple substance-free nonsense posts in a desperate effort to drown out the inconvenient but entirely fact-based truths posted by the realists here.

Add in a sprinkle of frankly mildly amusing demands to know who's invested what and when, followed up with the usual accusations that anyone daring to hold a less than rosy view on ANGS must be anti fossil fuels... we've seen it all before.

You used to get a more competent class of ramper here... the current crop are hopeless. Mind you, they have nothing to work with.

Aaaah ResRes, another sock puppet account. Been a member for all of 2 months. Joined LSE the day after ANGS's suspension - whoda guessed?

Two teeny things, ResRes. Firstly, everything that those of a more realistic opinion have said about ANGS have turned out to be entirely accurate. Secondly, nobody can be scared into selling their shares, because they are suspended.

Do try harder.

Malcy only ever writes puff pieces - he's just a one-man PR agency for hire.

As to his comment "Production from Saltfleetby was good and despite a little down time, due to fitting the booster compressor the overall result benefited revenue"? Cold hard reality shows that to be entirely factually inaccurate.

As ANGS itself admitted, production fell by 14% in Q2 over Q1. More to the point...

Average daily production over the entire month of January 25 (well before the compressor was installed) was 0.1378 mcm.

Average daily production over the entire month of June 25 (well after the compressor was installed) was 0.1128 mcm.

"The overall result benefited revenue", eh, Malcy? What a clueless know-nothing hack for hire.

Amit's updates have specifically and explicitly named both Johnson Controls (just once on 15th April) and Johnson & Johnson (again just once on 12th June). Both before *and* since those points, he's claimed that all information regarding the alleged licensing deal and the DaaP purchase is tightly restricted by NDAs...

The concept of an NDA that vanishes and stops applying, only to magically reappear a little later with all its restrictions still in place is utterly bizarre - but hey, that's CTAG for you.

A massively overborrowed AIM microcap issues a positive sounding RNS... hardly unusual, is it? Name me one ANGS RNS that hasn't sounded that way.

I mean, every RNS ever issued by equally hopeless basket cases such as UKOG and PPP has always been awash with positivity, so it's hardly a meaningful indicator, is it? Surely noboady expects these serial failures to actually present a realistic picture and tell the unvarnished truth, do they?

"Booster compressor... subsequently positively impacting on production."

Really? 14% less gas produced in Q2, compared to Q1? 30 day rolling average daily production now below 0.11 mcm, compared to 0.145 earlier in the year?

Interesting use of the terminology "positive impact" there...

I don't see why this is news.

Anyone actually bothering to base their analysis on easily obtainable cold, hard facts was already aware that ANGS was going to produce c. 15% less gas in Q2, compared to Q1 (despite the installation of the compressor).

And any who can use a calculator was already aware that ANGS was going to have to fail to pay the second of sixteen quarterly loan principal repayments of £1.25m - after having already been unable to pay the first one.

And then there's the interest continually due on that Trafigura loan...

And then there's already a year's worth of the eternal 8% royalty that's owed to Mercuria and Aleph that none of has been paid yet...

And then there's the £1.88m (plus interest now at over 20% per annum) still owed to PF...

And then there's the £4.062m ((plus interest now at over 14% per annum) that the HY accounts revealed is *still*owed to Trafigura due to missed hedges...

Yep, everything is awesome.

Onetomany says "Cash building nicely"... the RNS states "...which includes the Company's second repayment which became due as of 30 June 2025 and has also not been paid as yet. The Company will inform the market once an agreement has been reached."

So that's now £2.5m that they're overdue paying... (on top of the numerous other already incurred liabilities).

Still, I suppose it's one way of building your cash... simply don't pay any of your bills.

I doubt anyone is "intrigued", since nobody gives the slightest credibility to any of your posts, following your lengthy and unbroken but (credit where it's due) remarkably consistent track record of posting utter nonsense.

I think you may be confusing the meaning of the word "intrigued" with that of the phrase "ripping the p*ss".

As for 16 letter words? I suspect that words of precisely 25% of that length are continuing to spring to people's minds as apt epithets for your good self.

However, it is deceptive for a company to report a profit of £750k, if the only reason that "profit" exists is because it's been unable to to pay a £1.25m instalment (the first of sixteen) on its due date.

Macrofabrication.