Member Info for HeadInTheSand

Caravanboy in answer to your question, ANGS has stated that the maximum production capacity of the field as provisioned is 10mmscfd (which equates to pretty much 3 million therms a month).

That info is in one of their answers to an investor question as featured on the ANGS website.

As those more realistic will note, when faced with very easily checkable and verifiable figures, all of which are in the public record, the cheerleaders can only reply with childish insult... how unsurprising.

What's very obvious is that the likes of RT003 and his ilk cannot deal wth incontrovertible and easily provable facts, hence their instant resort to abuse and insult.

It's literally all about the sidetrack. If ANGS delivers on this and it doubles production up to 3 million therms a month from Oct 1st, then I could see an SP in the region of 4p.

If the sidetrack fails and the field only delivers the 1.5 million therms per month George states it will over the next three years, then ANGS gets a gross revenue of c. £23.8 million out of Saltfleetby over that three year period. Out of that it is contractually obliged to pay off the entire loan plus interest (c. £14 million) and pay FESL the remaining cash chunk related to the acquisition (£6.26 million). That leaves roughly £3.5 million to operate a producing gas field for three years...

I have even ignored any costs of attempting the sidetrack, and the 8% revenue override that is due to the lenders once the loan is paid off, plus any other more general ANGS costs (non-SFBY related G&A, paying off the Knowe CLN etc etc).

Yup, it's all about the sidetrack.

That is the most bizarre post from RT003.

The hedged rate per therm of course has not changed at all. It's exactly the same today as it was when ANGS signed up to it.

That's how hedges work - they involve contractually fixed volumes of any given commodity being sold at contractually fixed future points in time at contractually fixed prices.

It's literally incredible that this is apparently not understood...

Asher, it is impossible to twist anything to any agenda if one merely states facts. You may not like them, but that doesn't prevent them from being facts.

Tony_C, quite true. There is indeed the prospect of gas production post the three year hedge. The issue for ANGS is that without a successful sidetrack, Saltfleetby will produce a nett loss for the company over those three years, given the several obligations that ANGS has tied onto it.

BV you state:- "Caravanboy, I think people forget that there are 2 wells producing the hedged gas which should hit the output target imo, and Angus will still make money ignoring the sidetrack at these prices."

But that's simply not true.

ANGS has hedged 52.375 million therms over the next three years, which at George's hoped-for 1.5 million therms a month of production (ignoring any sidetrack, as you state), is as near as dammit 100% of all production. (Okay, it's 97%)

If all ANGS's production is hedged, it obviously only gets the agreed hedged prices for its entire output. Therefore high gas prices make precisely no difference at all to things.

ANGS only benefits from elevated gas pricing if it produces more than the hedged quantities over the next three years - and to do that, it needs a successful sidetrack.

First gas isn't any sort of game changer. Why would it be? There's nobody that believes Saltfleetby won't produce any gas at all., so there's no doubt that first gas will be achieved.

The actual game changers would be firstly a) the start of full production from the two existing wells at a consistent rate matching or exceeding George's hoped-for 1.5 million monthly therms...

...and then b) a successfully drilled sidetrack kicking in by October and doubling said consistent rate of production.

Both of those things if achieved - and especially the second - would have a major positive impact on the SP. First gas? Not so much.

Herbert, you are correct. If the two existing wells produce at George's hoped-for rate (1.5 million therms per month), then presuming Jul, Aug and Sep are full production months, then 4.5 million therms would be produced vs the 3.375 million therms hedged.

That would give a cushion towards the 1.75 million therms a month that have been hedged for the nine months from Oct 22.

Full production is of course an entirely necessary milestone to achieve (not least because it'll reveal the achievable consistent flow from the two current producer wells). However, it's the sidetrack that is the far more significant milestone - the delta between what ANGS would nett out of Saltfleetby without and with a successful production-doubling sidetrack is vast.

He did indeed offer that latest in a series of endlessly much-revised predictions, Howey.

Nothing disingenuous from me, JPJock... just referring to what George directly stated.

Given George's recent decision to change the terminology he uses, do you see any difference between "first gas" and "full production"?

As anyone who bothers to do the slightest research know, George already made it perfectly clear in his latest interview that hydrotesting is not wet testing.

The issue of gas being produced for sale this month is really not desperately relevant.

Yes of course it would have been nice to have some production to sell at full/unhedged market pricing - but it won't be the end of the world when this doesn't happen.

The issue of full production needing to be in progress by July 1st... now that's an entirely different matter. At latest gas pricing, ANGS already owes Mercuria £1.4 million for July (or £45k per calendar day), no matter how much gas may or may not get produced within that month.

The next two weeks - and then the next 90 days after that - are going to be more than interesting.

Silly Buttons if I were you, I wouldn't waste my breath on a magically appearing 2 week old ID, whose only other efforts have been to try to ramp the car crash that is CLON.

Up to you, though.

Basically it means that the 2nd placing to Aleph and friends for £3 million can now take place.

Not that this is in any way new news, but ANGS's number of shares in issue is about to be increased further - to 2,556 million shares.

Speaking of failure to update, LSE could really do with updating its fundamentals on ANGS.

It's got both the number of shares in issue wrong (it still states 1,369 million when for at least two weeks, the number has been 2,283 million) and thus the MCAP wrong (LSE's stating £17 million when actually this should be over £28 million).

Especially since both figures are likely to change again very shortly, dependant on the pretty much certain outcome of the (E)GM.

BV all we know about for sure re the first tranche of 273 million shares is that Aleph itself only holds about 160 million of those - according to the major investor section of the ANGS website anyway. Wherever the other c. 100 million shares reside or whether they've been held or sold, nobody knows.

Equally, nobody has the slightest clue as to how many of the second tranche of 273 million will actually end up being held by Aleph.

Isn't it about time one of the heavenly choir posted an ASCII art rocket piccy? I mean, the second half of the placing's being ratified today and Aleph's presumably in the process of acquiring another 270-ish million shares...

True. Also, ANGS's own statement did not say what their own "assessment and planning" had concluded.

As I said, the question of whether a sidetrack attempt can be made while full production is running it has not been made clear at all. The IQ answer quoted by Erdb has the caveats of "Subject to... " and "...is planned". Friday's RNS merely states this:-

"The Company is also pleased to announce that it has concluded all preparatory risk assessment and planning for the forthcoming side-track at Saltfleetby and has advised suppliers of a spud date for drilling of 21 July 2022."

I really don't know why ANGS doesn't give a simple yes/no on this very important question.

Also agreed. Though we'll have a much better idea in three and a half months' time, by which point, ANGS will have needed to drill and deliver its successful sidetrack.

It's still not stated whether the drill attempt can be made without suspending production. We'll probably have to wait for actual spudding (July 21st was the estimate, wasn't it?) to find out on that one.