Member Info for JD-Nau

According to the real-time figure that Singhie has been posting on this board all year (thanks for that Singhie, it’s an invaluable resource) we can get a really good idea of how much money Saltfleetby has generated for Angus this year. It’s a lot.

Jan-23 Therms: 1,909,995 Revenue: £1,759,930.52

Feb-23 Therms: 1,665,428 Revenue: £1,481,677.39

Mar-23 Therms: 1,833,268 Revenue: £1,673,093.54

Apr-23 Therms: 1,751,187 Revenue: £1,264,570.11

May-23 Therms: 2,604,715 Revenue: £1,960,176.78

Jun-23 Therms: 2,440,970 Revenue: £1,862,192.33

Jul-23 Therms: 2,957,493 Revenue: £1,618,180

Aug-23 Therms: 2,677,659 Revenue: £1,584,157

Sep-23 Therms: 2,311,840 Revenue: £1,320,691

Oct-23 Therms: 2,748,291 Revenue: £2,134,217

Nov-23 Therms: 2,301,912 Revenue: £1,632,991

So by the time we include December Angus will have generated a revenue of £20 million from Saltfleetby this year. With the cost of sales running at about 14% of the revenue (£2.8 million) and administrative expenses largely stable at between £3.5 million - £3 million per year then this leaves the company about £14 million per annum with which to service debt and pursue more projects. This is about three times more than is necessary to service a £20 million loan over 5 years, and means that there should be plenty of cash in hand for any new drills required at Saltfleetby and, more importantly, the acquisition of new assets.

Onwards and upwards!

Dan, the trolls really do seem to be rather upset today. Still I am sure that they will get together and regroup to come back with more new doom later today or tomorrow. It's almost like they have a grudge against the company.

I see that nutty Sarah has been posting here delist nonsense here again. Come on Sarah, give us a date for the delist you have been touting for the last two years. You have the inside track right?

They don't know this Dan, that is the point that I have been making again and again over the last few days. They know nothing about financing or business whatsoever. They were telling us that £20 million of debt financing should be done in 24 hours. They are all absolutely clueless and they prove it almost every time they post.

It hasn't taken them long to come up with new reasons why we are doomed has it. It's laughable. Best to ignore them.

Onwards and upwards from here.

So WG18 the other day it was the lack of financing that was going to destroy Angus and now that has been sorted it was the warrants. The same warrants that if exercised will bring in at least £1.2 million in cash to the company at the worst-case figures that you yourself provided yesterday.

We're doomed I tell you DOOMED!

LOL.

The more I look at today’s RNS, the more staggering it is in terms of utter ineptitude. It is just full of wea-sel words and downright lies.

They claim that, having submitted an EIS for Colle Santo that “the Company will focus in the coming weeks on its concurrent effort to secure approval to carry out a long-term test and monitoring of the field.”

But this is nonsense. It is no different to me announcing that “I will focus on the coming weeks on my concurrent effort to secure approval from the British Parliament for me to be appointed as head of state in place of King Charles”

The company may well focus it’s efforts on acquiring the long-term test approval, but just like my cam-paign to become King, it will not get anywhere because there is no legal basis for it.

If you read page 5 and page 13on the requisition website: https://www.reaboldrequisition.com/wp-content/uploads/Colle-Santo-Project-Questions-v2.pdf Kamran Sattar provides a certified translation of the statement made by the Italian authorities last time that approval was made for a 24-month test pe-riod back in 2022. They said that:

“We must investigate the risk deriving from the presence and from the structural and maintenance con-ditions of the Diga di Bomba dam, also assessing risk scenarios associated with extraordinary and excep-tional man-made and natural events, cumulated with the effects of implementing the project.

Again, with regard to the need for in-depth preliminary investigations, it is not considered possible to carry out production tests for a 24-month period, while at the same time selling gas for compensation purposes in order to support the investments required to carry out the in-depth investigations needed, given the critical nature of the area, as repeatedly mentioned by the Proposing Party itself, and given the fact that by law, the assessments need to be completed before the works are authorised and before the activities are carried out.”

So there it is in black and white. There can be no approval for the 24 month test until the EIS has been approved by the various authorities . The last one took two years of review before it was rejected and the most recent one was only submitted today. How on earth do they expect us to believe that they will get this production approval in “the coming weeks”.

They are very careful in their language to imply progress while legally promising nothing, but it is all smoke and mirrors designed to imply progress while promising nothing. It is outrageous.

Tonynorstrom1 it was in the RNS on 7th August: https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/reabold_resources/news/rns/story/rd19g9r

The exact quote was: "LNEnergy is seeking a two-year, long-term production test permit which would significantly de-risk the full concession permit approval to allow for 20+ years of production. The Company expects a decision to be made on the two-year permit later in 2023."

So the requisitioners were correct again about Colle Santo. On page 5 of their document here : Colle-Santo-Project-Questions-v2.pdf (reaboldrequisition.com) they pointed out that there would be no approval of the two-year long production until the Italians had approved a new environmental impact assessment. Despite this the company claimed that they would get the two year test permit before the end of the year, both in RNS and in interviews. Once again they are proved to have lied directly to our faces.

The development of Colle Santo has now moved back to where it was in 2016, 7 years ago and last time the environmental impact assessment took two years of review before it was rejected.

Still, never mind, the directors of LNEnergy have millions of our cash and shares in exchange for their option on a field that will never produce and S&S can be guaranteed their votes in the forthcoming requisition. It’s win-win all round, apart from for us shareholders.

It’s daylight robbery. Drain the swamp.

So like I have been saying repeatedly, in the face of all of the doom-mongers crying "doom, doom, doom!" the board of Angus knew exactly what they were doing all along.

Saltfleetby is producing revenue which makes servicing debt easy. It was not a problem to get new financing now, all £20 million of it, and it will not be a problem in the future.

The debt problem is now sorted and the company is on a massive upward roll. But this is not a surprise, it was always obvious what was going to happen, and I am delighted it has upset the deramp brigade so much. Watch them now completely change their tunes and pick on a new reason what Angus id "doomed, doomed, doomed!"

The last hurdle has been overcome. It is onwards and upwards from here.

I'll call out any directors who directly lie to shareholders. At the moment this is Stephen and Sachin. They have had a year since the last requisition to deliver results and they have not made any progress on West Newton. In fact they have gone backwards as they have wasted over £4 million on Colle Santo which they promised us would get the 24 month production test permit this years but actually looks like it never will. The entire investment just looks like a way to defend themselves from a requisition vote.

Kamran Sattar and Andrea Cattaneo have come up with a credible business plan about how they will address the company's woes and given the abject failure of S&S to achieve anything at all over the last 12 months I think it is time for somebody new.

Nobody thinks that Sattar and Cattaneo are Elon Musk and Steve Jobs, but there is no way that they can do a worse job than Williams and Oza. At least they have a plan for how to take the company forward and drill West Newton.

Holding stable in the high 7s, it looks like progress is being made. Well done to the Angus team.

Simon, your post has not been removed, it is still there at 12.01.

I have no idea why Kamran pulled out of the bid at 0.2, that is probably a question for Heid. But I cannot see how pulling out of a bid for a company can be considered a "criminal" action. It certainly does not compare to the consistent lying to shareholders that has been carried out by incumbent directors, both on the permitting for Colle Santo and the drilling of West Newton.

Simon, your post has not been removed, it is still there at 12.01.

I have no idea why Kamran pulled out of the bid at 0.2, that is probably a question for Heid. But I cannot see how pulling out of a bid for a company can be considered a "criminal" action. It certainly does not compare to the consistent lying to shareholders that has been carried out by incumbent directors, both on the permitting for Colle Santo and the drilling of West Newton.

Some form of present from Block would be very welcome. Christmas or before.

That said, it does feel like we might be in a position to rebound from these new lows in the near future. Here's hoping.

I agree that there is no defence for the current directors and they have failed beyond any hope of redemption, which means that we have to vote them out, otherwise we are stuck with them and their value destruction.

I asked several times yesterday if there was anybody on this board that could give me any reason to vote for S&S and I did not get one response. Not a single person on here has anything good to say about them and the closest thing that anybody has come up with is that Sattar and Cattaneo might not be any better.

Personally, that is a risk I am willing to take. The two clowns have lied to us for two long and the Colle Santo permitting lie was the last straw for me. Of course, there is no guarantee that Sattar and Cattaneo will be one hundred times better but it is guaranteed that they could not be any worse.

Anyone with any sense has got to see that we need to vote the clowns out and drain the swamp.

Simon, why are you parroting this nonsense line from S&S abut Kamran Sattar and Andrea Cattaneo wanting to "take over the company for nothing"? It is just a way of discrediting any opposition.

My take on it is that the current CEOs have taken out £4 million from the company and delivered almost nothing in return. Even the money received from the Victory sale, which is their only successful investment barely covers their wages over the course of their tenure.

If you remove their wages from the equation then Victory has actually netted shareholders about £1.5 million. That is a terrible return over the last 6 years especially when you consider that they appear to have lost £18 million on Danube, Daybreak and Colle Santo.

Taking over the company for nothing? Not in my opinion. More like saving it from certain ruin by two shysters who have just lined their own pockets at our expense for over half a decade.

I think that an investor group seems like quite a good idea. It would be useful to have our voices heard by management both before and after the requisition. Investorjonny, I have sent you an email.

Lady of Aim does have a track record of having the inside line on companies she posts on. It'll be interesting to see if she is right this time.

KS as far as I can tell was not and has never been a director or part of the management team at Daybreak so how on earth could he have promised to drill a well.

Since you seem to be a big supporter of S&S can you give me any reasons that I should vote for them in the upcoming requisition? I cannot see anythign that can persuade me after the Colle Santo debacle but I have not yet seen anybody give even one reason why we should vote for them. Can you do it?

Output data getting higher again, so giving the company better numbers for the doom mongers.

As I have said repeatedly do not see an issue with Angus refinancing any loans here. There is no major problem with the production and there is no major problem with the gas price and there is certainly no problem with the profitability.

Ok, so the well took longer and cost more than it should, but frankly in the bigger picture of the lifespan of SFBY this is a total irrelevance.

As for the idea than new loans are negotiated in 24 hours it is simply laughable. There are a lot of people on these boards (you know who you are) that set themselves up as experts on everything but if you actually read what they post then it is clear that they quite simply do not have a clue.

As far as I am concerned, we have an experienced board, gas production and revenue coming in. I trust the board to be well aware of our financing needs and get them sorted in time and I am certainly not going to be dissuaded from this thought by a gang of derampers who are not even invested in this stock but come onto these boards day after day to bash it.