Member Info for KarlovyVary

It’s clear from today’s interview on Share Talk that if the metrics derived from the EWT at Horse Hill can be applied to UKOG’s other assets, the net present value (NPV) of the company is very substantial. As investor sentiment waxes or wanes, at any point in time markets can substantially overshoot or undershoot fair value.

I said last week that I feel UKOG is at a turning point in terms of market dynamics. The mood music surrounding it for its past year, its annus horribilis, has been shockingly bad. With our determined seller, Solo, almost gone (I personally feel it is still unloading), sentiment will improve.

Today’s Share Talk interview wasn’t the best forum to talk through NPVs, interchanging dollars and pounds, and making assumptions about the time value of money, price of oil, life of assets, recoverable oil in place, number of wells, oil pads, etc. Far better, and clearer, to have set that out in a presentation.

But the overwhelming sense from the interview is that - in terms of supply side market dynamics - UKOG is now becoming a very different beast. Through these EWT results, it has “pretty much just left the station” in terms of transforming itself into an integrated oil company. IF the metrics from the current EWT are generally applicable across its assets, its NPV is far in excess of its current “car crash” value resulting from its annus horribilis. Investors, whether its army of small retail investors, or big institutions and other oil companies, will increasingly see this. Value will out, and the share price will re-rate accordingly - no doubt with some "over-exuberant" froth along the way.

Ideally, to further improve the market dynamics of the share, I’d like to see Stephen Sanderson choose to purchase equity in the company he runs at the same price as his army of retail investors, and not simply rely on options awarded to him by the company, at (from memory) less than half a penny a share. The two are completely different, for obvious reasons (eg current shareholders post tax earnings always risk being wiped out, whereas his post tax money continues to luxuriate in the warmth of his pockets), and affect actual and potential investor sentiment differently.

As anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of economics is aware, ‘market forces’ are summarised in supply and demand. On a fundamental level, the determination of the price of UKOG shares is no different - market makers have an intermediary role in the market, and buy and sell UKOG shares to facilitate liquidity. Nothing more. The past year has been an annus horribilis for long term UKOG shareholders in terms of the market forces surrounding it.

In early 2017, the supply side forces were much more attractive. Billions fewer shares. Drilling a 100% owned well (Broadford Bridge). A CEO who said he had ‘seen, smelt and touched’ the oil. Core samples were dripping with oil. The CEO hailed the discovery as of ‘national significance’ and UKOG’s ‘flagship asset’. On the demand side, Bouygues bought a reportable slug of equity in UKOG. In short. favourable ‘market forces’ catapulted UKOG’s share price upwards in quick order from around 1p to 11p.

Since reaching that nirvana, market forces have reversed. Supply? Think no oil at Broadford Bridge. Taking out ‘death finance’, and three placings - swamping the market with billions of new shares. On the demand side, Bouygues sold up and left. The new placing shares were simply flipped by those who bought them. Solo Oil has been offloading tens of millions of UKOG shares for weeks. Long suffering private investors have lost faith in a CEO who has still not chosen to buy shares in the company he’s led for years, and whose communication since Broadford Bridge has been opaque and at times wretched. These market forces have crashed UKOG’s share price to where it is today. Forget market makers, conspiracy theories etc. Focus on market forces. Right now, some investors are capitulating and selling all their shares.

What of the future? I believe we are at a turning point for UKOG. IF our CEO can forget any more empire building, buying stakes of other companies, and perhaps use debt rather than equity, supply would improve. He should buy a stake in the company he runs. Whilst options are awarded to him by the company, buying shares on his own account would be through his choice, and improve investor sentiment (demand). There are regulatory permits and licences which, when acquired, will also improve sentiment (demand). The current determined seller of UKOG shares (Solo) will disappear. As the share price starts climbing again, investor sentiment will improve further. At some point, real institutional investors will start to buy in. Relatively few quoted companies remain independent if they have an attractive asset. UKOG has oil, likely lots of it.

The bottom line is that I expect ‘market forces’ to become more favourable and squeeze UKOG’s share price higher from here on in, IF our CEO’s unhealthy appetite for issuing bucket loads of equity stops.

Three posts in 1 day about the same issue. Amazing. For the intellectually-challenged among us:

My post is NOT about options. Any private investor now has bought UKOG shares AT THE MARKET PRICE, and may gain or lose accordingly. Stephen Sanderson, our Executive Chairman and CEO, has NOT SIMILARLY invested his money AT THE MARKET PRICE, despite being in position for 3-4 years.

OPTIONS ARE IRRELEVANT. They are NOT how you or I invested in UKOG, as they are NOT exercised at the MARKET PRICE. Hence the RISK involved in options is completely different.

My point about Keynes' quote that in the long run we are all dead is that some of us who hold UKOG shares would actually like / expect to see capital appreciation (NOT DIVIDENDS, apologists and excusers!) of these shares after SS has been in place 3-4 years. Not more jam tomorrow. Not more heavily qualified RNSs. Not more strategy requiring possible dilution of equity. Bar a few months last year, there has been no capital appreciation of UKOG shares during his leadership. The share price is languishing below 2p now, despite a declaration of commerciality for the Portland. Do we have to die before UKOG shows a reasonable capital return? No doubt, SS apologists and excusers will misinterpret and skewer the letters and words in black and white in this post. I can't be bothered making myself any clearer to them.

They're simply not worth the effort.

The stupidity of some on this board is breathtaking at times. I post. I specifically say Stephen Sanderson’s zero investment in the company he runs and leads has now extended to 3-4 years. And how do some respond? 'The Times article on BT's new boss is entitled: "Out of this world pay' for BT boss'…IRRELEVANT. The point is SS has invested NOTHING over his own money AT MARKET PRICES over 4 years, irrespective of his pay level. Another poster: “Do you not think he will be in a closed period during testing????” IRRELEVANT! I said 3-4 years - not over the current testing period. No wonder many people no longer read the profound stupidity of many posters on this board….Too many apologists and excusers for Stephen Sanderson, who always try to shoot down pretty much factual and reasonable posts by others. As Keynes once said, "In the long run we are all dead". Running a company with a share price below 2p for the majority of the time he's led it is a damning indictment. Long term holders of 3-4 years are reasonable in expecting the CEO to have delivered more progress - always summarised by the share price - after all this time.

Caught my eye yesterday, from BT: “In addition, Philip has committed to invest £2m in BT shares within 30 days of this announcement subject to any closed period dealing restrictions. This combined with the conditional buy-out will take Philip significantly towards the shareholding of 300% of salary which the Chief Executive is required to build over a reasonable timeframe.” According to

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/UKOG/13717589.html,
our own CEO, Stephen Sanderson,  “joined UKOG in September 2014 and was appointed Executive Chairman and Chief Executive in July 2015”. Four years / three plus years later, his committed investment to UKOG is exactly zero, if I’m not mistaken. No alignment of his interests with shareholders’ interests. Over 3-4 years. Shocking. No excuses. Forget closed periods. They don’t continue for this long. Having bungled PR on Broadford Bridge big time, investors are wary of him, and UKOG shares trade at a discount: every seller of UKOG shares now are receiving less for their shares than would have been the case if investors had supreme confidence in him. His heavily qualified RNSs on Horse Hill flows have not inspired or restored confidence. The share price wallows below 2p, kept down in part by billions of new shares issued to, in part, acquire new acreage which - to date, given the share price and market cap of the company - he has not demonstrated the value of to shareholders.

I could go on.

Please, Stephen Sanders! Invest your money in the company you are Executive Chairman and Chief Executive of. Forget options. The new CEO of BT is on, I think, roughly double your salary and has already committed to investing millions of his own money, AT MARKET PRICES, in the company he runs.

I’m sure it would give jittery private investors, who own a very significant slug of UKOG, tremendous confidence to own and invest more in UKOG if they could see their own leader actually leading by example, and investing in his own company rather than appearing to be something of an invisible man, more interested in the technical aspects of oil exploration and production than being a visible face for the company - with his own money invested at market prices in the company he runs (NOT OPTIONS!!!), marketing the company’s prospects to serious institutional investors, getting the company positively visible in the serious media….

An interesting factoid from the past, that I think has been overlooked, but which has a direct bearing on why UKOG’s share price performance has been so depressed, and capital growth for shareholders hard to come by.

On the 14 November 2017, UKOG had 3,548,120,962 shares. Its share price closed at 4.9p.

On 15 November 2017, it announced it had secured a £10m loan facility. Ignoring minor amounts raised by conversion of warrants, on 2 July 2018, the final tranche of the loan was converted to equity, and the number of shares in circulation 4,857,240,526 – an increase of 37%.

Therefore, £10m divided by the difference in shares – 1,309,119,564 – means the effective price of the fund raising was 0.8p per share. Or an astounding 83% discount to the closing market price on 14 November 2017.

A placing at even 3p (39% discount to the closing price on 14 November 2017) would have raised the £10m with circa 1bn fewer shares diluting shareholders, and weighing down the share price (basic supply and demand).

The billion extra shares are a grim legacy, particularly for shareholders who have been invested in UKOG prior to 15 November 2017. They have meant subsequent fundraisings and acquisitions have been more dilutive (ie carried out at a lower share price) than would have been the case without their presence.

Hard and searching questions should be asked about the capabilities of UKOG’s leadership.

Despite having a phalanx of advisers, Stephen Sanderson cannot communicate his operational results from Horse Hill in a clear and unambiguous way, one that doesn’t torpedo the company’s share price.

Buried in the 3rd August update (“Portland high-rate flow test successfully complete”) was the essential lens through which the subsequent (10 September) results needed to be viewed: “It should be noted that the above high rate results are not the long-term sustainable flow rates that will be utilised to assess the Portland's commercial viability as part of the next test phase.” According to the 10 September update, these are “sustainable 24/7 rates of between 140-160 bopd”.

He’s done no favours to himself, the company and shareholders by stating on 3 August that “The maximum rate recorded was limited by the rod pump's maximum rate capacity of approximately 470 bopd. Higher capacity rod pump sourced and mobilised for use at HH-1,” as many investors expected this headline high rate would be revisited in the 10 September update. It wasn’t specifically. Further muddying the storyline, the 10 September update stated: “Following re-perforation, well productivity increased by up to 65%.” That’s re-perforation only. So what impact did the higher capacity pump have?

In short, a kind assessment is that the 3 August update warned investors that, one, the high flow test was complete (so that the 470 bopd figure didn't need to be revisited, higher capacity pump or not) and, two, that the high flow rates were not those which would be used in the next phase, to assess long term commercial viability - the results of which were given on 10 September.

A more critical assessment is that Stephen Sanderson is a terribly poor, almost whimsical, communicator. He doesn’t write and present operational updates with sufficient rigour, precision and emphasis to eliminate ambiguities and set investor expectations at the levels they should be at. Instead, chat rooms become “runaway trains” of inflated investor expectations, and “poison pens” pounce into the cracks and fissures of his disjoined and poorly presented RNS reports. He doesn't use the media to communicate targeted messages to stop the nonsense. Consequently, UKOG pays the price by having a volatile share price, one that is at a discount because of his credibility gap, and is easily susceptible to baseless rumours. Genuine shareholders suffer from all this.

Since last year’s Broadford Bridge news fiasco, I’m not a fan of Stephen Sanderson. When will he (and his advisers) ever learn? Markets hate uncertainty, and in his operational RNS’s he keeps offering too much ambiguity and uncertainty. So, I note the lack of consistency between:

• 18 July 2018: “The highest recorded hourly metered rate to date, equates to an implied daily rate of 352 bopd and was achieved using a 20/64" choke, a notably more restricted setting than the 64/64" choke used in 2016.”

• 3 August 2018: “Stable implied daily pumped rates of 401 and 414 bopd of dry 36 API oil were recorded over two periods of 6 and 2 hours, respectively, with associated maximum half hourly pumped rates of 441 and 470 bopd…As maximum initial rates were restricted by the pump's capacity of around 470 bopd, a larger capacity pump has been sourced and has been mobilised to site for possible use during the remainder of the Portland test sequence.”

• 10 September 2018: “Following re-perforation, well productivity increased by up to 65%....Independent oil consultants Xodus Group's ("Xodus") analysis of flow and pressure data interprets that further HH-1 Portland vertical well optimisation could achieve a forecast sustainable initial 24/7 pumped rate of around 362 barrels of oil per day”
Where is the consistency across the 3 RNS’s? This is a sleight of hand. There is a sleight of hand here that we experienced last year with the RNSs for Broadford Bridge. He started off in July with implied bopd and choke sizes, focused on pump size as a restricting factor in August and, by September, voila! So, what was the highest recorded flow rate? What was the choke used? Well productivity increased from what to what? How much of this was due to additional perforations rather than the larger pump used? So how many barrels of oil were eventually extracted from this test? Successive operational RNSs utterly lack rigour and therefore consistency. From one operational RNS to the next, he seems to say whatever he feels like saying as opposed to what needs to be said to ensure there is clarity and consistency of story for shareholders. One big cost of his whimsical approach to information sharing is that the hard information gaps enable the “poison pens” to sow doubts in the minds of the weak, so that they sell rather than hold their shares, or buy new ones.

A final thought. Whilst a natural focus here is on the share price, there is almost none on value. Unfortunately, “other things are not the same” as last year, so a doubling of the shares in issue since then means 11p now would loosely equate to twice the market cap achieved in those halcyon days.

It’s gobsmacking that one poster today called 3 placings in a month “not a big deal”.

The choice of end June 2018 for comparison is totally misleading. For those who’ve been in UKOG for 3 years - let’s loosely call them ‘long term shareholders’ - they have experienced a doubling in the equity base, and therefore a halving of their original potential rewards. All other things being equal, UKOG’s share price tonight would be north of 4p rather than just north of 2p. Every one of those long term investors who may have sold some of their holdings is therefore receiving half as much as they otherwise would have done. I readily accept that oil exploration is a costly and risky activity, and the advantage of placings. What I absolutely do not accept is that our CEO has received circa £30m over the past 2-3 years and has failed totally to deliver on his ‘flagship’ asset at Broadford Bridge in terms of his ‘litmus test’ of commercial flows of oil. His miserable failure at both operational and communication levels has resulted in UKOG trading with a discount because many will not invest in a company whose CEO communicates with his private investors with the same opacity as the oil he’s famously poured in videos.

The choice of end July 2018 for comparison is voodoo economics in action, useful to those who icon worship Stephen Sanderson. But serious thinkers should see only “lies, damned lies and statistics” in a choice of date that paints the most flattering picture of the commercial acumen of our CEO.

If Stephen Sanderson was one of Lord Sugar’s would be apprentices, he’d be fired for showing little commercial acumen. Raise £12.5 at 2p and less, rather than stagger the fund raising? Where’s the return on £30m of equity raised in the past few years. Failure should never be rewarded with job security.

It’s gobsmacking that one poster today called 3 placings in a month “not a big deal”.

The choice of end June 2018 for comparison is totally misleading. For those who’ve been in UKOG for 3 years - let’s loosely call them ‘long term shareholders’ - they have experienced a doubling in the equity base, and therefore a halving of their original potential rewards. All other things being equal, UKOG’s share price tonight would be north of 4p rather than just north of 2p. Every one of those long term investors who may have sold some of their holdings is therefore receiving half as much as they otherwise would have done. I readily accept that oil exploration is a costly and risky activity, and the advantage of placings. What I absolutely do not accept is that our CEO has received circa £30m over the past 2-3 years and has failed totally to deliver on his ‘flagship’ asset at Broadford Bridge in terms of his ‘litmus test’ of commercial flows of oil. His miserable failure at both operational and communication levels has resulted in UKOG trading with a discount because many will not invest in a company whose CEO communicates with his private investors with the same opacity as the oil he’s famously poured in videos.

The choice of end July 2018 for comparison is voodoo economics in action, useful to those who icon worship Stephen Sanderson. But serious thinkers should see only “lies, damned lies and statistics” in a choice of date that paints the most flattering picture of the commercial acumen of our CEO.

If Stephen Sanderson was one of Lord Sugar’s would be apprentices, he’d be fired for showing little commercial acumen. Raise £12.5 at 2p and less, rather than stagger the fund raising? Where’s the return on £30m of equity raised in the past few years. Failure should never be rewarded with job security.

quantities at his ‘flagship asset’ failed miserably. Where once he was giving video interviews, he has become an invisible CEO, disengaged from his private investor shareholder base, not putting his own money into UKOG (answer: why would he if he knows how massively diluted those shares will become).

UKOG shares will recover with positive news flow at Horse Hill. But Stephen Sanderson’s reputation may take far more time to do so, if ever.

Why is it that if a reasonable but critical view of the commercial competence of Stephen Sanderson as CEO and Chairman of UKOG is floated, the response of some is “sell up then, and invest elsewhere”?

I could do, yes. But in many walks of life poor performance is not rewarded with job security. The buck stops at the top, and managers are replaced. Shareholder pressure - read institutional shareholder pressure - has led to countless CEOs and chairmen being forced out. Football managers are ousted by owners for poor performance. In most companies there is performance appraisal at some level for all concerned.

Many investors here have held UKOG shares for years. Some boast of buying in at 0.4p. With the share price hovering around 2p, they believe they’ve made a substantial profit. In a sense, they have. But, because under Stephen Sanderson the share capital has ballooned like a supernova, they’re profit on that 0.4 would have been not 1.6p per share, but 3.6p per share (4p minus 0.4p). Every man, woman and child invested in UKOG shares has experienced this decline in returns. Last year, the share price reached 11p. Now, with the market awash with additional UKOG shares, the same market cap represented by that 11p then is generated by a much lower share price, reflecting the additional circa 1.6bn shares in circulation. It’s toxic for long term holders. The have to buy more and more shares in UKOG to realize the potential value of their original investment. That is why I’ll be staggered if Stephen Sanderson doesn’t look to at least double his options by end 2019.

Activist investors see a great resource being managed badly and push management for change. Remember the film Barbarians at the Gate, with the RJR Nabisco managers flying in separate corporate jets to play golf. In that case, KKR ousted the managers and created a leaner, more focused and profitable company. They didn’t simply take the view
“sell up then, and invest elsewhere”. They pushed for performance improvement, and achieved it. And made a lot of money for themselves.

PIs formed 60% of UKOG’s shareholder base when I last looked. Our CEO and Chairman has show no respect for us. Three placings in a month? At 2p and less? If he truly believes it Horse Hill will be commercial, stagger the fund raising as the share price climbs. Doing it all now only rewards the faceless “institutions” that immediately flip their shares in the market for a tidy profit. They may look favourably on Stephen Sanderson as someone who is guaranteed to make them money, but long term shareholders who have seen their potential upside steadily fall under the avalanche of new equity?

The cold, hard reality is that over the past year, having Stephen Sanderson as our CEO has resulted in the shares trading with a discount. The Broadford Bridge fiasco sowed seeds of doubt in his professional and commercial competence where once there was none. His ‘litmus test’ of flowing oil in commercial quantitie

Blink, and UKOG’s share capital goes from circa 2.6bn in 2016 to 5.xbn in mid 2018. In other words, potential shareholder returns have roughly halved in 2-3 years. How? Successive equity fund raisings at circa 2p or less, and an awful loan conversion. It would be interesting to see just how much the faceless “investors” have made flipping shares faster than hamburger flippers in McDonalds. Millions upon millions, I guess. Where does the buck for this stop? Stephen Sanderson. The CEO and Chairman of UKOG, who repeatedly expresses his “confidence” about commerciality of Horse Hill, but sells ownership in this ‘Crown Jewel’ and more generally ‘flagship’ Kimmeridge at ludicrously low prices. He’s just banked £5m plus in June, and talked of reaching ‘positive cash flow’ by 2019. A fortnight later....that long?....he’s raising more and talking of UKOG now being funded for 18 months. Days later, an incredible third placing, supposedly for ‘opportunistic’ investments....Now, where have we heard these promises before....Ah! Quick flick back through RNSs associated with previous fund raisings. The money has never lasted the promised time. For 18 months, read 9 months, or early 2019. With the share capital doubled, I would be staggered if he doesn’t substantially increase (double) his options between now and end 2019. All genuine holders of UKOG hope the flow testing at Horse Hill will be monumentally successful. But, wherever the shares go from here, Stephen Sanderson has been responsible for raising - at incredibly bad terms for existing shareholders - circa £30m in a few years. Where was the fund raising when the price was 10p? Where is his sense of timing to minimise the massive dilution? There is no sense that the interests of existing shareholders are being protected by him. Pretty much anybody I think can go down to The Money Shop and get money. But the terms offered are so bad most of us don’t do it. Our CEO’s equity fund raisings smack of repeatedly visiting the The Money Shop. I think both his commercial acumen and his respect for the interests of existing shareholders is simply beyond awful. Please prove me wrong, Mr Sanderson.

One expresses a legitimate, factual and reasoned opinion on here. The reaction of the ‘bully boys’ on this board? “long winded load of Bolloockkks” (factual? reasoned? Evidenced? pretty emotive…) “Some on here are running companies with over 20 million turnover….” (so, I’m not? Evidenced? Making assumptions about others…no facts…) “your talking Sh it mate and couldn't probably organise a **** up in a brewery” (reasoned? factual? Evidenced? pretty emotive again…) “What a load of complete and utter tosh.” (factual? Evidenced? reasoned?…) “My fraction is a load bigger than yours” (schoolboyish? my willy is bigger than yours? factual? Evidenced? No. Puerile…) “ ...because you're not invested here…..” (factual? Evidenced? No…) Some people in life just react in a completely senseless, inappropriate way to legitimate views. Whether they’re billionaires or the world’s richest person or Joe Bloggs, delegitimising a reasoned, factual, view in such ways is a sad, emotionally and intellectually impoverished way of living one’s life…

and deliver significant and sustained growth in shareholder value.

Every person or organisation that holds shares in UKOG is a fractional owner in it and entitled to express a well reasoned opinion on its strategy and operational performance. The common link between the two is management. It develops strategy and is responsible for successfully implementing it. In publicly quoted companies, the goal is generally to maximise shareholder value. If a company’s management doesn’t meet this goal, shareholders can force a change in management. It happens all the time, among companies big and small. Sometimes results improve; sometimes not. Companies that under-perform get acquired, or find it more difficult to raise money on public markets on reasonable terms, or go out of business. Markets demand performance from company management. With around £20m raised over the past 3 or so years, as a fractional owner of UKOG I am concerned at the ability of the person responsible for the strategy (Chairman, Stephen Sanderson) and operational performance (CEO, Stephen Sanderson) of UKOG to deliver any shareholder value, let alone sustained growth in shareholder value. A flat share price over 36 months with a sharp and brief surge to 11p isn’t delivering meaningful or sustained performance - and no performance at the operational level: where is the oil from Broadford Bridge? How many barrels were extracted over the 9 months of drilling? Some on this board simply want to gaslight the facts. As a fractional owner of UKOG, I am only interested in performance. Show me the oil. I’m not interested in useless CPRs, new gleaming office space in Broadgate, £500,000 of security costs, undertaking a costly High Court legal action, and asking E&Y to produce an valueless economic report….£20m raised, and a significant chunk wasted on actions that have produced no demonstrable value add for shareholders. As a fractional shareholder with the same rights as others, I challenge UKOG management to use its scarce cash to deliver demonstrable and sustainable uplift in operational and market performance. And to use all available options to do so, including manager investing (more of) their own money in the company. Whether a shareholder has invested at 0.4p or 11p, where the share price stands today has cost them money (less profit or as a paper or realised loss). Anyone with a private pension would deem it unacceptable if their pension fund manager said and did nothing to arrest poor performance by a company’s management, and returned a negative sum to them after years of investment. Institutional investors push for management change when performance is poor. I am not one of the SCA (‘Stephen’s Cheering Army’), with almost blind faith in the man. As our corporate broker, I want Cenkos Securities to really feed it back to him that some shareholders in UKOG are really demanding that he lift his game - communicate his strategy, improve UKOG’s operational perfo

I sincerely hope the extended flow tests are a overwhelming success, and the share price moves significantly higher, and grows over time. However, irrespective of whatever success lies ahead, let’s not forget how many long suffering shareholders have been forced to sell their shares at abysmally low prices simply because there has been a lack of commercial focus at the top on protecting and growing shareholder value. Creating a news vacuum, where the scum life can spread vile rumours and peddle lies, is asking for trouble. Not buying shares in the company you run is asking for trouble. Not dealing in a transparent and timely way with legitimate shareholder concerns is asking for trouble. That lack of commercial focus has created a breeding ground for poisonous discussion on this board.

My confidence in Stephen Sanderson as our CEO, of UKOG, is shot to pieces. Is the oil there in the Weald? Yes. Is he the right man for UKOG to get it out? I increasingly don’t think so. His problem for me is that I have simply lost trust in him. He promises, but invariably fails to deliver. Take timescales. Broadford Bridge results were supposed to have been delivered by September 2017. In reality, they were not finally delivered until end March 2018. How many barrels of oil were actually recovered from Broadford Bridge? We’ve never actually ever been told. At end March, he promised that UKOG would move its focus “with all speed” to Horse Hill. The actuality? April passed. More loan conversions. May passed. More loan conversions. At the AGM, it’s claimed he said he expected Horse Hill to be in extended flow testing by end May. The reality? More loan conversions, and June arrives. Then another botched fund-raising, with a leak driving the share price below 1p. After almost 2 ½ months of “all speed” being only loan conversions, a falling share price and a £5.5m placing, the very next day after the placing UKOG supposedly received OGA approval for the extended flow testing at Horse Hill. A massive coincidence after almost 80 days. With another CEO, more commercially focused on protecting and growing shareholder value, they would have invested their own money in UKOG shares during this “with all speed” period to improve shareholders’ confidence and the share price. With another CEO, the placing would have been timed after OGA (and other) regulatory approvals had been gained. These two simple actions would have meant the placing would have taken place at a share price more than double the price it took place at, reducing dilution by more than half. As well, some of the loan conversions would have taken place at higher share prices - again resulting in far less dilution. Under Stephen Sanderson, the number of shares in issue will, at a minimum, effectively double. Where’s the money gone? Broadford Bridge? Finished as a production well, but which has produced how many barrels of oil to date? Security….apparently over £500,000, according to the also costly High Court action….barristers do not come cheap. A pointless CPR. A pointless Ernst & Young report. Where’s the demonstrable value from all this? For me, Stephen Sanderson has shown no demonstrable commercial nous. He’s failed to invest in the company he leads. He’s lost what reputation he joined UKOG with, and is an increasing liability to shareholders. The acid test of this is the share price languishing at 1.15p years after he joined, with (once the loan conversions finish) almost double the number of shares in circulation. Where’s the shareholder value, Mr Sanderson?

My point about our CEO buying shares is that it would send a signal of confidence to investors, improve the share price, and reduce the dilution to the equity base from the equity conversations. A simple yet powerful tool. But one which Stephen Sanderson has singularly failed to use. He asks everyone else in the market to risk their money in UKOG without risking his own. Dreadful leadership.

I�m a long-term shareholder in UKOG. But I have lost confidence in our CEO, Stephen Sanderson. He simply does not seem to be up to the job. Consider. He owns no shares in UKOG. Jan du Plessis, Chairman of BT, recently boasted on its results call that he had used one million pounds of his own money to buy BT shares. Mr Sanderson has never purchased shares in UKOG, has re-dated his options to buy the shares, and has failed to use even periods outside of �closed� periods to buy shares. The only �growth� he has overseen is in the company�s share base, by well over one billion shares and counting. He has failed to extract oil in commercial quantities from the assets he has bought with shareholders� money. He has spent scarce shareholders� money on pursuing costly high court orders and drilled Broadford Bridge to maximise scientific rather than commercial results. By his own �litmus test� standard of bringing oil to surface in commercial quantities, Broadford Bridge � which he spent more shareholders� money completing as a producing well � failed. To date, shareholders have not been told how much oil was recovered from Broadford Bridge. Shareholders have not been told whether the cement squeeze was undertaken and, if so, what the result was. Shareholders were not told the result of one of the zones he said the company would test. He has produced misleading tweets. This is now, I think, the third or fourth fund raising in the past 3 years. Each time he claims the money will last through to commercial production, but each time time scales slip � as with Horse Hill now, which we were told would be in extended testing by end May- Timescales for results on Broadford Bridge slipped from September 2017, to the risible final throwing in of the towel at the end of March. Shareholders were told the delay was not due to the technical drill. I could go on�.This morning, Gavin Patterson was forced to resign as CEO of BT, because he has failed to deliver shareholder value. BT�s share price today is much lower than it was when he became CEO. Stephen Sanderson�s record as CEO is appalling. I used to believe in him, but my confidence has completely ebbed away now. As Chairman and CEO, he is responsible for a multitude of mistakes, delays, poor communications, huge expansion in the share base, and the appalling last fund raising which, months later, is still overhanging the share price. As a non shareholder in UKOG, his interests are not aligned with those of shareholders, and it has shown in the way creating and maximising shareholder value has become lost. Now he wants to change the company�s status from an investment company to an operating company. Why? It�s really sad that so many investors here are having their hard earned money destroyed by our error-prone CEO.