Member Info for NeoGeo

You prioritise wells with the best risk-reward. If one is flowing cleanly, you don’t waste a workover slot. That’s capital discipline, not avoidance.

They can’t give numbers yet. Flowback phase is messy by definition. Gas, water, condensate all mixed. Anyone demanding instant uplift doesn’t understand how wells behave post-acid.

Exactly. And that revenue increase was driven by volumes, not just price. Gas sales up 19%, condensate up about 21%. That’s real production, not financial engineering.

It’s repeatable because it’s not weather or pricing. It’s uptime, compressor optimisation, and better well management. They’ve literally told you where the uplift came from.

Merry Christmas all

Well ultimately they need to take the share price up significantly, so if fernandes is the man than to do that then he just needs to man up and put his name forward and finally get us back up.

I disagree. This reads like fear-mongering driven by an ulterior motive rather than a balanced assessment of the situation. The issue with Angus is clearly financial, and the fact that he is stepping in suggests an attempt to address that directly. Until an RNS is released, none of us have the full facts, and speculation at this stage isn’t helpful. I would have no objection to Fernandes becoming CEO if he succeeds in stabilising and improving the company’s financial position and starts delivering after years of misery.

It does feel deliberate. Fernandes attaching his name to this signals a degree of confidence in the ongoing discussions with Trafigura. Finance Directors rarely put themselves front and centre unless they are comfortable with the direction of travel. His involvement is therefore reassuring and, to me, reads as a subtle but clear indication that the debt discussions are progressing constructively.

Harsh but fair. Strategic decisions under Herbert left Angus exposed to exactly this scenario — single lender dependence with no fallback.

No argument there. Herbert was terrible. He was the one who allowed debt to spiral to the point where one counterparty effectively holds the keys. That concentration of risk was a huge mistake and shareholders are paying the price.

I agree. People underestimate how conservative lenders like Trafigura are. They don’t throw good money after bad. The fact they’re backing production enhancement while the company is suspended tells me negotiations are constructive behind the scenes.

Had the weekend to relax and revise the rns, and for me, the most important part of this RNS isn’t the operational detail, but the confirmation that the workover programme is “fully supported by the Company’s lender, Trafigura.”

Given Angus’s financial position, that line matters far more than anything else in the announcement. Trafigura is the senior secured lender with first charge over the company’s assets and, in reality, holds the balance of power. If Trafigura had lost confidence in Angus and believed that forcing the company into insolvency was the best route forwards for them then there is no reason they would be approving additional spend at this stage.

It’s also worth reflecting on how we got here. Under the previous leadership, Angus allowed itself to become over-leveraged and effectively dependent on a single lender, with little margin for error. Decisions taken during that period left the company exposed to missed payments, restructuring discussions, and ultimately a suspension. Shareholders are now living with the consequences of that strategy.

What’s different now is the approach being taken by the current board. Rather than drifting while negotiations drag on, they appear to be actively engaging with Trafigura and focusing on stabilising and improving the underlying asset that generates the cash flow Trafigura relies on for repayment. This RNS suggests a more pragmatic, creditor-aware mindset — acknowledging that the route out of this situation runs through cooperation with the lender, not confrontation or wishful thinking.

Trafigura’s support for the workover implies that discussions are constructive and that the lender believes there is a viable path forward. Lenders in Trafigura’s position do not sanction discretionary capital expenditure unless they see it as improving recoverability and reducing risk. That is a very different signal from one preparing to pull the plug.

There are still obvious challenges ahead, but this feels like the first tangible sign that the current leadership is trying to untangle a difficult legacy debt situation and rebuild credibility with the party that matters most. Compared to the drift and financial overreach of the past, this looks like a step toward solving the problem rather than ignoring it.

Had the weekend to relax and revise the rns, and for me, the most important part of this RNS isn’t the operational detail, but the confirmation that the workover programme is “fully supported by the Company’s lender, Trafigura.”

Given Angus’s financial position, that line matters far more than anything else in the announcement. Trafigura is the senior secured lender with first charge over the company’s assets and, in reality, holds the balance of power. If Trafigura had lost confidence in Angus and believed that forcing the company into insolvency was the best route forwards for them then there is no reason they would be approving additional spend at this stage.

It’s also worth reflecting on how we got here. Under the previous leadership, Angus allowed itself to become over-leveraged and effectively dependent on a single lender, with little margin for error. Decisions taken during that period left the company exposed to missed payments, restructuring discussions, and ultimately a suspension. Shareholders are now living with the consequences of that strategy.

What’s different now is the approach being taken by the current board. Rather than drifting while negotiations drag on, they appear to be actively engaging with Trafigura and focusing on stabilising and improving the underlying asset that generates the cash flow Trafigura relies on for repayment. This RNS suggests a more pragmatic, creditor-aware mindset — acknowledging that the route out of this situation runs through cooperation with the lender, not confrontation or wishful thinking.

Trafigura’s support for the workover implies that discussions are constructive and that the lender believes there is a viable path forward. Lenders in Trafigura’s position do not sanction discretionary capital expenditure unless they see it as improving recoverability and reducing risk. That is a very different signal from one preparing to pull the plug.

There are still obvious challenges ahead, but this feels like the first tangible sign that the current leadership is trying to untangle a difficult legacy debt situation and rebuild credibility with the party that matters most. Compared to the drift and financial overreach of the past, this looks like a step toward solving the problem rather than ignoring it.

Agreed. It improves the odds of coming out of suspension with positive tailwinds. certainty.

That’s the shift. Saltfleetby is about optimisation, not validation.

Even modest success strengthens credibility, which Angus arguably needs as much as incremental production.

If they were not supporting then they could wind up the company- their support is crucial.

And even if peak rates don’t materially increase, improved uptime and stability alone can significantly improve monthly cashflow and forecasting reliability.

Exactly. Routine maintenance preserves the status quo. Clean-outs are designed to restore lost deliverability. That distinction matters, particularly on wells that have already demonstrated strong initial performance.

Https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/ANGS/saltfleetby-gas-field-workover-4894285btdmmo5h.html