Member Info for ocelot

I saw your post at the time, jaffas.

I didn't say anything, but, as you can appreciate, I didn't agree with your decision (but, of course, it's your money and your decision!).

If I remember right, ANGS's RNS came out a bit later. Personally, I thought their RNS was welcome and positive.

I wish you all the best, too.

YL,

You won't be surprised to hear me say that I don't agree with you, but I do recognise your sincerity.

You say you have written off your investment and, given your opinion of ANGS, you are not looking to reduce or recover your losses by buying back in again or averaging down.

So I'm not sure I can say much else than to wish you all the best.

On the day of the Brockham RNS, 28/06, the share price low was 1.25p and the close, 1.425p.

That RNS is now 4 1/2 months behind us.

The time is approaching when the share price will cease to be absorbed by the rear-view mirror and, instead, focus on the way ahead, Balcombe and Saltfleetby.

YL,

You are one of the more prolific posters on this board (alongside myself since the Brockham RNS, I'll happily admit!).

When you were positively-disposed towards ANGS, didn't you post anything positive?

Don't know about any killing, but there will remain funds available on the facility should UKOG choose to use them.

2 principal projects:
1/ Balcombe remains on course, despite all of the negative comments prompted by the EA's objection to their application;
2/ we await to hear further news of Saltfleetby.
GL estimated the Net Present Value of Saltfleetby at about 4p and suggested a figure of 4-7p for ANGS as a whole.
With the present share price at 0.80p, ANGS is not an obvious sell.

Bunks 211
Boyo 213
ocelot 230

UKOG: 80 posts
ANGS: 143 posts
UJO: 167 posts

So those who were positive on ANGS in the past and got it wrong will continue to get it wrong?

aprrox £3.4m at 01/10.
Have since raised £897,500 net, of which £650k is to cash reserve abandonment costs.
Will receive £200k from JT-P by 31/12 on repayment of his loan.

UT trade of 999,999: close of 1.08p.

It goes back to Gottcha's 2 posts of yesterday, Ja51, when you claimed to be Veronica, a lady in a man's body (although, speaking for myself, I wasn't entirely convinced).

Yanis, can't come soon enough (imho)!

The posters who spoke of a "storm in a tea cup" have been shown to be right.

We ... aim to submit this revised HRA to WSCC before the end of November.

So a little more than 2 weeks involved.

5m at 1.09p

There were obvious tensions 2 years ago.

Have those tensions now subsided or will the increase in Bilgin's stake stir them up again?

I don't know the answer.

This has been echoed by the Environment Agency (EA) who have requested that we provide an update to our original Hydrogeological Risk Assessment (HRA) report to enable them to support our application to West Sussex County Council (WSCC) for our planning application for an extended well test (the "Planning Application"). We are pleased to be given the opportunity to provide additional comfort to residents, WSCC and the EA and aim to submit this revised HRA to WSCC before the end of November.

Angus does not anticipate any overall delay to the Planning Application because, as previously advised, determination of the Planning Application is not expected until January 2020. Full environmental permitting is a precondition to Angus proceeding with any works at Balcombe and we are scheduled to submit our Variation of Permit application, which also details more specific measures on site drainage and emissions management, to the EA over the forthcoming weeks and, as in previous instances, concurrently with the Planning Application.

Postalot, your excuses for ANGS is as usual myopic, unidirectional and nothing more than ANGS PR...
---------------------
This is what you wrote, wealdpwr.

wealdpwr,

Red-carded, for playing the man instead of the ball :-)