Member Info for ocelot

For myself, I think of some of the negative posts as being so unreasonable in tone that I am quite happy they are posted, because, imho, they are counter-productive.

That's illogical: if you're a former investor, you've already decided you don't want a stake in the company's future.

Hopefully, the rise of the share price will itself make some of the negative posters think twice before persisting with their posts.

Yesterday's news was disappointing, there's no getting around that.

Think these are the crucial lines from yesterday's RNS:

During the period we successfully drilled and completed the HH-2/2z well, which confirmed the presence and extent of the Portland oil accumulation...

After the initial reported high HH-2z oil rates, significant formation water ingress was observed, requiring the successful installation of a Thermatek plug to isolate the water inflow. It is now clear from the image logs recorded in the well, that both the oil and water flow originated from a series of extensive natural fractures, primarily at the toe of the well, although there are also further natural fractures observed higher up in the well. The plug was initially successful in returning flow to the reported high oil cut, however water cut built up, necessitating the well to be produced intermittently as the water disposal costs outweighed oil revenues.

The HH-2z well is currently shut in for a long duration pressure build up test to re-assess its connected oil volume. Consequently, the company has sought an extension to the current test permission in order to ensure that sufficient data is available to enable the correct forward decisions to be made.

We are reviewing a number of options for the future use of HH-2z, including stimulation to return it into long-term oil production, sidetracking the well to a different subsurface location and possibly converting it into a future water re-injection well to further reduce future operating costs (as foreseen in the Horse Hill field development plan presented to the OGA earlier this year).

The page on Angus's website is entitled "Investor Questions".

Are you or are you not an investor in Angus, Alan2017?

Wasn't familiar with the term "sock-puppet".

-- Retail website has performed robustly with sales across the quarter 139% ahead of the prior
year, leveraging the Group's recent investment in its online platform

Yes, the original timetable has slipped a bit.

It does look as if the action group's funded legal challenge has fallen by the wayside.

So what, then, is the point of the campaign of negative posts?

As far as I can see, if it has any effect whatsoever on the share price, all it does is help buyers get in cheaply.

re Balcombe:

"... we therefore shortly intend to resubmit our Planning Application for a shorter well test duration". (RNS of 23/06)

Retail trading over the third quarter improved significantly as stores re-opened, with average sales per week growing from GBP0.8 million during April (when all stores were closed) to GBP3.9 million in the final week of June when all stores were trading, which was 5.4% below the same week in the prior year on a like for like basis. The Board is pleased by this performance, which was ahead of its revised expectations following the outbreak of Covid-19...

Rob Parker, Chief Executive, said: "I am pleased with the resilience shown by the business through this period and I would like to thank colleagues across the Group for their hard work and dedication which ensured that, by the end of June, all Topps stores were back open and serving our customers safely.

"The Group has demonstrated its resilience, with revenues ahead of our expectations, and we have strengthened our financial liquidity through the sale and leaseback of our central warehouse and head office facility.

"Looking ahead, from our market leading position and with a firm financial footing, Topps is well-positioned as the economy begins to recover."

In answer to your specific question, as previously announced, we have had and continue to have no formal communication on this supposed action group which was talked about in the middle of last year. So long has been the period of silence that we are sceptical of ever receiving any funded challenge...

In summary, whilst we support the rights of all our investors to freely express their opinions, we also encourage them to be very suspicious of those who claim to be acting in their interests while revealing nothing about themselves. In the meantime we will continue to alert both the site administrators and, where appropriate, market authorities of any malfeasance or defamatory statements.

http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/media/investor-questions/

concerns an action group

http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/media/investor-questions/

I was unaware that some of those submitting questions are investors in ANGS.

... New assets, potentially vastly more profitable than those of old, are being brought into production and further acquisitions are being considered in a systematic and disciplined manner.

We do want this Q&A site to be a forward looking forum which informs investors well about the real prospects of the company, the day to day technical challenges, and the huge opportunities that lie ahead in a rapidly changing and unpredictable world. (From answer to Investor Question asked 31/05/20)

volume of 2.354bn per advfn.

The release of their RNS was not co-ordinated with UKOG.

First Equity's report of 15/06 would not have been released as it was if they had had any inkling of problems with the HH -2z well.

Verbatim extracts from UKOG's interim results RNS of this morning, so already in the share price.