Member Info for ocelot

With Brent in the low $30s, think UKOG needs to produce about 800+ bopd to break even at the level of operating results.

If Brent was to rise into the low $40s, think it needs to produce about 550 bopd to achieve the same result.

dahmed,

The cuts by Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Kuwait have relevance to the price of oil, which has relevance to UKOG and the market valuation of UKOG.

Welcome back, FOTH.

Riyadh aims to pump just under 7.5 million barrels a day in June, compared with an official target under the most recent OPEC+ agreement of just under 8.5 million a day. If Saudi Arabia makes good on its pledge, its production will drop to the lowest since mid-2002, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

The cut is particularly symbolic as it brings Saudi production below 8 million barrels a day, long seen by many consultants and traders as a line that wouldn’t be crossed because of the impact it has on oil revenue...

Prince Abdulaziz, who said that the worst-case demand scenarios hadn’t materialized, encouraged other producers to join with their own voluntary cuts. “We are acting as an example to other producers without imposing,” he said. “We should be proactive; taking the lead.”

Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates followed up announcing cuts of 80,000 barrels a day and 100,000 respectively.

.

With Brent in the low $30s, and what we already know about flows from HH-1, think it only needs HH-2z to flow at about the same rate as the HH-1 Portland vertical for UKOG to achieve equilibrium at an operating level.

Imho, therefore, UKOG's "breakthrough" is close, in operational terms, even if the exact timing remains dependent, above all, on the lifting of coronavirus restrictions.

Or, of course, it could be that the market has got it wrong and is undervaluing Alba's potential.

Ocelot - as far as UKOG is concerned I don’t see that the oil price makes any difference.

UKOG depends on share issuance, not oil sales. Given the scale of losses I can’t see 300, 600, or 1000 bopd making much difference.
---------------------------------------------
It was following this ridiculous post of yesterday evening that I filtered Backwoodsman.

We all know that UKOG is at an early stage of its development, we all know that UKOG is investing, we expect to see a significant level of cash outflow, but cash outflow isn't loss. Invest £1m, that is cash outflow of £1m, but it is only a loss of £1m if the investment proves to be a total write-off.

My interest is in the level of losses and the potential to transform those losses into profits.

that is, I am looking at the statement where profits (it they exist) or losses are shown.

You are looking at the statement which shows the flow of funds, of cash.

We are looking at different statements because we are concerned by different things.

Penguins,

I am looking at the income statement, where, in the case of UKOG, the company's losses are shown.

As I understand it, you are looking at the cash flow statement.

Filtered.

Ocelot - as far as UKOG is concerned I don’t see that the oil price makes any difference.

UKOG depends on share issuance, not oil sales. Given the scale of losses I can’t see 300, 600, or 1000 bopd making much difference.
-------------------------------------------------------------

You've left me speechless with that one, Backwoodsman.

As I understood it, those who can't work from home should go to work tomorrow morning, especially if they can avoid public transport.

Think it was aimed, above all, at those who work in construction, but it may have a wider impact.

Backwoodsman.

What's your prediction for the price of Brent in, say, 3 months' time?

18/19 total losses were £5.394m of which operating losses were £4.788m.

Penguins,

My comments relate to operating losses.

I agree that, in a previous exchange, I adjusted 18/19 operating losses for the revenues offset against intangible costs without taking account of the operating costs corresponding to those offset revenues.

On this occasion, therefore, I have made no attempt to adjust 18/19 operating losses for those offset revenues.

Of course, UKOG's investing activities will continue and, while the ewt continues, the revenues generated by the ewt will be offset against intangible costs and will not, therefore, affect operating income.

Think 813 bopd calculation is a bit higher than the bulls were looking for and lower than the bears were looking for.

For myself, I think it is do-able and, if the oil price was to rise into the low $40s and the margin was to widen to about $30, then UKOG would be quite comfortably placed.

Sorry, GL is Angus! Meant GF.

GL has spoken of being approached by peers re one asset or another on a regular basis.

For the present, Alba appears to be better-appreciated by its peers than by the market.

That can change.