Member Info for OofyProsser

Oh yes? To be replaced (in effect) by Jonathan Tidswell-Pretorius. And why did they insist on his resignation being immediate?

HITS: Mr. Zielicki gave an interview on or about 19 August last year in which he mentioned mergers with other energy minnows and acquisitions in N. America. The RTO etc seems to be a re-hash of that, really.,

I think a de-listing pre-supposed a share suspension. ‘Erbert’s resignation was impossible to predict but he’s not been seen or heard from in 11 months. I wouldn’t want to be a Director of a company where there was an imminent risk of insolvency or where I didn’t really believe in the recently-stated plans.

Ocelot: attached below is part of a post I wrote on 7 May. Not a prediction of suspension, but the next best thing?

“ I can’t see a route to profitability here. Just more dilution until it’s fe-listed one way or another.”

I’m sure others offered similar opinions about the same time.

Simon: in my opinion, the motives of the experts listed in my earlier post (I should have included WG818) are hardly relevant, given the fact that they’ve been proved consistently right.

I’ve no idea what you are saying in your penultimate sentence. CPR? MOU? HITS is quite correct in his view that even if Angus survives the current crisis, shareholders are unlikely to benefit. Their financial interest in Angus will be diluted into insignificance. It’s too late to do anything about it now.

Simonetc.: the balance sheet value of a company’s assets is meaningless if there are no prospective buyers for its assets while the company is unprofitable and in default on its debts.

If you and others on here had paid more attention to the analysis provided by HITS, Mirasol, JA51 and others over the past five years, you would not be in the sorry position that you appear to be in now. They deserve more respect and less supercilious commentary from you.

They can’t afford another well. Malcy has been consistently bullish on Angus for years, the only exception being, ironically, when the COO-elect, Jonathan Tidswell-Pretorius, performed that two-step with his shareholding and was forced to resign as Chairman and Director.

Ocelot: the Match-June quarter appears to have gone missing from your deliberations.

Angus is itself warning of the risk of bankruptcy in the event that Saltfleetby fails to produce enough gas to meet the hedges. In addition, they seem to be saying that the field will be uneconomic from 2029. Four more years of dwindling production.

HITS: does this (below) mean what it appears to mean? Forum can’t take shares. Angus can’t pay cash.

“In addition, £1.75 million of the deferred consideration to Forum Energy for the acquisition of their 49% interest in the Saltfleetby Field in 2022 will be paid out, with the remaining balance of £2.88 million owing to Forum payable in instalments in cash or shares (at Forum's option) by June 2025.”

In addition, the Aleph/Mercuria royalty has to be paid in cash from June 2025 and will not take into consideration new hedge contacts as negotiated post-February 2024.

Onetomany: that’s right, peddle the continuing confidence of the Board In preference to analysing the financial data. ‘Erbert’s departure speaks volumes. He was on the Board until recently but stood not upon the order of his going: he left as fast as his feet would carry him.

Conclusion: Angus's gas production will need to stabilise or increase, or a 50% rise in the gas price could bankrupt them.

Oh, hang on..

The “profit” appears to take no account of the sums owed to Trafigura on which Angus has defaulted and which are the reason for its current suspension. Angus depends on Trafigura’s goodwill, which is unlikely to come free of charge. Angus hasn’t got money or access to money sufficient to fulfil any of its stated plans or ambitions. Meanwhile, the “talks” on the “RTO” don’t appear to have progressed since the earlier RNS.

The suspension isn’t likely to be lifted any time soon.

As I understand it, an RTO Is between an unquoted company and a quoted company whereby the former buys the latter in order to establish a stock market quotation. That seems to rule out an RTO between Angus and Beacon. Trafigura is employee-owned and has given no indication of wanting to change. In any case, it’s hardly likely to want an AIM listing!!

Both Angus and Beacon are in very serious financial difficulties. Angus has big operational issues as well. It seems to me they’re both merely hoping something will come up within the next six months.

Anything can happen on AIM but I can’t see a quick resolution to Angus’s situation, unless either there’s a huge increase in the gas price (and they produce enough gas to meet their hedge requirements) or Trafigura exercises its rights under its charges.

Well, if it’s not to be Beacon, let’s hope it’s someone equally gold.,

What - your assurances thst a favourable announcement is imminent?? Or are your “sources” tongue in cheek?

Onetomany: that’s a great wheeze - a bid for Angus by Beacon Energy. Sadly, both companies’ shares are suspended but if they were not, Beacon, capitalised at three quarters of a million pounds, wouid have to issue quite a lot of shares to secure Angus and its debts and losses. Excellent scheme.

I take it that this is not necessarily the positive announcement of which you have been assured and for which you have been waiting?

Mirasol: if James gets sued, I’ll join you in the gallery!

: Bubblepoint: Angus never disclosed the cost of the sidetrack. The further they drilled, the worse it got and, to quote Bob Dylan, “the only thing they knew how to do was to keep on keeping on “. The cost has been estimated variously, but £11 million seems about right. Quite a long way above budget. Then there was the related disaster of missing the temporary but huge rise the gas price. This was exacerbated by the forward contract (hedge) which started to apply two months before they got the gas flowing, and at a time when gas prices were extremely high. I don’t know exactly what this cost them but the fact that they’re still trying to get themselves out from under the ramifications, it was a very large sum indeed. Add that to the usurious terms of the Mercuria loan and the cost of the new compressor, and, importantly, the cost of meeting the terms of their incomprehensible deal with Forum re the purchase of SEL, and their cash flow since then has been completely swallowed up.

Angus’s predecessors’ experience of drilling wells and sidetracks at Saltfleetby should’ve given them fair warning. However, it was all they had and they just kept on keeping on. A mixture, then, of poor judgement, bad luck and ineptitude.

Steady on, James.

It doesn’t appear to have sunk in that Angus hasn’t got any money and it seems plain that Angus’s advisers are not willing to support a share issue. Over to you, Trafigura.

But Trafigura won’t want to take this over, will it? Angus doesn’t look likely to turn a net profit without a massive rise in the gas price, and a big trading company will not want to be saddled with de-commissioning costs - or with the opprobrium that wouid be associated with failing to restore the site and the pipeline. No wonder they’re trying to organise some kind of RTO. But, as the better-informed on here keep saying, who would want what Angus has to offer?

They need a Michelangelo to have any chance of satisfactorily re-sculpting the debt here.

Thanks, Mirasol.