Member Info for Penguins

30 September 2025, 2024 ARA:-

'we plan to continue discussions with potential strategic investors'

Once upon a time the repetition from placing to placing was funding the same thing again and again, that's probably still true, but now there's these:-

19th November 2024 RNS:-

‘Additionally, the Company continues in advanced discussions with an energy infrastructure investor regarding participation in UKEn's current Dorset and new Yorkshire projects. We look forward to providing further updates in due course.’

From 5th August 2024 RNS:-

‘The funds will also permit the Company to further negotiations with identified prospective strategic joint venture partners and conclude a land option agreement for a further hydrogen storage site. The Company will also seek further Letters of Support for its Revenue Support application similar to those recently furnished by major energy and UK hydrogen infrastructure players RWE, Sumitomo and SGN.’

10th July 2024 RNS:-

‘The funds will also permit the Company to fully prepare and engage with further prospective strategic partners to seek, as a minimum, Letters of Support (" LOS") along the lines of those recently furnished by Sumitomo and SGN, such LOS being a necessary requirement for any successful allocation award (see RNS 29th May and 27th June 2024).’

2 April 2024 – 2023 ARA:-

Based on intriguing conversations with major infrastructure players, I believe the UKEn business has massive potential for growth.

1st February 2024 RNS:-

‘The Company is also in discussion with several significant potential international investors with regard to their participation in the Company's hydrogen storage project.’

31 March 2023 – 2022 ARA

‘With high level conversations taking place with government, infrastructure operators and possible strategic investors,’

Discusssions, negotiations, conversations, engage with....

How many other descriptions for badgering companies for meetings will UKOG come up with?

Only ocelot could read UKOG's wish list year after year and believe it was all going to happen.

Every upcoming year is going to be great, loads of activity - how's this from the 2022 ARA written March 2023:-

'With high level conversations taking place with government, infrastructure operators and possible strategic investors, our wholly owned subsidiary UK Energy Storage (UKEn) is gearing up for a busy 2023 in the full knowledge that Portland has the support of both central and local authorities.'

or this from 2021 ARA, written March 2022:-

It requires a great deal of specialist knowledge and experience for a business to spin several plates in this industry, however geographical and sector-based diversification remains core to UKOG’s ambitions. Tireless efforts continue to be made in the pursuit of maximising shareholder value, and as ever there is no room for standing still.

I confidently predict a busy 2022 on all fronts, both home and abroad. There will rarely be a dull moment and, as we approach the drilling of our first production well in Turkey, let’s hope for an enjoyable and profitable ride.'

2016 ARA written March 2017:

'We have a clear business plan, and the technical and operational expertise to make UKOG into a significant onshore producing oil company by end 2018. '

It's all BS. Every year promises, promises, every year either failure or it doesn't happen.

Ocelot,

Stop worrying about the motives of those that far more accurately predict the outcome of UKOG's ventures, perhaps they're much more honest in their posts, whilst acknowledging fools rush in every now and then, than those that follow the company line and proclaim future success .

Worry more about those that deliberately misinform or make wild, ridiculous claims about what the SP will be at some time in the future, or constantly expect some unspecified 'news' in the hope of a rare event of either coinciding with the prediction rather than a researched and justified opinion.

It's true that past performance of the company may not be an indicator of future outcomes, even when it has been for every project so far - but that isn't true for those that research, and justify what you consider a negative opinion.

It's a remarkable track record compared to your (and other posters) blind repetition of UKOG PR without question where the faintest of hope of success is often qualified by 'potential', 'may' etc.by UKOG when the chance of failure is clearly very high if you're prepared to look for the information. This has been true of HH, BB, Basur and Pinarova - even 'negative' claims that Portland Port was in the wrong place - and multiple other doomed projects dropped - Loxley, Holmwood/A24, Arreton, offshore IOW, Markwells Wood - but all contributors to the £100 million squandered so far.

Will next year to be the 'resurrection' year for HH - or at least plenty of hype about it - as hopes fade of a UKOG storage project being successful in the first round. Having not bothered to resubmit a planning application or mention HH in any RNS or the 2 GM notices since the High Court judgement in June 2024 (which incidentally was a travesty) it's now on their 'to do' list in the latest ARA - so expect it to become a feature in the coming months as hope dwindles on the storage front - probably starting with the updated hydrogen strategy paper expected before the end of the year - but don't expect to near about any 'negatives' from UKOG or those that only repeat UKOG PR.

I think what ocelot means is Peel Hunt have been absorbing the sells so that the SP hasn't dropped as far as it should have done......

Ocelot,

'Too early to ask this question before the identity of the infrastructure industry partner is known'

Funny that UKOG hasn't announced they have an infrastucture industry partner - just hoping to get one....

'to further discussions with energy infrastructure and sector specialists etc..' on 2, 3 & 6 October

and it isn't the first time they've claimed discussions - even advanced ones:-

'advanced discussions with an energy infrastructure investor' in November 2024

and the latest was in the recent interview:-

'Been talking to a couple of big players, one European, one Japanese.' - that got the rampers excited, but then so did all the following:-

'significant international trading house' in January 2024

'prospective strategic joint venture partners' in August 2024

'energy infrastructure investor' in November 2024

'several energy infrastructure investors' February 2025

'prospective strategic joint venture partners' August 2025

They seem to find a slightly different way to describe these mystery companies and how they describe the telephone conversion with them (let's hope that's a joke).

Over the years the perceived vs actual probability of success and the claimed asset value of those projects yet to be proved failures has been a major driver of the UKOG share price 'bubbles' that occur from time to time either actual projects eg Turkey, or claimed assets eg Loxley. Ocelot has been a great at repeating UKOG's claims.

At the moment most of the claimed assets have been zeroed, though HH lingers in the wings.

What's left is the misconception about hydrogen storage.

UKOG has two sites neither appears to be leased, though 'heads of terms' were agreed for the South Dorset site.

Yes the government has and will support hydrogen projects and possibly before the budget the long awaited update to the hydrogen strategy paper might be issued - though if it is I doubt it will provide any comfort that UKOG's South Dorset site stands any chance of being selected as even the June £500 million ' will help deliver clean energy while creating thousands of skilled jobs in industrial regions such as Merseyside, Teesside and the Humber' and the July hydrogen update continued with the theme of 'industrial heartlands' - not rural AONB.

Then there's the misconception the government, or any part of it, will help with funding the project - again it was reiterated recently that the government is 'minded' to stay with a floor and cap revenue (ie when a site is operating) model - funding to be arranged by the applicants for allocation.

I've yet to see a justification for claiming the south Dorset site is a certainty for funding and government and a first round allocation against all the hydrogen papers clearly saying the first areas are going to be where the early regional transportation network is planned and for industrial areas. The PM bsing able to boast about the money already allocated elsewhere in a planted question is not a strong argument - yet it seems to be about the only one.

Trish,

Have you read the government papers, or even the stuff you write - that well known industrial heartland, the beautiful South Dorset coast, even the Solent area isn't that industrialised apart from the ExxonMobil refinery - which failed to get its carbon capture project on the list of government supported projects.......and please don't claim UKOG stands a chance in EastYorkshire with SSE/Equinor waiting with plans to extend their Aldbrough storage for hydrogen - and then there's Centrica and their Rough conversion.

Laura,

I checked - not quite - but they weren't agreeing larger trades 1 million OK, anything more no shares.

...and a little while ago 10 million no problem at 0.025p...20 million no can do - with a volatile share maybe their algorithm is 'cautious' just restricting size through trading platforms, most trades are miniscule so going through. Most mornings there's been periosds of NT for larger trades and most times the SPs still gone down eventually.

There's things going on with UKOG's shares - whether it's good or bad no doubt will play out over time, but Spreadex having 333,333,333 shares is an interesting number given the recent placings - but contrary to the TR1 it wasn't in the previous notification.

Also in the previous notification on 15 October financial instruments were 2.553000% not 2.853800% and in April the financial instruments were 4.103600% of about 55% of the shares in issue now - but on October 15 the previous notification was given as 3.004900%

What with the differences in the major holdings listings between June and August can anyone believe TR1s or the major holdings lists - seems they guess what the previous TR1 said and the nominees no idea how many shares they hold at any given time

There's claims that southern England needs storage locally yet it never happened for natural gas - was the pipeline infrastructure capable of shifting and storing enough around the south?

Because demand in the south is likely to rise much later if it is eventually needed it's unlikely UKOG's west of Weymouth site will be selected for support for the first round - will UKOG survive hyping Horse Hill for a few years waiting for the second round? Remember this acknowledgement of the possibility in the 2023 ARA:-

'Success in this, or even a subsequent second allocation round, would provide the project with a sovereign guaranteed revenue

stream'

TH2,

You posted

'The budget will likely support the development of the first regional hydrogen transport and storage network, with over £500 million allocated for this project from the 2025 Spending Review.'

The first three paragraphs from the launch of the £500million allocation in June:-

'Thousands of clean energy jobs will be created in Britain’s industrial heartlands as the government confirms over £500 million for hydrogen infrastructure today, as part of the Plan for Change to invest in Britain’s future as a clean energy superpower.

The government has confirmed that the spending review allocated landmark new funding to create the UK’s first regional hydrogen transport and storage network, connecting hydrogen producers with vital end users, including power stations and industry for the first time.

This major infrastructure boost will help deliver clean energy while creating thousands of skilled jobs in industrial regions such as Merseyside, Teesside and the Humber, as well as in the supply chain. This will ensure communities across the country feel the benefits of Britain’s renewal while reducing reliance on volatile international fossil fuel markets.

'......industrial heartlands.....'

'.......creating thousands of skilled jobs in industrial regions such as Merseyside, Teesside and the Humber...'

...and the HSBM document is from December 2023 - and was probably why UKOG started talking about East Yorkshire because of statements like this in it:-

'Our ambition for the first allocation round for hydrogen transport and storage infrastructure is to support up to two hydrogen storage projects, at scale and associated regional pipeline infrastructure. These should be in operation or construction by 2030.'

Pity they don't seem very advanced with a site there - and there's credible competition.

Ocelot,

'In his recent interview (on UKOG's home page), SS said they are looking to retain at least 50% in negotiations with an eventual partner.'

you forget that nearly everything UKOG claim doesn't happen - and they're only 'looking' to retain 50% - they'd grasp anything offered by anybody turning up with the cash......

So they went from 4.51% of nearly half the number of shares to over 10% without declaring any changes?

as dodgy as ****.

....and of course if I chose the closing price on 1 October the drop in less than a month is about 50%........

Choose your day, choose your time period - the opening price on 1 October to closing price was nearly a 400% rise which means by today the SP should be about 3p or mcap of about £1 billion........... for negotiating leases on a couple of sites and a few desk studies.....and not forgetting some letters with kind words from a few companies

So 20% down in say a month - on ocelot's simplistic basis - since all the good news was known the SP will drop the impossible 240% (like a Trump reduction) but I think that demonstrates the absurdity of using a selected period and then use it as a basis to calculate what will happen.

More realistically 80% to the power 12 suggests a 95% drop.......which is probably nearer what has happened some years

Ocelot.

Talk about misusing stastistics

In an actual year the SP has dropped 35% to these new hieights

Ps the garbled word in my last post is consolidation.

'Old AIM any share price before the co solidation should be multiplied by 10 for a comparison.'

Old AIM any share price before the co solidarity should be multiplied by 10 for a comparison.

5 years ago you would have had to buy 10 shares at 0.15p to have one share today so the cost was 1.5p, and 3 years 0.72p.

Of course the delusional are claiming this is 'new UKOG' when there's nothing new about the BoD or the way they carry out business - just they've found a new rainbow to chase where they never reach the crock of gold.

TH2,

I guess Warren Buffett never invested long term in UKOG2 think having to hold for 6 months of the nearly 7 months since suspension counts as holding long term?

Ocelot

Rather than annualising the rise since UKOG was suspended why not use some real data and calculate the one year rise since 23 October 2024. I suppose because it's minus 35% - it dropped 0.013p (closing mid prices 0.0365p to 0.0235p).

As for these two:-

1/ the resourcefulness of management; - or how unscrupulous the management is.

2/ the willingness of the market to reassess the company's potential. - assuming the market reassessed UKOG's potential might be premature - the current gentle glide suggests otherwise.

But ocelot nowhere in these three raises are 'institutional investors' mentioned.

?????? - 2 October

Institutional demand - 3 October

Investor demand - 6 October

But surely by now posters have realised the reality that most if not all 15 billion shares have found their way into the hands of private investors, and if they bought and held most now underwater whilst those 'investors' have made handsome profits for a couple of days trading

Ocelot,

You posted:-

'As I understand it, Centrica envisage adapting Rough for hydrogen storage purposes. But £2bn is a significant sum and they are not prepared to go ahead until the government has taken a decision re its storage revenue model.'

The fine details may yet need to be decided but as recently as July this from the Hydrogen Update to the Market:-

'We are developing the Hydrogen Transport Business Model as a Regulated Asset Base model, alongside a Government support mechanism. After engaging with the market and exploring options for the design of the Hydrogen Storage Business Model our minded to position continues to be that the most appropriate business model is a revenue cap and floor mechanism to be awarded via a subsidy competition. We will provide an update on the commercial design of the Transport and Storage Business Models in due course.'

As for '£2bn is a significant sum and they are not prepared to go ahead until the government has taken a decision re its storage revenue model.'

That's going to be true for any investor, to expect any announcement of funding for UKOG's hoped for storage sites before it's clear exactly what the model is - and also the detail hopefully of where storage is needed in the early 2030s in the updated hydrogen strategy paper expected before the end of the year - is hypocritical.