Member Info for Penguins

correction:-

Adrian,

Despite anything you claim the only certainty with respect to Horse Hill production are the published monthly figures. Everything else is conjecture - a guess - often a bad one like your over 100 bopd - for last December and January.

Adrian,

Despite anything you claim the only certainty with respect to Horse Hill production are the published monthly figures. Everything else is conjecture - a guess - often a bad one like your over 100 bbls - for last December and January.

Blackford,

Being positive about something when there's plenty of evidence it isn't is delusional, or worse trying to con others.

All the BS about be positive about oil and gas E&P and it will turn out fine ignores that geology isn't swayed by sentiment even if the share price can be briefly - which of course is all you care about. Similar to ignoring the significant costs to be set against the sales value of the oil produced, or the fact that the occasional sighting of more than anticipated tankers has rarely represented anything but @davethedrill1 trying to perform the tanker trick.

Positivity has it's place, but applying it to projects dependant on geology, which is more predictable than UKOG or certain posters would like pi to believe, is pretty dumb when UKOG only tells their opinion of the positive side of the project. Of course persistent positivity based on what is perceived as fact rather than opinion can temporarily defy the reality - usually following some news - but eventually, even if UKOG delay as long as possible the results emerge when reality strikes.

Adrian,

last reply

I'm not ignoring that the OP was $ 40 then. It has very little to do with the OPEX - except they need it to be as low as possible - and I did mention the cost cutting exercise ('and that 33% of the OPEX remaining in early 2021 is compared to January 2020') - as usual a made up 'complaint - but the 66% reduction was in total OPEX and relative to January 2020 when a lot was going on - HH-1 and HH-2z being tested.

I know the OP is higher now - you keep changing the subject - I said previously what would be left now after paying for water disposal and OPEX and a discount to Brent might be $40 a barrel - I suspect if the OP was $40 they would shut in HH-1 - saved by the OP.

Adrian can on here say anything at all - abuse other posters and get re-banned on Monday at the latest and have his devious posts removed. Was temporarily banned 3 times before going on the Angus board and sounding off so objectionally he was banned for life.

The difference is I have never been banned - and I'd say almost all deleted posts are from threads deleted because of Adrian - which is why I start new threads every now and then. Myy history since May 2018 is still there. Many of those posts claimed to be 'negative' are actually predictions of more production and better progress than has ever happened. I'm still waiting for results, not RNS about plans or claims of what may happen, that are positive.

Every outcome so far has been worse, if not a complete failure, than UKOG has claimed it would be - hence I don't believe their claims unless backed up with evidence - sadly lacking for Loxley and Basur - and there's a complete absence of information about a timetable for activity at Horse Hill - Adrian hinting in September 2021 that the HH-2z conversion would be 'soon'., based on work being done on site then - which had nothing to do with HH-2z. Why should anyone believe it's happening now until UKOG say it is underway rather than vague 'preparations'?

Blackford

So you won't deny you're davethedrill1? I'm not a banned poster who sneaks on here though so no deal who publicises that's what they do.

Nevertheless by that post you've confirmed you are.

No I don't know what OPEX is - do you? Has UKOG given a figure since 2020? - I just expect that if they are producing a fifth of the oil they expected then the fixed costs will higher per barrel - logic - and that 33% of the OPEX remaining in early 2021 is compared to January 2020 when they weren't even in production and playing with 2 wells - total OPEX could have been much higher - note they don't say OPEX per barrel.

Anyway busy day - can't waste my time with someone who has all the questions, but the wrong answers.

My negatives, if they aren't facts but fair and realistic opinion, have quite often come true (and perhaps the SP 'decline' confirms that) - whereas most of your 'positives' are hardly that anyway and may perhaps be briefly reflected in the SP - then the facts come out.

Oh dear

What you mean is 600bbls was exported this week. 2 tankers on a Monday is not produced this week - you have no idea when the oil was produced.

Can you also confirm you are not Adrian who tweets as @davethedrill1. I know he won't deny it when sneaking on here. Yesterday he was tweeting as if the poster 'starling' was someone else, and then deleted that post - then when banned admitted it was him.

There is no evidence that the work in July has 'paid off' - UKOG unlike previous workovers on HH-1 have made no claims regarding any improvement in anticipated production. So just Adrian's opinion - who has previously got their opinion about production wrong after a workover.

........It is useful cash but nothing like the amount Adrian mentions. After the expenses of water disposal, OPEX on the water and oil production - which for fixed costs will be far greater per barrel than expected when production was expected to continue at 300bopd, and there was no water production, it won't even cover UKOG's ongoing general and management costs - confirmed by the recent placings being in part for that purpose.

I can, like you, choose what I consider to be important.

What matters is what they have left after expenses and unless you have proof that every week there are 3 tankers then it's not what's earned every week as it's only when they export the oil, not the time period it has been produced in. The week before and after could be less.

But what UKOG have to spend is the important figure.

Another question - do they transfer any profit earned in HHDL to the parent company - thats 65% of the profit retained in HHDL if not.

While you're here - if the HH-2z conversion can be done with a crane which should be relatively cheap - and the cost savings could be considerable if there are no problems with injecting - why have they not done it?

However the operations to shut off the HH-2z water in 2020 (another UKOG fail hidden for months) were performed with a CTU because it was in the horizontal section - some of the equipment they need to to remove from the well and a new completion installed for injection will need to be in the horizontal section - we'll see if a crane turns up to do it - and why did you say you saw a pump on HH-2z in July on a tweet on October 16th (you have since deleted it) when you were challenged about your July 14th tweet that the pump was working well?

Starling

Who says it's a weeks worth?

But no one knows what price UKOG get for the oil, what the cost of 1.5 vacuum tankers of contaminated water costs to dispose of nor the OPEX for that quantity of oil and water.

What it's worth to UKOG - I'd guess less than half the current OP - say $40 a barrel being generous so if those tankers were full of oil - one was a vacuum tanker with less capacity, and will still have hazard plates if it's carrying contaminated water, but say 600bbls of oil or $24,000 or £21,800 but no one apart from those on site knows how many days production it represents - your previous sightng appears to be 8th November - were the on site tanks empty following that so the 600bbls could easily represent an average of about 60bopd - with a maximum of 66bopd - no one, will know the total production in November and thus the average bopd through the month.

How many times over the last year have, erm, you, tweeted that there have been 2 tankers in a day and another during the week - and even the suggestion that there are the 'unseen' tankers- and the average has been around 60bopd or less during the month.

Another uncertainty is that UKOG tested intermittent production - so over brief periods it could be that production is greater than the average - and then during shut-ins the average is less.

Whatever the net value of the oil is it won't cover the costs of G&A - it's even mentioned in the latest placings some of the cash raised is for 'general working capital' - aka keeping the lights on

Starling,

it was actually the third lowest trade today possibly of all time - if they can sell as many as you want at 0.0617 then they're going to be very happy - I may regret it but I could have bought 10,000,000........not exactly a shortage of shares to sell for some reason?

Brillo,

I'm afraid sarcasm could be lost on the faithful.

Every time there's a big trade it has to be a buy.........and rarely is.......and even if it was there needs to be 100,000,000 sells below that unless market makers are planning to go for a charitable tax status - and there were les than 500,000 share sold below that reported so far.

as you're just copying 'old' posts here' my take (again).

Usual waffle

'Millions in the bank (2 successive placings this year) - How many millions? First raise appeared to be spent - second raise only for Turkey and keeping lights on.

'Permit to drill further wells on the Kimmeridge @ Horse Hill (increased flow rates expected in Q4 2022 and beyond, lots of oil tankers seen on site early November)' - How many tankers? No mention by UKOG of increased flow rate, permission to drill wells in Kimmeridge - but didn't even drill sidetrack HH-1z 'expected' in 2019 - big issues with Kimmeridge

Water re-injector proposal to reduce waste costs @ Horse Hill - need cash to do this - had permission for months

Proposed Turkey Basur-Resan drill by Q1/Q2 2023 (seismic data currently being analysed) - first well despite being less risky than Loxley drilled in wrong place. No target yet - map on phase one seismic had odd closure inbetween dip lines, closure significantly smaller than previously indicated = OIP volumes reduced.

Farm-out of Loxley gas project (more £££ in the bank) - no, hopefully if they get their costs covered if they farm it out but lose equity = less £££ spent they don't have anyway.

Pre-planned farmout been 'available' for months - no mention of progressby UKOG so far.

Significant infrastructure projects are not government fundedand then there is past performance whether you like i and geothermal at HH will be low key if it happens as not a 'hot spot'.

plenty of opportunity for P&D's on 'news'. But whether any of these will happen or be successful - who knows - I suppose many don't care.

Here's a few either no longer proceeding or missing in action many claimed to be saviours of the company and worthy of multiple P&D's :-

Markwells Wood
Baxters Copse
Arreton-3
Godshill-1
Holmwood / A24
BB-1y
Resan-6
HH-1z
HH-3
HH-4
HH Gas to wire - money was even raised (supposedly) to buy the generators
Solar
Geothermal
USA

and for the 'unsuccessful list:

BB
HH-2
Basur-3
and just about successful, barely economic (saved by the OP) HH-1.

That's is why many are still bearish - seen so many claimed to be huge projects turn to dust on less evidence of possible failure.

Come on you UKOG! Ooops another own goal.

Being on this board and reading ells posts is like being at a football match where your team is rubbish, you know it is and followed for years and know all the ins and outs of their performance, but occasionally they have an undeserved win. But you're next to someone who only started supporting this season shouting abuse at anyone who doesn't wear the team strip because they don't support the team enough so must be supporting the opposition, doesn't know the names of the players but keeps bellowing random names of players mostly on the bench who are either past it or untried - even if they cost a lot.

Ocelot,

UKOG talks the talk, but fail when it comes to putting those words into action and delivering what they claim will happen.

Hh-2z was intended to be a producer, producing between 720 and 1080bopd. The final permission to do this supposedly simple reconfiguration was granted over 6 months ago.

The Loxley 'pre-planned' farmout is looking decidedly unpre-planned. Expectations it would be concluded rapidly when announced over 4 months ago - with ocelot suggesting they would have been negotiating a farm out following an earlier RNS announcement about farming out - seem to have been over optimistic.

Instead of acquiring seismic before drilling Basur-3 was drilledmin the wrong place. The phase 1 seismic mapping illustrated that even the Basur-1 location was poor and didn't produce a robusrt target. This second phase of seismic may, or may not confirm the leads - what is apparent is any new prospect will be considerably smaller thhan the figures heralded in 202 as transformational given the mapping from phase 1.

The significant words for the Portland project are 'long term'. Expectation was 4 yea4s before planning was secured. Over 2 years ago Basur Resan was chosen over UK projects because of the supposed ability to monetise rapidly - and claimed (before a single prospect to drill has been identified) to be H1 2023 . Preparations for the Portland project will cost considerably more than the HH-2z conversion - yet seems to have priority in terms of funding.

Signs of desperation that anyone is prepared to hang around in the hope a tanker will appear - or perhaps it isn't just hanging around? - every time we've had this BS (2 or more tankers today! viva) it hasn't been reflected in the monthly production figures. Nobody knows what UKOG's production flow strategy is but they did say they would test intermittent production - so they could be pumping for a few days at a high rate, then shut in to allow pressure to recover then repeat. The average across the month is what matters not counting tankers during one week.

We'll see though we'll have to wait as UKOG is a bit shy about mentioning their sole operated production - the prediction by Adrian based on his 'observations' for last December and January was over 100bopd - the actual was around 60bopd average.

#UKOG at #BroadfordBridge Showed that they are the masters of using cranes instead of rigs. Huge savings. Viva! Adrian??'

Adrian forgets that Broadford Bridge was a deviated wells, not horizontal.

Presuming UKOG keep roughly to the plan in the Geological Resevoir Parameters V4 of 28 January 2021 (I know, technical stuff, not a chart with coloured lines showing the SP will be.........) the proposal is to inject between 2990ft and 3964ft:-
'the image shows the injection area (red box) within the Portland Sandstone at HH2z. The injection area is located between the 4 ½ inches slotted liner (2990 ft MD) and the Thermatek plug encountered at 3964 ft MD'

The well encountered the Top Portland at 2389ft where the well was already at 70 degrees to the vertical.and drilled ahead building angle until it was (nearly) horizontal within the 'sweet spot'.
There is a seismic section in the report illustrating the injection zone which shows it clearly to be within the horizontal section only and presumably between already set plugs, there will also be production tubing and the ESP remaining in the well.

If this was a quick and dirty operation using a crane the question is why haven't they just got on and done it? Perhaps it's not as simple as just stuffing the HH-1 water into the reservoir in a location originally planned for production and known to be fractured?

Maybe Adrian should be worried about a knock on the door from the FCA rather than this fantasy story about Russian money

Only person who says what's going at #Horsehill is me!
Silent Steve ain't going to tell you. Ha Ha. Fek knows why!
So it's down to me.
Adrian

and we know that he just makes things up to suit his narrative

Ocelot,

So maybe the ongoing work is 'preparatory' work for HH-2z - but its devious copying an extract from a 3 month old RNS as if it confirms it is.

Ocelot has form in picking up on drian's tweets as if they are in any way factual.

and going back to 1st September 2021 when Adrian tweeted this in the early evening (he's been waiting 14 months btw):-
'Adrian The Fool on The Hill@davethedrill1
Sep 1, 2021
#UKOG Looking forward [3 penguin icons} Pingos face when work starts on the Water injector on the Horsehill 2 well'

Later that evening, from ocelot:-

RE: Bid seems to be 01 Sep 2021 20:11
We are also hoping for:
1/ the permissions to convert HH-2z into a water injector, which should remove the water disposal costs of HH-1 and may help to increase oil production;
2/ their Loxley appeal being upheld.

So there's been expectation for a long time that UKOG would convert HH-2z - any time something turns up on the site - which includes the work in July this year. The question is why hasn't UKOG expedited this work which should recoup it's cost fairly quickly. I'll be pleased to see them starting the conversion - I've also been waiting to see what happens, but injection will need to be tested and that may prove it won't work as desired.

In the 2018 CPR there was uncertainty as to the water drive (edge or bottom) - but the current water is said to be associated with fracturing not water encroaching from the bottom or edge. Injecting into the oil leg within the limited producing layer may be counterproductive to ultimate recovery and there also may be risks associated with the fracturing providing conduits for the injected water returning rapidly to HH-1 - hence the need for testing and seeing what happens.

Whatever 'gear' Adrian sees arriving there needs to be a CTU or a workover rig to reconfigure the well - until that arrives the conversion, rather than any preparations, hasn't begun.

(Goreman?)

Hilarious - still ignoring that you have no idea what's left of your estimate or why UKOG need to raise for general working capital - and while you're not engaging just repeating the same old news - any evidence for this:-

'Penguins you were quoting years old figures as usual'

As this fits into your 'ability' to make something up - and then 'prove' it wrong, I've not quoted any figures- as you say those given by UKOG are years old and estimated when production was meant to be 300bopd - I suppose that is an old figure and totally wrong now, it's not even the 100bopd you claimed was being produced last December and January.

Dave (Goreman?)

Hilarious - so you have no idea what is left of your estimate or why UKOG need to raise for general working capital -

'Penguins you were quoting years old figures as usual'

This fits into your 'ability' to make something up - and then 'prove' it wrong, I've not quoted any figures- as you say those given by UKOG are years old and estimated when production was meant to be 300bopd - I suppose that is an old figure and totally wrong now, it's not even the 100bopd you claimed was being produced last December and January.

ocelot,

'A deramper's lot is not a happy one - it's not easy constantly to preach a message of negativity.'

Firstly - ocelot presumably has no idea what 'derampers' are saying as they are all filtered.

But it's very easy to keep to realism and as far as 'positive' posters it has been a torrid time essentially promoting a share that has been generally dropping - checks share chart - since 2017.

Yes there have been P&D's based primarily on skewed RNS - but ultimately UKOG have had to either RNS the outcomes of the activities - failure - or in the case of Horse Hill production is published by the NSTA.