Member Info for Penguins

As Adrian/ chandosflow is trkes his hardest to bury this post from last night and any Post refuting his rubbish I'll repost it:-

'Adrian, I know it's you.

Perhaps because of:-

1) your obsession, constant posting, don't understand simple O&G concepts and think looooo etc is an argument

2) Coincidence?

from twitter (davethedrill1 / FOTH / freeasabird / Adrian):-
'no waste tankers needed. Barells of oil a'
' over $70.50 a barell'
'it's flowing at 1000 barells of oil a day'

From here (chandosflow) 22:28:-
'HH1 has done Hundreds of barells a day and so has the Kimeridge before the water prob'
and 22:23:-
'could produce 3 or 400 barells a day'

You self identify..........but I'm not going to mention the other 'tells'

PS please don't mention the other obvious mistakes he makes when anxious - he tries really hard to stop making the mistakes once thay are pointed out. He may not realise what's wrong with the above though.........

Adrian,

Learn to read or stop making stuff up:-

'You say you are invested in Igas but never post on there or anywhere else except bashing UKOG.'

From my post

'and funnily enough I'm also not invested in IGas'

As for believing anybody - you suggest you're not Adrian but make the same spelling mistakes and have the same obsessive nature - spouting any nonsense (straight out of the Trump playbook) so it's hard to keep up refuting the rubbish you post.

Chunderflow,

You posted this earlier,

'I bet your gutted lol you were expecting and hoping for a big drop in price weren't you so you could gloat.'

I think most of the world would like the OP to drop apart from the posters on micro oilers and 'greens', where even with the current OP the value of oil produced by UKOG still won't cover the ongoing costs (salaries alone in 2021 were £1.5mm) - in the AGM notice they stated UKOG needs to raise to progress any and all the projects.

All you're worried about is your trade benefitting from price gouging producers, and I say that as a holder of significant funds in oil shares here and N America - though currently selling some to lock in profits I'm happy with.

But when will UKOG produce enough oil to just cover business costs let alone pay for all the projects SS keeps adding whilst completing none.

Chunderflow - or should we all call you Adrian,

'You and Pingo have done your outmost to pretend there is no gas in the Weald'

Please point out where I have 'pretended' that there is no gas in the Weald. In fact I quite often mention how much of a problem associated gas can be in production, and funnily enough I'm also not invested in IGas - but don't cut and paste pages of stuff about Bletchingley (which is about 40 km from Godley Bridge) I prefer to find information about Godley Bridge which illustrates that IGas map Godley Bridge as a structure wholly in their licence - have a look at their latest CPR. Now that might suggest that there's no gas at Loxley as UKOG claim it's within the same closure as Godley Bridge. Until the well is drilled not even UKOG know if their map is right, or Loxley is a separate closure, or possibly on a 'nose' and thus no closure at all

What you're worried about is pointing out that to find ioil or gas in the Portland you need to drill in the right place, and when you find it there's a problem with decline. As for the Kimmeridge, 5 wells tested it in the Weald in the last 5 years - none currently producing or any sign of being developed. At Brockham it's being completed to produce the Portland.

When eventually SS gets round to drilling Loxley will UKOG, like HH-2, not bother to drill on through the Kimmeridge.

'You looking forward to next week Pingo?

LOL.'

I'll quote ninetails:-

'Optimism is returning for a trader’s spike, don’t get me wrong I am looking forward to it…but what then ??'

and you:-

'Should be a great opportunity to make some money with a little luck '

So you'll be selling - lovely, so you don't expect the rise to hold, so what's all the BS about how great Loxley and HH are?

lol

Adrian, I know it's you.

Perhaps because of:-

1) your obsession, constant posting, don't understand simple O&G concepts and think looooo etc is an argument

2) Coincidence?

from twitter:-
'no waste tankers needed. Barells of oil a'
' over $70.50 a barell'
'it's flowing at 1000 barells of oil a day'

From here 22:28:-
'HH1 has done Hundreds of barells a day and so has the Kimeridge before the water prob'
and 22:23:-
'could produce 3 or 400 barells a day'

You self identify..........but I'm not going to mention the other 'tells'

Adrian,

'As most sane rational people know UKOG have been held back by planning red tape and nimby councilors. Horsehill, Dunsfold and others.'

Hmmm - sane rational, but that wasn't what you tweeted (or posted under a different name here) when you weren't invested:-

'TheFoolonTheHill@davethedrill1
Feb 7
Replying to @JCranam
#UKOG Then there's the other problem John. SS. Then how many months years after the EA permit is out for #Horsehill will Sanderson take to mobilise reinjector equipment to HH. He is never in a hurry. He still gets paid.Ill wait to see equipment arriving.'

Don't know about looooo etc. though,

IGas have a structure map that clearly shows a saddle between Godley Bridge and where Loxley is planned to be drilled that's at a similar depth to the Portland as the dry GB-2 and GB-2z - are they showing a map in the CPR they don't believe in?

The map in the Star Energy application for the acreage looks like the map in the CPR and covers the UKOG acreage This is a comment made in thatapplication:-

'An west-east seismic line from Godley Bridge to Alfold at a vertical exaggeration of 10 times shows the Godley Bridge closure. The leads to the east are either extremely subtle, or closed by static artefacts. The Godley Bridge structure has less vertical relief than the static artefacts.'

Note that the 'leads to the east are either extremely subtle, or closed by static artefacts' is what UKOG plan to drill at Loxley. If I were IGas I'd let someone else pay to find out if their map is correct or not.

But your argument is looooo.....etc

Then there's:-

'But the BRX4 well reperf in to the Portland could produce 3 or 400 barells a day according to MD George Lucan'

Could.

Sounds like he's hoping to spoof investors with an initial test - remember the 2016 HH-1 testing - HH-1 1688bopd constantly predicted by FOTH and freeasabird. A few years later and awapping testing between Kimmeridge and Portland and stopping and starting for various reasons enabling pressure recovery then RNSing selected flow rates - production start rate 300+bopd, 6 months later an average of about 100bopd (plus water), 2 years later about 60bopd, plus water.

Ocelot,

you changed your opinion from buy during the April 2021 spike to strong buy over the weekend following as the price collapse- you only changed back to buy in August when the SP had reached 0.15p - after which it continued to drop.

First ocelot UKOG post with 'buy' as an opinion:

'ocelot Posted in: UKOG
Posts: 18,290 Price: 0.325
Buy
RE: How many egg cups 25 Jun 2020 10:54
4 tankers a day would be lift-off for UKOG.
It would mean the company is trading profitably and is no longer 100%-reliant upon the market for funding.'

That was the day after a spike. The company wasn't trading profitably - one day of 4 tankers (possibly 2 waste) does not make a company profitable. a few days later the share was trading around 0.22p.

Not sure the opinion is helpful in determining what a poster truly thinks - or has super investor ocelot failed to sell on these spikes - thinking they are fundamental changes.

I don't offer a short term opinion as sentiment is unpredictable.

Wizard not what Adrian's excerpt says, suggests it isn't a Kimmeridge source. Not sure everyone agrees though.

Adrian,

Where is IGas planning to drill? Thought you said they were waiting to JV(?) with UKOG.

Maybe you should have a look at the map in the latest IGas CPR - if they drill near the licence boundary they'll probably be outside of the Godley Bridge closure as mapped - they need to drill somewhere on the Godley Bridge structure - ie further west away from Loxley.

The link might need to be copied and pasted (ironically) into the search bar, for some reason it isn't all a hyperlink in the post.

Here’s a thought understand what you’re posting vast tracts of copy and paste about.

Have a look at the UKOGL UK map and zoom in to the Weald, turn off everything else – and select fields. Curiously enough there is no ‘Loxley Gas Field’ mentioned – seems it is a figment of UKOG’s imagination. Then ‘turn on’ wells – all the pink ones are exploration wells - every one drilled on a map hoping for success – many dating from the 1980’s when GB-1 was drilled and the other dry nearby wells were drilled and much of the seismic shot. Loxley is located between Alfold and Godley Bridge.

Apart from Godley Bridge there are no gas (nor oil) fields in the centre of the Weald. Bletchingly for instance is nearly 40km to the north east and it’s described as associated gas (like HH); Albury is described as a dry gas field about 10km to the north of Godley Bridge. All the other discoveries are not, and have never been developed – Ibug listed them but missed Godley Bridge.

Of course IGas are promoting Hydrogen generation – what’s the economics of that though? Igas already have the site and development and production kit paid for at Albury and Bletchingly though there doesn’t appear to be much progress so far. Godley Bridge is abandoned, no site, located in farmland and Loxley isn’t even drilled.

PS still trying to ‘fool’ people – recommending your own posts from your twitter account.

UKOGL map:-
https://ukogl.org.uk/map/?e=-157792,6590498,14344,6691853&l=21,1245312,0&sm=true&b=3

Follow this link and wells and fields are already selected though you’ll have to relocate to the Weald.

Vetta,

not sure a Q&A day with a fool, posts mostly the fool (72), counts for much.

Ocelot

Repeating parts of your post from this morning deserves a repeat of my response:-

'Ocelot,

The difference is perhaps illustrated by your posting when there's a pump and dump.

You post as if there's an underlying fundamental change to the company's value eg you agreed with Zac Mir that the SP would be 0.9p by the end of May last year during a P&D in April - the SP peaked at around 0.5p. That P&D was focused initially on a permission from the Turkish government that nobody knew UKOG was waiting for.

Tho realists that understood the SP movement was driven by short term traders and that the underlying value of the company's assets, rather than the SP hadn't changed and expected the SP to fall back. It did and given long enough between P&D it seems to eventually settle below the SP before the P&D started.

When Loxley news arrives as the expectation is the permission will be granted there may well be a rise in the SP but until Loxley is drilled the value of it is unknown, and other factors will then bear such as placings for the many unfinished projects - even with a JV with IGas for Loxley I doubt they will pay an uplift so there could be 50% to pay for.

Conversely if permission is not granted I would expect the SP to fall suggesting that the rampers have influenced the current level of the SP.

Even the recent rise on rhe gas storage venture was beginning to fade - all credit to SS in timing of the announcement with the Loxley news expected soon after.

But the real reason for the low SP isn't realists pointing out what may happen rather than the company's rose tinted version, it's the serial lack of success'

Adrian,

Why do you keep quoting revenue when the deductions to that revenue could well mean there is no profit. We keep getting told that water production is being controlled so disposal costs aren't too high, then there's other OPEX and other site and licence costs let alone office overheads associated with HH. OPEX per barrel was estimated some time ago for 300bopd production, bound to be more for about 60bopd as fixed costs are distributed across less barrels.

Ocelot,

The difference is perhaps illustrated by your posting when there's a pump and dump.

You post as if there's an underlying fundamental change to the company's value eg you agreed with Zac Mir that the SP would be 0.9p by the end of May last year during a P&D in April - the SP peaked at around 0.5p. That P&D was focused initially on a permission from the Turkish government that nobody knew UKOG was waiting for.

Tho realists that understood the SP movement was driven by short term traders and that the underlying value of the company's assets, rather than the SP hadn't changed and expected the SP to fall back. It did and given long enough between P&D it seems to eventually settle below the SP before the P&D started.

When Loxley news arrives as the expectation is the permission will be granted there may well be a rise in the SP but until Loxley is drilled the value of it is unknown, and other factors will then bear such as placings for the many unfinished projects - even with a JV with IGas for Loxley I doubt they will pay an uplift so there could be 50% to pay for.

Conversely if permission is not granted I would expect the SP to fall suggesting that the rampers have influenced the current level of the SP.

Even the recent rise on rhe gas storage venture was beginning to fade - all credit to SS in timing of the announcement with the Loxley news expected soon after.

But the real reason for the low SP isn't realists pointing out what may happen rather than the company's rose tinted version, it's the serial lack of success

Wizard,

The problem is all those resources are pie in the sky - only you seem to not have noticed that HH-1 isn't producing 362bopd, HH-2z isn't producing 720 to 1080bopd and there are zero out of 5 failed tests of the Kimmeridge being produced (Lidsey, Brockham, BB, Balcombe and HH).

Loxley is certainly pie in the sky, there not being a Loxley discovery well, and in Turkey they may not be able to reach the structure from the gold plated well site.

Now to add to Loxley that won't deliver cash flow but expenditure for years, even if successful, we have possible geothermal (same problem) and possible gas storage (worse) and other unspecified projects that will require up front costs - at least they only want authority to issue 9.5billion shares.

TH2,

Where's the TR1, you've been topping up for years now, better hurry as the 9.5 billion extra shares will make it harder to get to 3%.

PS. whilst there won't be any compensation, though costs may be awarded, there would need to be production to qualify anyway. Not guaranteed is it despite UKOG suggesting there was a Loxley discovery well when there isn't.

Nope,

The projects are not onn the move until further funds are raised.

For those that don't understand nominal share price it means the company can issue up to 9.5billi9n shares if there are sufficient takers.

That's more than 50% of the current number of shares in issue. There is still some available to place from last year's GM.

Note they now say they need the money for the HH-2z conversion as well as Turkey and of course Loxley plus the new glittery project and other untold ventures:-

'will require further funds in the near future for, amongst other things, its studies and planning application for the Portland Energy-Hub, its funding obligations under the agreed work programme for the Resan Licence, conversion of HH-2z into a water re-injector, to develop its other UK onshore assets including Loxley should planning consent be granted and for the pursuit and evaluation of further international petroleum and UK renewable opportunities.'

Ocelot

UKOG should be careful what they claim - the discovery well was Godley Bridge - 1 about 5km to the west of Loxley - followed by the nearby dry GB-2 and GB-2z, and a well about 5km to the east of Loxley, Alfold-1 which was also dry.

So claiming there's a Loxley gas discovery is stretching the truth a long way.

'holds majority interests in four further UK onshore oil and gas discoveries, including the significant Loxley Portland gas discovery'

It could easily deceive someone reading it that there is already a discovery well at Loxley when there isn't, and expect the appraisal well is of a discovery nearby not 5 kilometres away.

as for 'assessed to be the second largest onshore gas field' - that's based on a Xodus study of a UKOG interpretation. Xodus who introduced the Turkish project to UKOG and assessed that HH-2z could produce 720 to 1080bopd and HH-1 would produce 362bopd.........but of course UKOG only RNS'd what they chose to from the HH Xodus reports.

is what has held back UKOG.

Not those pointing out the BS RNS and posts.

Claims of future riches by SS have often briefly raised the SP - but years of ramping by certain posters (and tweeters) have failed to prevent the share price dropping to the current level. Perhaps this indicates that the realists have better understanding of UKOG's projects and those ramping are the trolls.

Often the short term price rises are used for fund raising by placings - tens of millions wasted to date.

Maybe the ramping today, based mainly on a project that may not proceed, will cost maybe millions in the meantime, and almost certainly won't deliver cashflow this decade, has helped raise the SP 2 hundredths of a penny. However UKOG needs a real success in its oil and gas portfolio to rerate as they are the only projects likely if successful to provide any significant cashflow in the next few years and there will be fund raising needed for Loxley and perhaps the next Turkish well depending on how much was spent on the failed Basur-3 drilling - whether there's enough left to fund HH-2z conversion is unknown, or whether it will have a positve effect beyond saving water disposal costs.

TH2,

'Loxley timeframe to Gas production is months not years....'

Even if they hold back what's left of Basur cash they will still need to raise many millions to pay for the Loxley first well.

As for months not years - even the site prep will take months and so will the drill and test if it's worth testing.

If test successful need to drill at least one more well to establish size of accumulation to 'right size' any development - planning permission needed.

If drilling successful development needs all sorts of permissions whether gas is exported or there's gas reformation.

Definitely years not months - unlike oil all they can do with any gas tested or flowed before the development is built is flare it.

Ne

Fascinating,

those that keep telling how much the UK consumer is suffering are delighted that the oil companies are price gouging tham just because UKOG can earn a tiny bit more which still doesn't cover UKOG's overall costs.

and where did insiderknowledge (surely some mistake there) get the idea that UKOG's exporting oil (all 60bopd? of it) will in any way 'be in demand'?