Member Info for Penguins

Cynderlad

Yes, why.

Will I have to stop using it if Loxley fails? If we stop importing gas it won't just be me. I didn't stop using my car when HH was shut in either.

The problem for posters having a go is I'm not a swampy or 'greenie', nor am I a nimby, and surprisingly still a shareholder but would like to see a proper rise based on information, I'll even take sentiment if it's for the right reasons and doesn't fade as quickly as it arrives.

Since SS used words like significant and national importance the hyperbole about UKOG and anything it does is ridiculous. UKOG wants to drill a well. That well will find out if there's gas there in sufficient quantities and delivers at decent sustained rates to develop. Wait until late 2021 early 2022 for talk of UK's need for the gas and Loxley's contribution until then it's effectively not there.

If you plough through my posts you will find me being positive when UKOG put out information that can really be interpreted as such. Let's see what they put out about HH-1.

PS I'm seeing hints of a previous poster......

UK gas consumption 2019 was just under 80 billion cubic metres. That's about 2,800 billion cubic feet (BCF). If Loxley is successful and then went on to supply 100,000 homes that would be about 4 (BCF) or an average of more than 10 mmcfpd. I suppose every little helps but that's about 1/700th (0.14%) of self sufficiency. That will get better as UK gas cconsumption drops so maybe in 6 years (adding on UKOG time from drill to FDP) that will be 1/600th.

Doria, interesting

Judging by posts here and on twitter these are the people who hope to get a direct benefit today, and the profits in the future. So that explains some of the BS. If UKOG are successful at Loxley and sold the gas at anything less than prevailing price the shareholder's would be up in arms. The beneficiaries ultimately might be SS first, then the UK government (less all those tax losses ocelot is so keen on), surrey business rates and local causes and UKOG shareholders. Any gas will be sold to the public at market price, there won't be local distribution as it would be impossible to balance supply and demand during summer/ winter.

Wizard,oh dear,

I seem to have hit a nerve. But you've not spent time at the gates either so your criticism as usual is hypocritical. You've had 2 years of UKOG proving your expectations wrong, but still you're their number one apologist.

Doria, yawn.

Let's see what tomorrow brings.

If UKOG just tweet a picture of the 600th tanker with ol' trousers, and not a RNS with mention of sustainable production (not a short term initial rate) from HH-1, then it's just a stunt and may signal a raise in the near future.

It's interesting that they're up to 600 tankers. Using UKOG and OGA figures I make production from HH to end September about 124,000bbls, or @ 215bbls per tanker 577 tankers, meaning there's been about 22 tankers (4730bbls) produced from either from HH-2z since June (unlikely?), and HH-1 since end September (but it's been worked on or shut in most of the time since then). There have been a few tankers immediately after the workover and recently but 22 seems too many, probably not to troll though. Are rejected tanker loads being double counted when they leave the site again.

Cynderlad,

Whilst I suspect Loxley drilling will be passed there is a reason that there is a planning committee and permission in certain cases is not delegated to the officers, even when the officers have recommended approval. These will probably be contentious or applications obliged to be 'heard' and the outcome not necessarily decided by the legalities of approval. Planners recommendation is just that, a recommendation. Surrey budget is close to £1billion, yes costs award wouldn't be welcome but not as dramatic as it might seem - if UKOG were producing anything like they had claimed they would be (2000bopd end 2019) perhaps UKOG's promise of contribution to the local economy might be believed to be a stronger draw.

There will still be the need for planning for the development (if the well is successful).

Hoping for Bags,

You're wrong. OGA will only grant an FDP if the applicant can show planning permission has already been granted for the development specified. The situation should the HH PP be overturned is that the OGA approval would have to be withdrawn - it doesn't have priority over planning permission - it depends on it. See below about FDP approval, were the previous challenges still underway when UKOG applied?

The PEDL permits the holder to drill, shoot seismic and develop only if planning permission is obtained. Having the licence does not indicate any permission to do these things unless all other permissions are obtained.

If anything the OGA probably wishes the onshore oil and gas industry would just go away as the rewards for UK onshore O&G are minute vs offshore and the work involved disproportionate. No 'rounds' since 2014 being a signal.

From OGA guidance:-

'A PEDL does not give permission for operations but it grants exclusivity to licensees, in relation to hydrocarbon exploration and extraction within a defined area. All operations require other permissions as appropriate, such as access agreement(s) with relevant landowner(s), Environment Agency (EA) permits, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) scrutiny, planning permission and Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) consent.'

and

'In addition, the OGA will require:
• a Board letter confirming scope of insurance or availability of necessary funds for any required remedial work;
• a Board letter confirming availability of planning permission and absence of any ongoing planning disputes'

I prefer looking at the documentation, not come up with a 'opinion'.

Cynderlad

Stop assuming things I might say. Have I said any of the things you're accusing me of? Predicting the OP isn't even a black art, it's complete guesswork and 'events' have a habit of disrupting forecasts. But obviously global economy improving means more oil use, but it may also mean more oil produced and an imbalance the other way at some point - which is an undisrupted cycle.

I've for a long time said injection into a fractured reservoir is a risky business, and UKOG have taken months to not arrive at a decision. Possibly waiting for pbu results - I would expect they're monitoring HH-2z pressures ' that should tell them if it would work from there. Maybe they're waiting for the OP to rise to a point where HH-2z oil value > water disposal cost, though that may depend on the water cut remaining stable.

But it's equally maybes in your 'positive' post.

My supposedly negative opinions ('maybes') have been criticised over the years as those spouting great RNS, about a dismal one, and more and more ludicrous SP, oil production and reserves have been lauded - for being wrong.

Let's see what happens next week, next month, next year, I don't see many posts at the moment seeing past this Friday which is a start not a finish.

Cynderlad,

What risk do you put on that success? Loxley quite high, Turkey no way to assess as we hardly know anything about the detail behind the few figures UKOG has released although the operator's strategy is to farm out prospects where underlying value is not reflected in their financials. IOW even higher risk than Loxley. Return to BB (I forgot that 'success')- not likely to happen at all.

It's an opinion based on what we know, and what we know of UKOG. I know posters say don't look at the past but UKOG haven't changed their mode of operation since the radio silence during BB testing after shameless positive tweets and over confident RNS.

After award of the planning permission on Monday UKOG will still not have any significant reserves, still not raised enough cash for their commitment in Turkey, still need to drill the Loxley well to even know if the gas is there (and then test to see if it's economic) and unless they get a 6 hour test that looks good from HH-1 probably no details of daily flow from HH since the start of production.

Wizard,

Yes, they've sorted out the spread after yesterday's disaster where so called bought and sold were more or less equal.

If you are trying to show a massive imbalance between buys and sells then you don't understand how those figures are arrived at, after years of posting and over 3000 posts.

Troll,

Probably increased flow rates in both oil and water. But we don't know from what level because of UKOG's silence, although all indications are that it certainly wasn't 300bopd and not even 200bopd, and in July the rising water cut was 25%.

Loxley will almost certainly be passed tomorrow, then what. UKOG's plan is to drill H2 2021, in UKOG speak that's probably H1 2022 at the earliest but that may be a positive as they don't have the money to drill anything in the UK without raising even more cash. From Turkey? If successful, the income will be rolled over to drill more wells so not from there for a long time, if ever.

Otherwise there's IOW where the planning has still to go to committee and an even more desperate 'appraisal' than Loxley, and the well planned for winter will be earliest winter 2021/22. Then Turkey where UKOG aren't operator so don't control the timing and have only raised an initial amount to pay for the initial work programme of a well and seismic they're obliged to pay 100% of up to $5mm.

Last time it was 4 tankers (though maybe 2 were waste) that helped propel the SP to over 0.5p. Unfortunately despite this post from someone called trollhunter it was not an indication of flowing dry oil, or flowing very well:-

RE: Three in, go for four tankers today? 23 Jun 2020 13:51
Looks like whatever layer they are working on has cleaned up and flowing 100% dry oil again.
When they publish the results of the production setup and flows... this share will properly re-rate.... big step up that day coming!!!'

later that day:-

'Our smug CEO will be out soon telling everyone what's been going on and what they are doing next.
Four tankers today and the team are told to start early tomorrow.....need more eyes...... five tankers will be a new record and prove something is going very well..... very well indeed!!!'

A week later UKOG RNS'd that HH-2z was shut in because of water production and the only comments about HH-1 were about a bigger pump and the workover to improve flow - and a mention that prior to 31 March the well was flowing over 300bopd. What they didn't, and have only recently alluded to in the 5 November RNS is that HH-1 is producing water, and in June was producing nearly a barrel of water for every 3 of oil, and that since the end of March HH-1 averaged 208bopd.

Is UKOG a company that can be trusted, no mention of water production from HH-1, and giving a false impression of HH-1 production in June.

Cynderlad,

I don't need to, you just did, thanks. But I've never said it's a sure fire dud so that's a lie. Pointing out the issues is just that - maybe you've come to the conclusion it's a sure fire dud?

Apparently dissecting the RNS issued by UKOG over the years is because I'm a swampy, but in fact it's quite the opposite, but telling it how it really is has unfortunately been negative since the 2016 short ewts looked so good. It's not my fault that the outcomes have been so predictably poor despite the UKOG 'polishing'.

Anyway PP is a step on the road, not the destination so after this spinning plates until Turkey news with the possibility of HH-1 news and a raise.

Sinbad,

Last time the highest price of over 0.5p was Wednesday morning. It dropped back Thursday and Friday never reaching 0.5p (max 0.45p buy?)- meeting was on Monday.

Have the big buys gone, big sells, then rinse and repeat, lots of tiny buys at 0.22p when most trades are much lower? Traders accounts with no fees making it look like the price is rising? Interesting bid / offer movement. Lots to think about.

Cynderlad,

You misunderstand, I prefer to make money by telling it how I see it. I'll probably be selling at some point this week, not buying but at least I don't pretend that the Loxley planning is some new dawn. It's just a continuation of UKOG's ambition vs reality which has worked so well so far - but at least it will be H2 2021 before reality can bite for Loxley.

Bad Troll,

Research, hahahahahaha, if you mean looked at posts, tweets and those oh so knowledgeable graphs and know something's happening Friday, maybe?

They know it's #UKOG and hope to get in before the herd get out, you know that.

So despite all the talk of buying the main worry is when to sell on the spike rather than buying. Maybe it's today, maybe Friday afternoon.

and then wait for the SP to drop back on HH news and maybe a raise, and then watch the same crowd do the same on Turkey announcements. It's not rocket science but nevertheless lots fall for the pump hoping to ride the wave and some get caught.

Still peddling $13 OPEX, I wonder what the OPEX is for zero production as has been the case for nearly 2 months, or the months before that when production had a water cut and less than the target 300bopd?

GSYMAN

You should have bought before the pump (though I'm not sure you're not part of it) you could have bought millions, cheaper - like the guys claiming to be buying today.

Don't worry there will be plenty of shares available in the dump but the art is in not buying them then though, so not much help.

Interesting the number of new/newish accounts.

Cynderlad,

Just shows you can't predict everything ' He'll be here by 5pm for sure.'

thanks, you're right about HH ('Loxley application and Legal case dot not change the recoverability of oil in the ground at the flagship site'), but more importantly nor will it change the Portland at Loxley - but to start with UKOG need to find gas there, and then produce it for a while, and the well isn't planned by UKOG until H2 2021, and UKOG are not renowned for doing anything to plan - take note Troll - NAV - requires an asset, not a structure Xodus think has problems.

Idespair,

and no water disposal - given that when UKOG gave the $13 OPEX estimate it was before HH-1 was producing significant water. The water disposal costs exceeded the value of oil in HH-2z.

Ocelot

'but, of course, there are also some news items to be anticipated in the very near future.'

but of course it depends on the order they are announced as not everything is guaranteed to be good news. At least UKOG should be able to avoid announcing a cash raise or HH-1 workover results before Friday....but then....

Ocelot,

Just using 12 billion shares I get per share of the main assets:-

oil and has properties (CPR'd reserves) 0.012
Goodwill (money spent buying licences and shares)0.14p
Exploration and evaluation assets (money spent drilling etc) 0.28p

You might notice that this is more than 0.38p - that's because there's debt per share.

Funnily enough cash raised to date would be about 0.6p per share. They'd have done better sticking it in the bank with zero interest.

Cynderlad,

Before the last meeting the vast majority of posters claimed knowledge of the process said the councillors had no option except to follow the planning officers recommendation as the alternative would be a disaster for the council etc.

Following the meeting there were dire warnings about councillors being sued etc. But they simply cancelled the decision.

What will happen this time must still be uncertain. I agree there's a good chance of it being passed but if councillors were only obliged to follow the planners recommendation the whole exercise would be pointless - like me you might think planning committees should be abolished not only because of this but the suspicion of Jenrick type decisions, but that's not the current system.

Getting planning passed is only one of the uncertainties Loxley faces.

Ocelot still going on about assets that are an accountancy nicety. For an operating oil company actual oil assets of more than the £1.427mm might be a lot more important rather than £17mm of goodwill and £34mm of currently unused equipment and holes in the ground that contribute to 0,38p. The real value of the kit depends on it's usefulness in getting oil out of the ground. Second hand oil wells are a cost to abandon, not an asset.

Wizard,

RBL that was when HH-2z was going to be a producer and HH-1 Portland production wasn't expected to decline significantly in 6 months.

UKOG would have to get a CPR and that would mean a report with actual data in it not the 'highlights' UKOG likes to RNS..

What do you think of the fact that in the 30 June 2020 RNS UKOG revealed that HH-2z was shut in because of a water issue, yet forgot to mention that HH-1 had, during June been producing significant amounts of water (nearly one barrel for every three of oil) as detailed by the OGA - and still haven't categorically stated that there was a problem with HH-1, yet have shut it in for at least 4 weeks after the workover.

I'd take more notice of this sentence: 'should the flow characteristics change over time, this can be the result of various factors including the break-out of solution gas and increased water cut, translating directly into a production decline over time.'

Do you think this was put in about other fields, an interesting fact, nothing to do with what had happened to HH-1?

Troll.

'This is no one field oil company'

Maybe but the one they operate doesn't seem capable of producing anything significant and Horndean, the other field, may be sending a trickle of cash to UKOG from the net 15bopd or so, less a significant OPEX cost.

Loxley planning may provide a short term boost to the SP - but the well is H2 2021 just to find out even if there's gas there (let alone a commercial find), and Turkey after the initial fund raise (note initial) to start paying for it on 2nd October - silence. Incidentally the beginning of October is when the workover of HH-1 began, after which the well was shut-in.

UKOG's record of 'bringing home the bacon' is dismal, suggesting that whilst the projects are high risk the narrative is of millions if not billions of barrels, high flow rates, high chance of success - that isn't reflected in the results.

The Turkey well is a farm-in project that the operating company is not paying a cent towards until it knows the results and Loxley is the same reservoir/s as Horse Hill with no partners.

But having planning permission for a dodgy well will be the making of UKOG?

PS does anyone really believe posters who claim they've just topped up etc. - these seem to be the same ones that are always in profit.

Ibug,

So theoretically the OGA figures should be at a specific temperature and pressure for comparison between fields and summer/winter - which would entail another conversion from the prevailing temperature and pressure.

Anyway as the oil from the Portland almost certainly has a stable API/SG the conversion from tonnes to barrels should also always be stable - but you need to use a specific conversion - whereas cubic metres to oil barrels is not specific to Horse Hill oil or even oil.

Specific Gravity and API are linked by the Formula SG = 141.5 / (API + 131.5).

The OGA state a specific gravity of 0.846. This gives a conversion factor of 7.43 Barrels to a Tonne, so this gives an API of about 36 (which is what UKOG have said it was). If the API was 41 the conversion would be about 7.7 barrels per tonne.

For the sweep I'll go for August
571 cubic metres / 3,600bbls oil (484.5 tonnes)
240 cubic metres / 1510bbls water (240 tonnes)

So we're the same for water, and I'm a bit lower for oil. Gas is more random but I'm going for about 17,000 cu metres.

My guess is based on rate of decline reducing, so 3176 bbls left for September slightly more than your figure implies.

But as the volume depends on the number of days producing in each month it is all pretty much guesswork. If HH-1 was producing every day in August and September the average daily production would be 110bopd.

It's more interesting than guessing the SP, but I don't think you'll get many takers with trader's week coming up, not expecting anything more than hundreds of posts and tweets from new names on why Loxley planning is a dead cert (but see them gone Thursday just in case) an ever higher SP / unjustified valuations in a game of spike 'chicken'.

MJFMSG,

To ensure a profit or maybe minimise a loss (with an honest or a raise RNS emerging before Friday - though unlikely) you should have bought before last week, or better still end of last month, depending on your dealing charge and spread, you might need a 10% rise to sell at a profit, but certainly I'm expecting more even though it will need careful watching.

Should be lower SG means amout in tonnes per barrel goes down. Higher API (lighter oil) is lower SG. Ie more barrels per tonne.