Member Info for Penguins

Friday post:-

'One set of tractor unit wheels were up but they always are for oil tanker trailers.'

Did you have a look at the tanker leaving today - with all wheels down - so did you just make that up because I pointed out there were 'wheels up' and the tanker was not full leaving the site - and can we rely on anything you put in posts?

'New holder(s) get their shares tomorrow.'

Admission is expected to occur on or around 10 June 2020.

Tradedesk:-

'No debts.'

In the RNS:- 'The purchase is via three equal instalments of £550,000 as follows'

The first will be made about now 50/50 cash/shares, the other 2, totalling £1.1mm, by shares, cash or a mixture at UKOG's discretion, at six months intervals or less, again at UKOGs discretion.

Matt,

we're all waiting for news to drop rather than speculation - but that news might not be positive, or as positive as expected.

I suspect you're wrong about reporting levels for TR1 for Tellurian (who don't seem to care) and Canaccord who probably do - so we shall see fairly soon unless they keep their shareholding above 5% and below 6%. As there wasn't a trade reported for the 459,564,456 shares issued to Canaccord from the April placing they aren't 'reported'.

PS there was a previous poster who had 'expectations' that were never fulfilled - let's hope yours don't go the same way.

Wizard,

Without water injection seems not much of the estimated 11 to 14mmbbls connected oil is likely to come out. In the HHDL HH Geological Reservoir Parameters report to the Environment agency (September 2019) without injection the recovery was estimated as 8.6% to 10% (page 15, Figure 15 ) so up to 1.4mmbbls. Funny when UKOG quoted up to 45% recovery they didn't mention down to 8.6% without injection.

https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/psc/rh6-0hn-horse-hill-developments-ltd/supporting_documents/HHDL%20HH%20Geol%20%20Reservoir%20Parameters%20Final%20240919%20Rev1.pdf

But this was before the HH-2 pilot hole was drilled and a change in understanding as to where the oil production was coming from:-

From this report:- 'Given the permeability profile and other available data it is a reasonable assumption that the entire Portland zone has contributed to flow, as in the model suggested by Nutech.

From HH-2 RNS:- '.... indicate that the "sweet spot" has likely contributed the lion's share of the 29,568 barrels...…..'

Looks like the Nutech 'model' was wrong.

We are still waiting for what impact the findings from the HH-2 pilot, and subsequent testing from both wells will have on HH-1 connected oil and recovery, although UKOG will have revealed this to the OGA to get FDP approval for HH-1.

The longer UKOG don't reveal what each well is producing the more worried Penguins is (what a bizarre way of expressing your own opinion) that Penguins hope that the Portland would help the SP recover at least a lot of the recent lost ground won't be realised.

As I posted 23 May:- 'If instead the next RNS is more talk of other opportunities, IOW, Dunsfold - even A24, and waffle about HH rather than detail will it be tin hat time?'

Worse, they have raised £2mm (what's left after YA/Riverfort and PW Well Services are paid off from the £4.2mm) to spend on these ventures that have risk when a better use would be advancing HH, though I suspect that cash will be spent before too much is done on either Dunsfold or IOW - which will probably result in the repeated theme of UKOG fund raising - raising for the same thing more than once. At least they didn't say they are now fully funded.

Legalease,

Looking back through your posts you seem to have sold out on 23rd December, or soon after as your flow of UKOG posts stopped on the day of the water ingress RNS, whilst posting: 'Should now see a rise into New Year, Merry Christmas all'

Then on 31st May:- 'I’ve bought in because I think it will be over a penny within a couple of months possibly sooner.' and nearly 50 posts since...…

Adekela - not sure that I agree with your assessment - but what was it in my post that was so troubling that you broke your duck for the last month - that the analysis by those that are accused of being nimbys etc have been correct in their assessment of UKOGs progress - obviously some do seem to know, or at least understand better than others?

More fondle,

What do those of us that aren't nimby's, not swampies, not ER (?), accept full responsibility for their purchasing decisions but want to post a sensible, reasoned argument on information in the public domain to do, rather than a post that essentially says 'based on nothing I predict the price will be 'x' p' - where x is any number the poster has just made up from 0.1p to 20p+

There are quite a few posters who only post claiming that any poster who has a different view to theirs is a nimby, environmentalist etc. - but history shows those not predicting huge flows, huge price rises, huge reserves have actually been right.

Even those posting during the BB pump and dump that BB wasn't as good as UKOG were claiming were ultimately proved right and I suspect a lot of 'investors' lost a lot of money, and quite a few who made money selling out during the highs were probably ramping a higher SP well beyond their sell price.

We're continually told the bottom has been reached while the SP has dwindled, sometimes based on charts - but it's events that really decide the SPs direction and at the moment we're waiting for real information on HH-1 and HH-2z flows, and then a clear forward plan - not just 'forgetting to mention, for instance, 'dual completion'. It's about now that UKOG suggested a CPR would be commissioned, another essential element to provide (hopefully) reserves that justify a higher SP, but if HH-2z hasn't been flowing and they are still messing around with HH-1 the data needed for a CPR is likely still incomplete.

The other event that would help is confirmation through TR1 that at least some of the recent 2.1 billion share placing have ended up in sticky hands - and stay there.

Any of these, depending on whether the news is (really) positive or (really) negative should shift the SP, so far (really) positive news hasn't been in evidence, just RNS after RNS essentially promising jam tomorrow, so we are still waiting.

Matt,

the TR1 level is 3% for UK issued shares and in 1% steps above that. If Canaccord are buying they would also have to declare when going past 6%.

I think you'll find it's the UK arm (wealth management) that are holding the shares from the TR1, although the ultimate controlling company is in Canada - but that makes no difference regarding TR1 levels as UKOG are a UK plc and it's the issuer not the holder - for obvious reasons - that counts..

But a nice story, let's hope it comes true, but almost all speculation and wrong about the levels TR1 have, or should in the case of Tellurian, to be issued. Canaccord I expect to be far more on the ball.

as for buy/sell with WH Ireland awash with shares to place the 'big players' won't be buying in the market.

When the deal is done PW well services will also have in excess of 130,000,000 shares (at 0.21p VWAP for £275,000, 50% of the initial payment) which they may keep or sell - they might want to start replacing equipment. UKOG will have to RNS the issue of the shares - but they get no discount, maybe the price was inflated (last placing of £1,275,000 was to do much the same, if not a bit more) so they could sell for less.

But someone was supplying the demand yesterday and the finger must be pointed at forward sellers from this placing, Canaccord could even be selling their previous issue and replacing with this one - which wouldn't be forward selling.

dALLIANCE,

Perhaps you should try research as my point was that wasn't the 'twitter latest'

but as I'm replying:-

https://twitter.com/Anton13579/status/1268819538621186048

Free money,

You have looked at other tankers, presumably full, which do have the tractor unit wheels down

eg https://mobile.twitter.com/johnrog94359745/status/1262392264824958983

or this one: https://mobile.twitter.com/Anton13579/status/1268454373245452288

I didn't say it was empty just the wheels were up - you presumably, because of your 'explanation' agree one set of wheels were up?

Trollhunter,

You will grasp at any straw thrown at you, and btw only 500,000 more barrels needed to make the $4 saving per barrel worthwhile.

Mullins,

Not really the latest as the tanker was videod leaving with 'wheels up' ie not full.

So is another shut in of HH-1 looming while they take off that nice new super pump they only stopped production last week to install, to perform a re-reperforation of the Portland - is that because they found out the old pump wasn't the problem but the reservoir was?

Looking forward to announcements of initial rates and then silence.

Phil,

Worst case? They were maximum number of tankers, not sure that represents a 'worst' case. But that was 25% reduction in the first 4 months.

Oktane,

what about 1 and 2,

the flows are so low that issuing shares to bring the cost down $4 a barrel is important as this is just asset level OPEX and full costs of HHDL are much higher and marginal even at higher OP.

Of course owning equipment is a double edged sword, especially second hand, no rental but maintenance and replacement when worn out kit. $4 a barrel means to earn the £550,000 next payment from this saving needs 170,000 barrels production. Better get those chokes open.

I've previously posted that actually getting cash out of HHDL won't be as simple as just wishing it. So every $ that can be saved financing HHDl is of course valuable to UKOG but this is an oil company and what investors are interested in is flow rates, and UKOG seem reluctant to say anything about them whilst detailing a 'saving'.

As for paying for a larger percent of the assets - unfortunately it seems to be a larger percent of costs so far, ho hum, here's to 25 years of production of ????.

nhawan,

for every buy there is a sell, the MM's wouldn't be selling at 0.204p if someone wasn't supplying matched volumes below that price. The question is if (and I agree it is a big if) the buying demand is met at this level and the day traders are faced with holding because the sell price hasn't risen...….do they sell at a loss or join the unwilling band of previously caught out traders?

they are making it up as they go along.

Dawns on them that CLN's are not a sign of cajones but a problem for the SP - no s**t Sherlock.

Decide to workover HH-1 and do another perforation (previous reperforation 10/9/2018 RNS) just after installing the new super duper pump - did it not improve performance, had the flow rate started declining and it was hoped they could pump it up?

Raising cash to pay again (but only in instalments this time) for what the last placing was for:- 'To fund the above costs reductions (e.g. payment of contractual notice periods) and part of the stated well intervention, production facility and other costs).' - that well intervention was expected to be the dual completion of HH-1...….....

Borrow for Loxley before PP is granted (if that's not a warning sign things aren't going well at HH - what is) though after nearly 9 months they conditions for the HH development haven't all been passed. So is the cash really for something else?

Not mentioned HH-2z, and the only 2 things mentioned about HH-1 are it needs recompleting and reperforation and it's asset level OPEX is $13 a barrel at current (unmentioned) production levels.

Let's hope they don't mess up the reperforation, and costs continue while they keep on shutting in the well.

But it seems they can't wait for the CPR to do RBL instead (how many times have we had, according to certain posters/tweeters, the last placing/CLN because of RBL or self financing) - but why the urgency - surely Loxley and IOW could wait if a CPR was planned to be completed before end Q3.

Looking at the posts you would think that the only thing that mattered was whether the pyramid share selling scheme was going to result in a lower or higher price for the raft of new gamblers.

The only nearly 'technical' figure was $13 asset level OPEX - but we don't know what costs are included - at current production levels.

But we don't know what those current production levels are - or what the target production levels will be with the new completion, and why when they replaced the pump recently didn't they do that?

We don't know what is happening to HH-2z (maybe cash really needed for a workover?) as either it is producing very little or is shut in.

HH-1 new pump installed and new completion - what has happened to the dual completion to bring Kimmeridge into production?

Posted this on 23 May 2020:-

'If instead the next RNS is more talk of other opportunities, IOW, Dunsfold - even A24, and waffle about HH rather than detail will it be tin hat time?'

Obviously didn't think they'd throw a £4.2mm raising into the mix.

Ocelot,

The detail of assets includes:-

£17+mm of goodwill
£27+mm of 'investment' in subsidiaries

Both classified as 'non-current' assets

and nearly £7+mm of cash UKOG had at that time.

These represent almost all of UKOG's 'assets'.

I suggest looking at 'CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION AS AT 30 September 2019' in the Final Results for the full details.

UKOG desperately need a CPR with reserves.

but interesting video

Though it is in mirror image?

At least we know what R. looks like now, though surprised about the ponytail. Infiltrating XR just so he could get a decent shot of the site rather than through the fence was a bit extreme, only joking - but we now have a better idea of what's going on from a bunch of protesters than from UKOG.

For instance where are those 3 grey tanks so necessary for the HH-2z ewt that UKOG were so proud of on twitter on 6 Dec 2019. A case of counting chickens.........?

Just in case it is misunderstood the 'sp' in this sentence shouldn't be there:

Anyone who claims to know what is going to happen (SP, OP, Flow rates, reserves) without all the data is just guessing, even with it all sp predictions for some of these by the company will have a band with a most likely value and a large range which even than will only cover most of the calculated outcomes (P10 to P90).

It should read:

Anyone who claims to know what is going to happen (SP, OP, Flow rates, reserves) without all the data is just guessing, even with it all predictions for some of these by the company will have a band with a most likely value and a large range which even than will only cover most of the calculated outcomes (P10 to P90).

and just to be clearer still I'm primarily referring to Flow Rates and Reserves having ranges of values.

Sting,

Where have I said normal people are predicting 1000bopd from the Portland in HH-1, looking at the 'sweep' no one is even predicting it for HH-2z.

I continually get accused of posting things I don't, read my posts- they are cautious, I know that in O&G E&P there are few certainties except what has happened in the past. Anyone who claims to know what is going to happen (SP, OP, Flow rates, reserves) without all the data is just guessing, even with it all sp predictions for some of these by the company will have a band with a most likely value and a large range which even than will only cover most of the calculated outcomes (P10 to P90)

You also seem to be continuing with the idea that a dual completion of Portland and Kimmeridge is planned using a LRP. Doesn't seem to be possible or if it is it isn't used much, but UKOG did mention changing production in HH-1 to ESP, which is utilised for dual completions (31/03 RNS: '....use of a bespoke permanent magnet electric submersible pump (ESP) in the HH-2z well. We plan in the short term to produce HH-1 via a similar ESP system.')

Your basis of criticism seems to be that you 'see me' as a non holder, and then you launch into a bizarre rant.

One of your complaints seems to be that I spend a lot more time than others can reviewing the RNS and technicals - surely that would be a good reason to read my posts. Although I don't spend much time reviewing either - it's called reading, and hopefully remembering the salient points. I choose not to say anything about myself - just what I'm not, and I'm not a swampy and I am not doing down the company, just telling it as it is - if it doesn't match your view perhaps you should dwell on your main complaint -

'and lots of people on here haven't got the tme to review rns and technicals as much as as you'

R,

just shows how much difference it makes being at the site and reporting what you think is going on:--

'roganjt Posted in: UKOG
Posts: 668 Price: 0.225
No Opinion
News 22 May 2020 09:20
At Horse Hill at the moment, something is afoot They are preparing the site, could be this weekend or early next week! Could this be the start of the work to co-mingle HH1 Portland and Kim, or HH2z interventions, or both!!'

No neither......…

………then again this is the start of one of my posts 23 May:-

Penguins
Posted in: UKOG Posts: 1,967
Price: 0.225 No Opinion
RE: Crane on site 23 May 2020 10:12
'It's predictable that anything happening on site and anything seen is interpreted as a positive, one day hopefully it will be. Last time a crane was seen they pulled the pump off HH-1 and replaced it.......but maybe this time.....'

I'll keep to my 'dribble' thanks.

R,

Making comments about another poster being depressed just after mental health awareness week is not a good look, anyway I'm sure you will be pleased to know I'm fine, just busy.

But not really much to comment on - I already posted about the new pump but the thread was deleted - I guess the discussion with sting and skwizz was too much for those that prefer one liners. I'll repeat both my and stings posts if you're missing posts with a bit more meat in them.

Today one tanker seen (apparently 5 missed), first for a week that's been reported. But what's going on at the site, HH-1 being worked on Tues / Wed - pumping Thursday according to you - but what about HH-2z? Shut in? Why, meant to be a 90 day ewt following clean-up? If the horizontal needs a workover that's not just a crane - CT Unit minimum. 31 March RNS said ewt was continuing (as did 28/04 RNS - 'HH-1 in stable oil production, HH-2z EWT ongoing') and workovers of HH-1 have happened during the lockdown.

But those that think that a new LRP on HH-1 will change significantly (if at all) the 'more than 300bopd' previously RNS'd that some posters say is just from HH-1 Portland, 1000bopd capable pump or not, as the sustainable initial rate was calculated to be 362bopd very early on in the testing (10/9/18). No update to this has been made based on the more extensive testing since, or a new reservoir model based on the HH-2 pilot core. Best that UKOG might be able to manage is a quick burst after the shut in to release as a half hour initial rate.

The spread has been interesting today (and other days) with a fantasy Ask (up to 0.29p) and Bid (down to 0.23p) with the lowest trade at 0.24 (I'll ignore the 2 trades totalling £15.50 @ 0.2303) and highest at 0.264p. Hope nobody thought the spread when it was briefly 0.25/0.29 meant that actual trades were rising that much - MMs joining in the 'pump', or was it just manipulating the reporting of buys and sells.

At least it's sunny for your tanker watch, though an RNS with operational details would be preferable.

This thread title just about sums it up.

Big dump thread later and the cycle will be complete.

The OGA production restriction is agreed with the company. There will be no restriction on what the company gets paid for the oil produced. If, for testing purposes, they needed to produce 1000bopd than that’s the basis the limit would have been decided on – it will be arrived at through technical considerations not financial.

There is no 'you can only cover costs of testing' restriction - the restriction is you can't carry on testing rather than applying for FDP approval for production.

The only reason I can think of for why UKOG extended Kimmeridge and Portland testing, and it was agreed by the OGA, was because of uncertainties in the results, and they needed more data.

One reason for applying a small choke is to provide back pressure to stop gas coming out of solution and the oil flow would be the result of that not the determinant. There will also be possible reservoir damage to consider from a high flow rate and that the OGA will approve the maximum ultimate recovery in the FDP, which is not necessarily the maximum early flow rate.

As for predicting flow rates there hasn’t been enough information released to even make an educated guess, but someone might still guess right.

My estimate (total 450bopd) was based only on the 3 tanker a day requested in this planning application:- SCC Ref 2020/0018 – at least an indication of what UKOG anticipated, maybe they will change it (as I was assured they would be increasing the tanker count in the development planning application).