Member Info for Penguins

Mullins,

It might be the most recent tweet but it's old news, UKOG tweeted about the report 5 Times on December 14, and exactly the same tweet as yesterday on 15 December.

Rather than a report about preparing for the next decade, which UKOG may have nothing to do with, it's a pity UKOG is less informative about about what's going on with projects of more immediate concern, a picture of the Pinarova site that looks anything but ready for the workover and nothing specific about the other O&G projects. Has UKOG given up on their supposed core business - just hoping someone will farm in to HH and Loxley to do the work, and AME operating in Turkey (though who's paying what isn't clear).

Not sure what the UKOG 'team' are doing other than managing contractors - and repeating tweets, almost all about hydrogen which if they're lucky they could be converting from natural gas in 2030 or so.

Auspicious date?

9 months ro the day to when UKOG RNS'd that the swab test of the Pinarova secondary objective in the Hoya (although it had never been mentioned as such previously) had failed and not recovered any oil despite there being oil shows whilst drilling - not to be confused with an oil smell whilst drilling. UKOG didn't bother to mention that the primary target had nothing in it - just had to deduce that, like so many UKOG failures, from the fact the Hoya amplitude anomaly was no longer mentionedand and that after reaching TD they needed a reason to continue to look for a mythical accumulation that was feeding the oil recovered from shotholes - that reason being maybe there if there was some oil in the Germik they could consider (September RNS) 'the acquisition of a small 3D seismic programme to identify a possible deeper oil pool, seepage/spill from which being the most likely primary source of both the seep and Pinarova oils.'

Not sure that a 'possible' deeper oil pool leaking or being full is the most likely primary source of the oils seen. To leak and be still leaking it would need to be recharged, perhaps by an even deeper accumulation, that's also leaking, spilling ........etc etc. if it's not migrating from the source rock.

Originally UKOG thought (June 2022) that the shothole oil:- 'provides evidence of an active light oil petroleum system in the central area of the licence'

ie that the shothole oil was direct from a source rock 'active light oil petroleum system' not spilling or leaking from another accumulation.

and surprisingly (June 2022) the seep's API gravity is close to the 43˚ API gravity of AME's nearby producing East Sadak oil field' yet despite sending a sample of E Sadak oil to be tested with the Pinarova and shothole oils they've not mentioned it - maybe it doesn't fit with the narrative (interpretation) of the deeper accumulation

Roll on the results of the test, not sure that UKOG seem that excited about it, nor sure why they are doing it except to fill the gap in anything happening, and it's still going to be a long time until either Loxley or HH-3 are likely to be drilled (or if) - though why hasn't UKOG converted HH-2z to an injector, according to UKOG a 'win' of £250,000 a year and probably a lot less costly than Pinarova drill and test to do - even in the highly unlikely event of SCC et al losing in the Supreme Court (the excuse for doing nothing) converting HH-2z to a water disposal well is not drilling for more oil and could have been retrospectively permitted.

The last statement before the extracts from the RNS perhaps explains.

'It seems a very opaque system with no public record of when YA/Riverfort choose the conversion price / date which seems unfair to 'normal' investors, even traders.'

Paragraph 1 & 2 - It wasn't clearly stated the 1.3 billion shares would be handed over to YA/Riverfort and enter the market with no proper notification. It was 4 months later the conversion and conversion price was revealed.

Paragraph 3 - even more equity shares were handed to YA/Riverfort with no explanation why the original1.3 billion was added to by over 1.42bilion shares

Paragraph 4 - The over 1.42 billion second tranche shares are being sold but there has been no notification of them being converted and at what price - and there's still probably over £1.5 million of conversions to come already plus another £0.5 million to come.

The question is why UKOG made the original June RNS so vague. UKOG could have clearly stated that the shares would be given to YA/Riverfort and when conversion happened wouldn't be revealed, and the conversion price wouldn't be revealed until some time later.

The formula for the number of equity shares could have been better explained - it was described as amounting to between 37% to 51% of the £2000000, or 1.3 billion. The basis for what was described in November as the first tranche of 1.3billion shares wasn't explained (though it was less than 37% of £2mllion because of the conversion price), and the second tranche of 2.42+billion shares seems arbitrary and if they had been converted at the SP on 3 November of about 0.03p (they won't have been) the equity shares would have totaled 54%, more than the 51%, so they must have been expecting the SP to drop.

Just like the project RNS - smoke and mirrors.

I think ninetails has described it very succinctly.

So UKOG gave YA / Riverfort 1,300,000,000 of equity shares which were converted when the vwap was 0.0504p after the 28 June RNS and probably sold them all at a higher price between the announcement and the conversion date, but this wasn't mentioned until 3 November. It was unclear from the RNS that these shares were just being handed over without any further announcement and there was no mention of a further handover of 1,424.4 87,652 shares - labelled as a second tranche of equity shares.

But UKOG shares in circulation wasn't updated until November - surely that isn't allowed. If the 1,300,000,000 were handed over in June when the CLN agreement was announced, or soon after, they should have updated the shares figure then. If these shares weren't handed over before they were sold then YA / Riverfort surely must have been shorting.

In November they handed over the second tranche of equity shares, another 1,424,487,652 shares to YA/Riverfort (and updated the shares in circulation) that trade data suggests they are or have been, selling - but when will UKOG let investors not given help like this know what price these shares have been converted at.

This affects how much loan remains to be converted. Assuming all the second tranche of equity shares are sold and they have 'converted' at 0.022p (just above the lowest vwap I calculated) then with the first tranche of equity shares they still have £1,575,000 of loan to convert (includes the 4.5% added to the loan on the sale proceeds of the equity shares and the £500,000 added in November but not the £500,000 to be added before February 16). Hopefully these will be converted with only a few days delay between conversion and RNS.

It seems a very opaque system with no public record of when YA/Riverfort choose the conversion price / date which seems unfair to 'normal' investors, even traders.

Excerpts from the 3 November RNS:-

'The Loan's first tranche of 1,300,000,000 has been converted by the Investors at an average price of 0.0504 pence per share. Investors can elect to convert the second tranche of 1,424,487,652 Equity Shares at the lower of the Variable Price* or the Fixed Price**.'

'Application has been made for the first and second tranches of the Equity Shares, numbering 2,724,487,652 ordinary shares in total, to be admitted to trading on AIM ("Admission"). Admission is expected to take place at 8.00 a.m. on or around 8 November 2023.'

Another RNS of no news - with a promise of news in the future, that will probably not be news of the testing results but arrival of the equipment on site - is the repetitive issuing of 'news' tweets and RNS a contractual obligation of the CLN?

In May they messed around until 23May allegedly not perforating the casing after announcing they were gong to test the Germik (oil smell formation) on 3 May. During that time they did release a couple of tweets (11/05 & 16/05) that suggested 'testing' was happening when later they said the no valid testing happened unless another test proved otherwise.

Let's hope once the PSI equipment arrives they quickly get on with perforating the casing and then we'll see how excellent the arrival of the equipment was and it puts an end to all the nonsense about an interval that had an oil smell which was so important it wasn't mentioned until after the well TD'd when all other possibilities of success were gone.

As for the oil sample, which was deceitfully 'urgently' revealed days later on twitter when the Hoya section, that at least had oil shows, was about to be swab tested - how does that and the shothole oil sample compare with the E Sadak sample that was also sent for testing? Did UKOG forget to ask as it seems UKOG was responsible for arranging the oil sample tests.

It's also interesting to note how the oil that returned to surface - the 'mobile light oil recovered from the mud pit - is no longer identified as happening when the casing was inserted - are they hoping everyone's forgotten what they've previously tweeted and thinks it was in the mud pit while drilling the Germik - which would be far better than it being displaced by the casing with no certainty where it came from.

https://twitter.com/UKOGlistedonAIM/status/1654065954463047680/photo/1

Will we see chartists once again issuing charts showing rockets and upward curves as has happened so many times before - but never the subsequent drop - forgetting that with UKOG what goes up has, so far, always come down.

A chart showing the peak of the spike - now that would be useful, if it was right.

SRBS,

unfortunately finding 'some' oil is about all UKOG expect as well. Surely they would be a bit less subdued in their expections than we'll go looking for where the sample we get (positive testing) came from (more seismic).

'With this in mind, should further testing be positive, consideration is being given to the acquisition of a small 3D seismic programme to identify a possible deeper oil pool, seepage/spill from which being the most likely primary source of both the seep and Pinarova oils'

But even that is disingenuous as where it came from might be an active source migrating straight into the shallow section at the shothole and the not much deeper probably very 'tight' Germik, rather than a leaking deeper accumulationsomewhere around the area, probably in the Mardin that appears to be a rather poor fractured carbonate reservoir with rapid decline in E Sadak.

Fun and games about to commence - looking forward to the uber-ramping of the traders who appear on news, and disappear before results if they time it right.

Despite what they post their actions speak far louder than their claims of things like 'the sky's the limit' - when they bail out on take off.....

Ocelot,

when UKOG's 10% share from Horndean goes from 11 to 13bopd every little helps but it's not going to make any difference to UKOG - and September's figure was a drop from previous months.

As for the Portland storage project it appears to be similar in certain aspects to all UKOG's projects.

Find a project that wasn't commercially viable - in this case without government support.

Put a spin on it - in this case hydrogen

Then claim that this time it willl be successful - as in all previous UKOG ventures - in this case because the government 'supported' it (polite words about the project)

Then take years tofind out whether it really will work. meanwhile drawing a good salary regardless of success - in this case will there be government support to the business model and specifically the Portland gas storage project.

With Q4 2025 when the government hands out contracts - if an incoming administration (assuming a change) agrees with the business model - bearing in mind the various scandals over the current government awarding contracts.

Shls,

oh dear - swab test equipment - sounds like they're not hoping for anything much more than a sample, - the previous Pinarova swab test based on there being oil shows, not a smell, didn't recover any oil - and still the perforating guns aren't on site.

Pity they don't update on Horse Hill, things like decline curve, the June 2019 Kimmeridge report, HH-2z conversion rather than a daily state of a track in Turkey.

Trish,

they're not drilling. The well is drilled and cased. The idea is that the perforating gun will be lowered into the well and then 'perforate' the casing. What happens then is they find out if the original test in May was as good as valid, whether those perforations penetrated the casing or not, or they manage to get some sort of flow.

Not sure why sonmoon is posting about naturally occurrring helium being discovered whilst drilling - has nothing to do with salt caverns being leached which are then filled with gas But Sunmoon seems to be a serial account holder, this account being registered at the end of November....yet.....there's similarities in approach, interests, language, posters with a previous serial account holder - and it isn't Adrian.

'Sunmoon', consider that those who have been permanently positive about UKOG being serially proved wrong are far more likely to, as you put it, 'go mad' than those that have merely reported what they have researched which isn't 'positive'. They're certainly more likely to be posting desperately in an attempt to recover their losses if they believed what they posted.

It's certainly easier to post honest opinions than the sort of ramping rubbish that is clearly not believed by many of those posting it as they don't hang around for the glorious outcomes they claim will happen.

Shls,

The Supreme Court is on holiday until 11 January - and that's about Horse Hill - so some time after that, they publish a case list on their Web site the weekend before each week.

Loxley was decided in July and a leave to appeal to the High Court was refused and that was RNS'd by UKOG at 08:01 on 3 August after which you posted:-

'Shls3834 Premium Member

Posted in: UKOG

Posts: 440

Price: 0.0545

No Opinion

RE: No change after that 3 Aug 2023 08:20

Yeah I’m really Surprised'

Which was presumably about the lack of a P&D on the Loxley decision 'news'?

UKOG have submitted in Dece ber another application for the extension to the planning permission for retention of the Broadford Bridge site which runs out in March 2024. They have extended it three times since the failed and expensive BB well but it might be rejected this time and UKOG will then have to shell out for site restoration - probably the only reason they keep asking to extend the permission, though they continue to claim work at HH will impact the decision to do further work at Broadford Bridge.

For the first time in this planning application UKOG cite the legal challenges at Loxley and Horse Hill as the excuse for not advancing any work at either site - though not mentioning that any further work at either site depends on getting someone else to pay for it.

BTW there have been plenty of trades - just a site glitch, a Y2K bug finally emerged?

ZYX,

It might be more accurate to say that the NSTA has insisted that the obligation 3D seismic needs to be shot as UKOG, and probably PPP, wouldn't be that interested in risking destroying a target with no seismic control by shooting more seismic rather than the opportunity to raise funds nd keeping the dream machine limping on during a rise on the hope a well would be successful. Basur-3 an example of drilling without good enough seismic control - yet prior to when Basur-3 was drilled AME suspended drilling at E Sadak to shoot more seismic because of the level of failed drills.

In Turkey it certainly looks like the Basur-4 closure disappeared when more seismic was shot hence the Pinarova fiasco hoping oil that found its way into a shothole over a kilometre away also found its way into a amplitude anomaly, but not the same as the nearer Kezer well where there was oil in the Hoya but only a 'cut' in water. When the Pinarova target/s were found to be dry they scrambled around to find a reason to test a non-reservoir layer where an oil smell was observed but wasn't reported at the time, probably because they knew it wasn't worth testing as they then cased the well and drilled ahead..

But, given the dodgy closure that's been contrived for Loxley, what's surprising is that the NSTA hasn't insisted that the Loxley seismic isn't acquired before the proposed well, not after as UKOG has planned. Maybe if UKOG do manage to get Loxley (apparently the largest undeveloped gas field in the UK according to everything's transformational SS) farmed out an incoming farminee will insist on shooting more seismic.

I do like the idea though that Q4 2025 'isn't that far away', firstly who would buy now for the Portland gas storage project which despite being worked on for 19 months has not been fleshed out in terms of timings and costs - and it isn't just a long time but also probably a change of government who will perhaps be a bit more careful with handing out cash to one and all.

shls,

'we believe we can recover between 5% and 15% of the oil in the ground, which by 2030 could mean that we produce 10%-to-30% of the uk’s oil demand from within the weald area.'

yet since then, which was the claim in 2016, we're more than half way to 2030 and current production from the kimmeridge in the weald is zero barrels of oil.

what mr sanderson surely knew, rather than 'believed', from the bgs weald report on the kimmeridge was that most of the oil that nutech calculated to be in the kimmeridge wasn't going anywhere and that the flow from a couple of the micrites at horse hill was likely to be anomalous and short lived.

certainly following broadford bridge-1 ukog would have been aware that those 'beliefs' were wrong, but has never set the record straight so that dl can continue to quote those bs oip figures.

since then there have been months of kimmeridge testing, with ukog releasing selected flow rates, and with that data had a kimmeridge report done in june 2019 that had 1.4mmbbls net oil to ukog (first mentioned as a footnote in the 16/04/21 2020 annual report, 21 months later) and no doubt loads of other analyses. did this report and internal analysis lead to the hh-2 well not being deepened to log the kimmeridge, hh-1 sidetrack not happening and hh-1 not being dual completed - and occasionally mentioned plans, but no action, to drill the kimmeridge.

ninetails, ss could hide behind he was quoting the bs analysis from nutech and that there was sp**** flow data in 2016. but surely more information other than contingent resources should have been released from the 2019 rps report that presumably contradicts the nutech analysis.

Wizard,

You keep to your half full philosophy- it has obviously worked so well over the past 6 years since 2017, when according to ocelot I got it so wrong prior to the Broadford Bridge drill that the Kimmeridge was not going to be as wonderful as many, including UKOG, claimed.

You posted 'It is the testing following the perforations that will show the potential of the site and any current flow rates and income.'

What in anything that UKOG has tweeted or RNS'd leads you to say that following the perforating 'will' show any 'current flow rates' and more importantly 'income'.

'Might' I could accept but testing a non-reservoir formation that had an oil smell whilst drilling that UKOG didn't mention until the well TD'd and the actual targets were dry is, on the balance of probabilities not going to 'flow' and UKOG are surely indicating that with this in the 22/09 RNS:-

'With this in mind, should further testing be positive, consideration is being given to the acquisition of a small 3D seismic programme to identify a possible deeper oil pool, seepage/spill from which being the most likely primary source of both the seep and Pinarova oils'

As for DL retweeting UKOG PR - he also reweeted the first tweet showing the oil recovered prior to drilling the Hoya section, because he was also 'duped' by UKOG by timing the tweet as if the oil was from the Hoya section they were going to swab test (that then failed to recover any oil) that did have 'oil shows', not just an oil,smell:-

David Lenigas@DavidLenigas Apr 21

Brilliant. This is amazing oil from @UKOGlistedonAIM #UKOG quick look see from their ~50m of oil shows in their new #Turkey #oil well. This looks like very light sweet #crude to me. Any oil company would be happy seeing this. Main target still to come deeper.@'

Wizard,

Even UKOG haven't claimed oil will flow at Pinarova even a 'positive' outcome appears to just lead to the hope there's an accumulation feeding whatever they find that they can locate - which, as the oil in the shotholes was described as an active seep, might mean it, and the shows, smell and oil returned to surface when the casing was inserted migrated from the source rock, not an accumulation.

As for the Horse Hill planning challenge. What will change in the near future assuming, as most do, that the challenge will fail? UKOG doesn't want / can't afford to drill either Loxley or any more wells at HH - and given the likelihood of water ingress from fractures at HH and both HH and Loxley having dodgy maps - although only at HH is it planned to acquire seismic before drilling - commercial success isn't guaranteed for both of these supposed appraiasal wells.

I suspect that the focus on the long term infrastructure project rather than their core business of O&G E&P is a reflection of how poor the O&G opportunities are - no surprise for a company scraping around to redrill prospects that have already failed. My expectation is that UKEn will be sold on at some point, perhaps with a pink trousered CEO to continue getting benefits he's become accustomed to.

Believing UKOG claims of oil flows, transformational potential or even UKOG's opinion of successful outcomes has so far not been a sensible investment strategy. Presumably traders who promote P&Ds agree despite their glowing endorsement of the projects - hence their short term (unless they get spiked, or misjudge when 'news' will arrive) attendance on this board.

eg 'It will fly to the sky ' or other such unjustified nonsense.

PPP are also quoting OIP and 2C resources for the Portland that was calculated for the June 2018 CPR ,prior to the ewr in 2018 and 2019, and prior to a new map produced after HH-2z proved the old map was wrong as the Portland in HH-2z was deeper, not shallower, than HH-1 - and the bounding fault's position changed so the Collendean Farm well was in the same block as HH-1 and 2z.

Given what has happened during HH-1 production and HH-2z testing how UKOG or PPP can continue to quote figures from the 2018 CPR.

As for the Kimmeridge, PPP continue to quote the ridiculous OIP figure of 8 billion bbls of oil within the whole vertical section across the 2 HH licences - which is clearly complete nonsense regarding any oil that even might be produced. Even UKOG has stopped mentioning figures produced by Nutech in 2015 and Xodus would not include any figures for the Kimmeridge in the CPR. However unbeknown to investors UKOG had a Kimmeridge HH report produced by RPS in June 2019 (during the ewt) that had 2C contingent resources for HH of 1.5mmbbls, . Despite this until the March 2021 Annual Report UKOG continued to quote in the final report in March 2020 the Nutech OIP figure. The RPS Report has never been mentioned by UKOG except as a footnote to the table of contingent resources. Were the contents of that report the reason HH-2 wasn't deepened through the Kimmeridge to obtain more data, that the proposed HH-1 horizontal sidetrack into the Kimmeridge didn't happen nor HH-1 dual completed in the Portland and Kimmeridge?

But what PPP fail to update is, for investors in PPP (and UKOG), more relevant. No update on the CT #1H well production in December, nor anything substantive about the #4H workover that's been underway for 20 days - yet it seems that well is flowing:-

'Our initial workovers at Chalk Talk 1H and Chalk Talk 4H have proved successful for Pennpetro and are now generating solid cashflow.'

For the farm-in to be funded by cashflow the question left hanging for both PPP and UKOG investors is 'how successful' - what are the flow rates now, and what the decline rate is likely to be in the future. PPP RNSd initial flow rates following the #1H workover and updated production during November almost weekly.

Trish,

can you point out where UKOG have been even slightly positive about the upcoming perforation and test of the Germik?

Not absolutely definite that the previous test was invalid, and what they consider 'success' seems to be encouragement togo looking for a deeper accumulation that may not be there, like the original primary target the Hoya amplitude anomaly.

Just looking at the last RNS the wording is strange - as if obtaining and shifting the guns around was UKOG's responsibility, otherwise why does scheduling involve UKOG liaising with AME, surely AME would just tell UKOG when it was going to happen:-

'The Company is now liaising with the operator AME to schedule a firm date for the resumption of testing operations.'

But maybe this does mean UKOG are paying for Pinarova, which is what was implied by this in Aladdin's Annual Report:-

'The only exception will be testing the Resan shallow accumulation. Not only will these wells be quick and cheap the costs are carried by our JV partners'

Mannnan.

'75,000,000 must be buy at 0,027'

Must? Why? More likely a 'favoured' seller with those pesky CLN shares.

SRBS, not sure your 'definitely' logic works - the trade immediately before was identified as a sell at 0.0266p, but the trade before that was at 0.028p (spread was 0.026 to 0.028p) - and now at 2:30 there's a 73,000,000 'sell'at 0.027 (spread 0.26p to 0.029p)

Ocelot,

it isn't difficult for the number of shares traded to be so high when UKOG has contrived to make, with the help of a CLN, the price of each share around a fourtieth of a penny, and there's a seller in the market.

More than half of the total was in 4 trades, a sure sign some or most of them are the seller, and total trades value about £125,000. If YA / Riverfort did shift a load oof shares shares today and go with the vwap from just over a week ago (0.0216p) they,ve made about 20% plus their 4.5% added to the loan.

Wiltshireman,

Not sure it isn't better to know what's likely rather than what is hoped for - especially when everything points towards failure in terms of what even UKOG expect commercially - success just encouragement to hunting down an oil pool that may not even be there.

Seing how much excitement there is about the upcoming perforating and testing I thought it worthwhile having a read through all the previous RNS to find out what UKOG expected the outcome to be of a test of a zone that had a strong oil odour whilst drilling that was so important they didn't mention it until weeks later after the main target, and a zone with oil shows were proved duds.

In the RNS a few mentions of the similarity of the oil to the shothole oil, though they seem to have forgotten they also sent off some E Sadak oil to test as well, but there was no mention of how good this test might be at all, the best I could find was this on 22 September:-

'With this in mind, should further testing be positive, consideration is being given to the acquisition of a small 3D seismic programme to identify a possible deeper oil pool, seepage/spill from which being the most likely primary source of both the seep and Pinarova oils.'

Sounds like 'success' will be to initiate looking for a deeper oil pool. But the Pinarova oil sample they got, which only came to surface when the casing was set after drilling through the Germik, has already been shown to be from the same source as the shothole oil - but that's different from where if might have leaked from, or even if it has leaked from another accumulation.

Unusual for there to be oil at surface for any length of time without suffering degradation which presumably is why it was referred to as an active seep with 41.7 API - though UKOG / AME have never mentionedan active surface seep - just oil in the shothole, and not as light as E Sadak 43 API oil.

But if as originally thought the shothole oil was 'evidence of an active light oil petroleum system in the central area' (from the 30 June 2022 RNS) then both pinarova and the shothole oil could be directly fed from the source rock, no need for a deeper accumulation happening to leak to both.

So what is this test about, do UKOG/AME really expect anything more than another sample, and why the emphasis on there being an accumulation feeding it?

Is it just keeping the dream going for a little longer? The delay in obtaining the guns a fortunate problem?

Ocelot,

Well George Lucan is no longer in charge and there's a vast gulf between being polite about another companies 'assets' and spending money on it. The loan they've got is about 75% to pay off previous (disastrous) loans / deals that saw the SP collapse when gas production should have benefitted pi. Unless they start another round of bad borrowing the remainder is needed to drill at Saltfleetby, not waste at Loxley. In fact the whole SFB saga is a lesson in how expensive it is and how not to fund a gas development - and they knew the gas was there.

If Loxley is so wonderful why hasn't any company farmed in since July 2022? Gas prices have been high and predicted to stay high, ocelot happy to claim valuations in the billions last year. Even if the High Court challenge put potential farminees off that was defeated in July this year - though no posters mentioned it might delay the farm out last year.

But it doesn't look like UKOG has the stomach to pay for drilling any more risky wells with HH-3 seemingly dependent on PPP farming in, and despite claiming they would go ahead with site preparation for Loxley this year, regardless of the farm in happening, dragging their heels on getting the planning conditions dealt with.

Probably cash from those who've got out with a profit from Angus hoping for another bit of luck. The 'MMs' having seen it all before, saw them coming with their pockets full of their gains and upped the ask.

Of course UKOG could put out another instalment in the perforating guns saga - but as for 'Big seller out (150m trade yesterday). MMs free to take the sp back up now.' - I think that most will realise who the 'big seller' is and that they aren't anywhere near 'out'.

They will probably want to drag the price down a bit further as I suspect the best recent vwap is from last week on Wednesday at about 0.0216p - that may be slightly out but at best there would be slim pickings from the sale price of 0.0215p,

There were also the 4 35,000,000 trades today - looking like 2 buys & 2 reversals by the share volume being negative for two of the trades - though on A***N they don't 'do' negatives - more shenanigans.

But it looks like the bid is being held down vs the ask - even with a £10,000 buy - so does someone have plenty of shares that still need shifting.

But you've pasted your bullying posts.

If anyone needs help it's someone who's obsessed with coming onto a board he's banned from day in day out to abuse, smear and lie about other posters.

'You bunch cowards couldnt fight yourselves out of a wet paper bag in the real world'

'nomlungu getting upset her weak little activist gob ****e online bully ninetails is getting some back lol!'

Is this reasonable language - it certainly demonstrates that what ninetails is posting is just run of the mill abuse by you.