Member Info for Penguins

UKOG not even on the post leader board any more, and even when it was - sells - and 'someone' sold 10,000,000 at 0.0327p and 0.0325p- you did sell when you were in profit?

On Monday it was difficult to sell, easy to buy - that should tell you something about what's going on.

I suppose you see it as a double play with your PPP shares which you started buying when the SP was around 3p needing help when (if?) they come out of suspension and will need cash for Texas and HH 3D (BTW it was DL that claimed there was 3D before HH-1 was drilled - I was one of those that said it was a lie). PPP already need 60 million shares to replace shares borrowed for previous placings (currently only 100,000,000 in issue) - massive dilution coming at PPP - and you were buying at over 3p (suspended at 1.875p).

I can see why you're desperate.

Adrian,

It's hilarious you trying to mock someone about a non-existant short that would have been by far the most sensible thing to have done until two weeks ago - and may still be worth holding onto - after all there was a poster who was convinced that 0.06p was the floor when the SP steadied at that for a while, though anyone shorting (a CFD?) has had plenty of time to cash in while the SP has steadied over the past 2 weeks after two months of ever lower 52 week lows.

We'll see if a win in the Supreme Court will see the SP 'bag', the Loxley win was muted.

But are you living in the past - TW, shorts - next up BDI will be back and £1 party - sorry for those that held in 2017 because they believed the BS.

Adrian,

'They show them selves up for what they really are . Bully greenie leftie uncoothed louts :)'

Says an uncouth bullying lout who makes up stories about other posters whilst pretending he's not the uncouth bullying lout who has been permanently banned from this site for being an uncouth bullying lout.

You did write those posts - and of course you don't report posters - you're a permanently banned poster, and what would you report posters for - saying you're Adrian

Still an opportunity for you to bathe in victimhood again - twice already today - tomorrow morning another opportunity.

Desperate, just desperate.

You posted:-

'Penguins.

He is an Energy Minister.'

I knew - as that was in reply to a post where I stated:-

'it was actually with the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change'

but I asked you 'Maybe you could point some others out?' as you claimed 'SS has had several meetings with the likes of the Energy minister fairly recently'. I could only find the one meeting in UKOG's tweets mentioned with anybody since UKOG got involved in the Portland project and that was with him on 25 January - so did you just make up 'several meetings' because it sounded more important as you avoided mentioning any other meetings?

You seem to be getting rattled - desperate to post here (endlessly) just in case there is no news soon? Even lost your walkman ID after being such a good boy for so long.......and still exhibiting the stange behavious of referring to yourself as if your not Adrian.

But as you're here still waiting for you to say where I've been 'unfair' about the projects that have results, nor have you identified where a pi can 'borrow' shares to short.

Maybe instead of making up stuff post about things you can justify.

Actually 3 different 'posters' - one is repeated.

Several meeting with the 'likes' of the energy minister?

I only found one meeting mentioned on UKOG twitter since UKOG got involved with the Portland gas storage project with the 'likes' of the energy minister - it was actually with the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change on January 25th this year (cute picture), though UKOG milked it with several tweets.

Maybe you could point some others out?

But a 'big announcement' - maybe, who knows, not sure how it generates cashflow until around 2030. Best chance is selling the project on.

I see ocelot missed that there's 4 different 'posters', they're probably meant to sequence but it doesn't in Edge - the last one mentions being ready for 2050........

Just like ocelot, toys / pram.

'Cancel culture' - oh really - Adrian virtue signalling his conspiracy theory credentials of victimhood. Next up 'woke'.

I suppose filtering another poster is the nearest you can get to cancelling another poster when they aren't posting here despite a permanent ban and keep things cival [sic].

The point of this board is discussion, not an echo chamber. Though I can understand that it's difficult to endlessly post how great everything will be only to find out that UKOG forgot to mention the downsides the so called negative posters mention as a possible problems.

Anyway I'm still puzzled that despite the Finch challenge being continuous since September 2019 (until the Supreme Court rules on it) that has stopped UKOG doing anything at HH (except everything they have done) that UKOG were planning to convert HH-2z in 2022, RNS 5/5/2022:-

'UKOG can now proceed ahead with its plans to convert Horse Hill-2z into a water injector during 2022.......'

No mention of Finch, and no mention that the EA permit needed more activities before they could actually do it. June 2023 they were still waiting for the permission to proceed.

Also didn't see Adrian telling all and sundry here and on twitter that it wouldn't happen because of Finch.

Adrian

What's there to be positive about, but I frequently post that Finch is expected to lose. I've also posted that the PPP deal is good for UKOG - if only because of the risks.

But I'm not going to post them for you when you can't even say where I've been 'unfair' about the projects that have results, nor identify where a pi can 'borrow' shares to short.

When there's something truly positive not just UKOG's or other posters opinions I'll say so. At the moment Pinarova testing a formation that isn't considered reservoir, UKOG avoiding any information going public about HH and the Loxley CPR with errors is not positive.

Adrian,

UKOG stopped snapping up shares in HHDL after HH-2z was a disaster and anyway UKOG had spent all the spare cash buying Tellurian's share of the licence equity and already had a controlling interest in HHDL. Was Alba prior to HH-2z hopeful that it would be successful and HH-1 wouldn't decline so kept hold just in case (maybe Tellurian had better technical people?).

Posters thought UKOG buying up shares in HHDL for about £300,000 per percent was a good deal - doesn't look so good now - PPP, if the deal happens, are getting licence equity for about £50,000 per percent if you consider only the 'carry' of £2.3mm as they would have to pat 50% anyway.

The value of Alba's share in HHDL would depend on the price anyone was prepared to pay and after HH-2z and the rapid decline in production of HH-1 that might have been a lot less than the loan they were owed.

The language is pretty clear though whether 'HHDL can generate sufficient returns during and until the end of it's commercial life.'

Walkman,

You have been saying for years my posts are negative. As I've previously pointed out my posts only appear negative if you believe the highly optimistic opinions that UKOG put in RNS and quote from reports assuming there's no risk of failure. I challenged you yesterday to explain where I had been unfair in my opinions of the projects that have had some sort of result - HH! BB and Basur-3 - as none of these have been anything like as successful as UKOG claimed they would be it's hard to understand why 'being negative' was wrong although I would contend that it just confirms my opinions are realistic.

Perhaps you should read the UKOG RNS and reports that are full of 'up to' and 'ifs' and 'coulds' and posters then quote as if they're certainties rather than the opinions they are.

Still waiting for you to explain where a pi can borrow shares to short that means they have to buy shares to give back. Your helpful advice to 'close shorts' here is unlikely to be seen by the entities that can actually 'borrow' shares.

In fact I think you're talking about a CFD which is essentially a bet on what the price might be. A CFD company usually balances shorts and longs but there was an occasion when IG covered their bets and had to declare an over 3% holding.

Walkman,

The economics of another well, if its performance is anything like HH-1, and they might have been lucky not intersecting a fracture in HH-1, could be marginal. Water disposal may help but risked NPV may be barely positive with the rapid decline seen though earlyhigh production helps with NPV. In a normal company there would be an expectation of a decent return on cash spent, not just making a small profit. NPV isn't just oil recovered times OP less OPEx (which is much more favourable and often used by posters) but takes in the time value of money. Risking it acknowledges the chance of the well being a commercial success.

Four wells though. They've already changed the map considerably since the planning permission for four wells and it's highly likely that new 3D will, like it seems has happened with the Basur-4 3D, change the map where currently there is no seismic control - coincidentally where HH-3 is notionally targeted.

You seem to have diffficulty not only with maths but understanding English - Albas uncertainty as to whether HHDL will pay back the loa is clearly whether 'HHDL can generate sufficient returns during and until the end of it's commercial life'

Not because of the legal challenge.

Anyway July production seems to have coupled production of one of the lowest full month's averages (50bopd) with one of the highest water cuts at 40%. Not a good sign.

Let's be honest - you're desperate to stop any sensible discussion about UKOG projects - but I don't spin the positives to negatives, it's pointing out that the positives aren't as positive as UKOG 'spin' them.

I don't hate UKOG, HH or SS - interested, over sharing perhaps - but if you think what I have posted about any project that has had any sort of result has been unfair maybe as you are such an expert on my posting (over 8 years not 10 - oops your maths again) you could list them now.

Here's a reminder of projects that have had results and I've been, relative to what UKOG have claimed, 'negative', though I would say realistic.

HH-1, BB, HH-2z, basur-3.

I'm fascinated how I've been 'biased' about these - the one thing I did say in 2015 was that UKOG in their Environmental Method Statement said they might have to swab the Kimmeridge to get any oil sample - obviously that wasn't necessary - but it was more or less true about Broadford bridge - and I apologised (though it was what UKOG had expected) - and of course UKOG has been secretive about the results of the HH Kimmeridge ewt.

'Oil and gas exploration is always risky' - but some oil and gas exploration is more risky than others.

So the risk of poor results with more drilling plus the risk of Finch winning is what's stopping UKOG.

I'd certainly agree that more drilling at HH is high risk and I would add higher risk than losing to Finch and could easily just repeat the results of HH-1, or worse HH-2z, though I doubt that even SS (or DL) would risk another horizontal.

The question is why certain posters (and a tweeter) were insistent during the years since UKOG decided to convert HH-2z that every time UKOG did any work on the HH site that the HH-2z conversion was about to happen while the challenge continued.

Even UKOG said they would convert HH-2z in 2022 - doesn't sound like they were considering the challenge as a threat - or does it indicate SS is, as you put, it stupid?

'No point in doing work while an appeal against the original planning is going ahead................SS would not be so stupid.'

Not sure the record backs up that statement. SS has serially found things that are very risky to waste money on - whilst not mentioning they are risky.

If HH was as good as you seem to think (or do you?) the risk of losing in the Supreme Court is much less than the risk of Loxley failure and the failure of Basur-3 , Broadford Bridge, HH-2z were in truth high risk - we're waiting for Pinarova to be confirmed (or not) as a failure, though success is unlikely to be significant - they've already forgotten about the primary (and secondary) target. No doubt there will be some 'positive' to feed to the faithful regardless of the result.

As for the injector they are more likely still waiting for final sign off by the EA.

'Three groundwater monitoring boreholes were constructed, and baseline monitored for a period of three months in preparation for water reinjection via a recompleted well Horse Hill-2z. All permit pre-operational measures have now been submitted to the Environment Agency for discharge in line with the permit requirements.'

Not waiting for the Supreme Court - just not getting the paperwork sorted in a timely manner. UKOG decided in 2021 to convert HH-2z as an injector - submitted an application to the EA, then withdrew it early 2022, resubmitted later in 2022 and got sign off in early 2023 - and then did what they knew they would have to do - groundwater monitoring which they could have done whilst waiting. They could already be saving some of that £250,000 a year UKOG claim.

You have yet to justify your claim that 'shorts are closing'.

Maybe you are getting flustered that the SP isn't shifting?

If there are shorts closing it didn't exactly make much difference after 9:00am. Maybe they're not as worried as you are. Even the buys before then look more like a pump that fizzled out.

Needs news - even if in reality it'll probably be about something that will eventually not live up to UKOG's claims. Even the water injection carries risk in a fractured reservoir - and that's the activity that has the lowest risk.

There we have it - as expected - 'Do your own tesearch! I am certainly not going to say on here

Of course - just another story to cover ignorance - what's the saying, put up or shut up.

You do realise that for 21 billion shares 0.5% is only 105 million shares (I forgot - Avington production and Finch figures - maths not your best subject) - hardly going to make a difference even if anyone is shorting up to that level. Compare that with the CLN which if they manage to keep the SP at this level means another 6 billion shares for the first £2mm (includes the 4.5% extra - but not the warrants).

'Hit a raw nerve did o Penguins.'

No - but it would be normal for someone who makes a claim such as 'That means buying shares to give back what they borrowed' can answer a simple question about it.

I'll try again.

Walkman - where can any normal pi 'borrow' shares they need to now buy to replace?

or are you claiming it's being done by those that have to declare a short position - ie no one that would read this board?

No short on UKOG mentioned here:-

https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fca.org.uk%2Fpublication%2Fdata%2Fshort-positions-daily-update.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK

Seems it's just another of your fantasies that being realistic about UKOG's projects is 'bashing' - whereas what you do is make things up.

Though as usual you change the subject:-

'Odds on we will hear news of the water reinjector installation at Horsehill if Finch loses within days imho.'

To spend how much - to save according to UKOG £250,000 a year - hope they haven't spent the £2mm yet (Turkey, salaries, Portland gas storage consultants) or they'll have to wait for the £500,000 top up in November

But is that like the pre-planned farm in being announced within days of the Loxley decision in July?

So where can any normal pi 'borrow' shares they need to now buy to replace?

Do you really think any investor in a position to 'borrow' shares will be looking for advice from you - someone who just makes stuff up?

Walkman,

apart from the impossibility for anyone posting here 'shorting' UKOG rather than a CFD - if anyone has been shorting UKOG they'll probably be sitting on a lot more profit than your possible 0.0011p per share (about 3%). If they did it when a certain 'expert' trader was recommending buying last year at 0.09p - that would be about 0.056p per share - over 60% though the costs would be higher.

and don't forget you only make a profit when you sell for more than your average cost.

so don't panic when I mention I couldn't sell under £1000 worth just now (yes I have a few million, not worth a lot - lucky I sold most on the swabbing P&D) but could buy for 0.0345p, but didn't. funny that when they've jacked the SP up, I wonder what's going on, couldn't be those multiple 10,000,000 trades just listed undercutting pi? Maybe if you wait a while you might be able to sell for a bit less.

BTW don't bother about the - 'why would anyone be negative (=realistic) about the projects when they hold shares' when it's obvious it isn't how good the projects are that determines what UKOG's SP is - just enough believing the BS.

Walkman,

'Penguins doesnt like positives.

Tough lol. 3.3 million tons of crude oil at 6.5 barells a ton over 20 years is the proposal from 4 new wells and HH2Z converted to a water reinjector well.

Thats an average of around 2700 barells of oil a day.

The 2700bopd every day for 20 years average you've calculated should straight away warn you there's a problem with Finch's number. After 2 1/2 years HH-1 was producing about 60 bopd.

I would love to see positives in what UKOG are doing but I'd not rely on figures from activists that you have highlighted (for Avington) exaggerate figures of production - in my opinion to scare the local inhabitants.

These figures are a perhaps Finch deliberately misunderstanding the production figures in the planning application to scare those living near HH.

Neither in the planning application or any other publication does UKOG state a figure for total production from HH of anywhere near 3.3 million tonnes, . There have however been estimates of production from HH - in 2019 1.6mmbbls of gross 2C resources from the Kimmeridge and in the 2018 CPR a figure of 1.5mmbbls gross 2C resources from the Portland - though the Portland figure wasn't based on information gained from the ewt or production.

Production clearly being far worse than the expected worse case well expected in the CPR producing an average of 122bopd in year 3 - not the about 60bopd HH-1 was producing so even the 1.6mmbbls 2C resources appears to be an exaggeration now.

In fact tonnes to bbls is about 7.3 - though this varies with API as barrels is a volume measurement and tonnes a weight (lighter oil means more barrels per tonne). So UKOG official figures suggest about 420,000tonnes, not the Finch fantasy figure which assumes HH produces a bit less than the 500 tonnes maximum UKOG requested per day for 20 years - clearly complete rubbish.