Member Info for Penguins

Who has posted that negative posters are averaging down apart from yourself?

But you'still seem to be suggesting they're doing it:-

'My response to that is not understanding why people would continue to average down when it's evident that they have lost faith in the company.'

Maybe I'm missing that you're just answering your own question and you're saying no one who has lost faith in the company would average down - an obtuse way of saying it?

But 'lost faith in the company' - faith is similar to belief and is more often the reason for 'optimists' to b 'enthusiastic'

I also can't find the origin of what you're implying is a quote (' not understanding averaging down ') in this sentence:-

'To take that & turn that comment into ' not understanding averaging down' is an odd thing to say in my opinon.'

I suppose it would be an odd thing to say, but you're the only one saying it as far as I can tell - at least a copy and paste means it's actually there.

BTW it was you that introduced ninetails irrelevant post into the discussion - I just looked at it and found it wasn't suggesting he was averaging down.

and perhaps if you stopped making assumptions about what other posters are supposedly doing / thinking and stuck to commenting about UKOG you might not get so much 'response'.

As for UKOG - we'll see about next year, not sure even UKOG could stay silent / do nothing in Turkey for that long - AME wanted to shoot some seismic in the Siirt area this year but UKOG haven't mentioned it.

The rabbit hole just got deeper.

Your premis seems to be that posters critical of UKOG are averaging down:-

'Penguins, how UKOG is run or whether it follows market rules, I don't have any control over.

As I have previous mentioned; I don't know why anyone who feels this way about this stock would continue to buy to average down or hold.'

and you answered this part of my post 'You keep on mentioning averaging down - I don't think I've seen anyone proposing that as a good strategy since 'ells' of the sequential accounts / buy at 52 week low fame was posting.'

with a quote from ninetails that was not proposing it as a good strategy - I'd say quite the opposite:-

'but unfortunately many have no choice but to hold or take a massive loss…and many continue to invest trying to get their average down.......but SS always finds a way to get the price down whilst diluting the shares'

As for the scirocco quote; in your post here you clearly identify why someone might average down - and also in that post why anyone who was negative wouldn't - so what's with the inference critics are averaging down?

Shouldvesold

You keep on mentioning averaging down - I don't think I've seen anyone proposing that as a good strategy since 'ells' of the sequential accounts / buy at 52 week low fame was posting.

Perhaps you can point out a recent (and of course not deleted) post suggesting that.

However there's a post from 'shouldvesold' on scirocco's board saying - 'I wish other lth holders did what I did and took the opportunity to average down in bite size pieces during the .25p months.'

Maybe that's where you've seen it mentioned.

Otherwise you seem determined, like others, to assume that those that have been here a while haven't spotted how UKOG and certain posters operate and blindly hold shares because they've been persuaded that 1p /2p is coming (or any number higher than today's price) in rampy posts on supposedly 'good' news to hold so don't sell on spikes. But it is very kind of you to offer your words of wisdom about trading. Perhaps your 'punt' (presumably for a 'news' spike, not success) on UKOG might be successful, another excellent trading strategy.

Good to hear you have a friend though - I was wondering....

I know you didn't start this thread but the last cash raise shares have apparently not hit the market yet, and they'll be priced, when converted, at the lowest vwap in the last 15 trading days - which if done soon will be lower than any but a very few bought at - if not lower than anyone has been able to buy for.

ZYX,

while I'm here - ocelot doesn't realise that it would be easier to sell Loxley to GL than an O&G professional who would be able to review the CPR, not just the volumetrics and unrosked NPV, rather than take it as the whole story

Shouldvesold,

'I am sure that when there is market sensitive news, that UKOG will let the market know'

It should.but UKOG sem to operate an announcement of failure by omission.

For example - going back through the wells:

Pinarova - would you expect a company to mention something about what was seen drilling through the main target - the amplitude anomaly in the Hoya. The lack of saying anything about that or not, as planned, setting 7" casing - leading to expectations they were testing the main target when they weren't.

Basur-3 - would you expect a company to mention the drill was stuck and the formations drilled (or rather not drilled through) indicated that the well was in the wrong place. AME in their scout report gave a date of mid July for stpping drilling - UKOG RNS'd 2 August.

HH-2z - would you expect a company to mention they had hit water producing fractures and stopped drilling but instead only mentioned they stopped drilling because they had drilled enough good quality reservoir. Didn't mention they had stopped drillinĝ because of these water conduits even whrn they announced water production in the first test of HH-2z. Failed to mention for months after 'solving' the water production from the well other water producing fractures had overwhelmed oil production.

HH-1 - did not mention that the well had suddenly started producing significant water for months, even after the three month delayed OGA (now NSTA) figures were released showing it. As for the testing - obscuring what was really happening by releasing a pot pourri of reasonable looking flow rates - only in production (and not subsequently touching the Kimmeridge) has that intent been revealed.

So you're sure that they will release 'bad' news promptly?

Is that enough posting about the company rather than a thesis about other posters and bland words about UKOG?

HH1AN2,

'all depends on a good seismic and a good drill to the right spot, a lot of ifs'

Yes it 'all depends' on practically every risk (ifs) disappearing could be said about every UKOG project. So far, if anything, UKOG has proved every risk is likely to happen - perhaps why UKOG was able to pick up the prospects and leads nobody else wanted?

So far BB and Basur-3 (Basur as a whole after 2 phases of seismic?) failure, HH nothing like 'expectations', Pinarova hoping the tast so far was invalid, Loxley farm out running for over a year, HH farm out to suspended PPP also looking fragile.

Plenty of silence about these projects now, yet just like all the above prior to the business end of the project, drilling, testing, production -

Portland - plenty of news via twitter about a project that is in the early-ish stages of planning - won't be cash generative until the end of the decade, probably.

Ocelot,

As I posted previously - Whilst the Portland gas storage project might be a good project for the UK is it good for UKOG in terms of encouraging investors to buy shares?

It appears to be a distraction from what I presume investors want to see which is a successful oil or gas project with cash flow, or at least tangible value in the near term.

This is a project, however funded to execute it, that will almost certainly require government subsidy or price intervention to be viable in operation - the lack of guarantees scuppering the previous plan - and therefore the project's ultimate viability depends on what will be a political choice / decision - and that can change even during a party's tenure let alone when a new administration enters office.

I still don't understand the enthusiasm for thie Portland project by investors in an AIM O&G company when the cash being spent in UKEn, raised at great cost to the SP, could be applied to fund a short term catalyst instead - at least the outcome would be known before the late 20's.

11 weeks tomorrow and no substantive news from UKOG about th bigger perforatingguns.

Shouldvesold

JUst to repeat - AME in their 2022 annual report said:-

'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 and if successful would be a first in the region.'

But even if there's an error in the translation the primary Hoya target, the reason for drilling the well with the hope an amplitude anomaly defined lead would have oil in it, hasn't been mentioned since before they were going to drill through it - and even that being successful would have been a first.

But instead they now want to reperforate an interval that wasn't considered a target and if it was tight it's quite possible the previous perforating did work but the formation wouldn't flow - UKOG in the Interim Report admitting the previous testing was 'interpreted' to be invalid:-

'The tests are thus interpreted to be invalid until such time that larger perforating guns can be deployed in the well to establish proper contact with the formation and the potential hydrocarbon prospectivity correctly assessed.'

It's a long wait just to find out if the previous test was valid or not - I wonder if they might re-interpret the results?

Whilst the Portland gas storage project might be a good project for the UK is it good for UKOG in terms of encouraging investors to buy shares?

Investors looking for a gamble on finding oil or gas are not going to be those interested in what should be less risky lower and longer term return infrastructure project investment - and I'd be surprised if they would buy UKOG shares now for a project that has yet to be proved commercially viable with a lead time to cashflow of maybe 7 years where there must still be uncertainty about the project progressing.

It doesn't matter how much work UKOG has done, if anything it's a negative as it's using up cash that could be used to progress the O&G projects that I'd guess most investors are interested in.

But could there be an approach to take UKEn off UKOG's hands by a big player for a chance of an early return - when, who knows, maybe once planning is submitted?

Ninetails,

It isn't that UKOG lie, it's just they are very choosy as to what they RNS - which sets up the ramper / deramper stand off, with one side quoting RNS as if they are factual (a lot is opinion - 'interpretation' of the data- the other suspicious that the information is incomplete, which it often is.

For instance, a very recent example, though with every failure there are instances of not telling the whole story:

In the 3 May RNS instead of mentioning anything about the Hoya when they reached TD in Pinarova, and had logged the well, they just mentioned they were waiting for the final log interpretation. But based on the logs they must have already decided there was no pay in the Hoya and decided not to run the 7" casing. But they also didn't mention they hadn't run the 7" casing which was a bit 'cute' because in the 25/4 RNS they stated:-

',,,,,it is planned to run electric logs to identify oil pay, followed by cemented 7" casing. This configuration will then enable definitive conventional selective cased hole tests to be performed.....'

They did mention, for the first time that there was an oil smell over a shallow zone, and oil had returned to surface when casing was inserted - but strangely they had 'urgently' tweeted a picture of that oil sample when they were swabbing a different zone - somewhat underhand.

By not mentioning that the 7" casing wouldn't be run at TD they avoided admitting that they hadn't identified any oil pay in the Hoya, and there was an assumption that when they tweeted pictures of a 4.5" perforating gun they were testing the Hoya, which they weren't.

Over the years UKOG have been reluctant to admit bad news. Even the hopefully upcoming testing which was originally stated to be necessary because the perforations hadn't contacted the reservoir has now been better explained as an 'interpretation' it had failed to contact the formation.

There are examples over the years during BB and HH testing, failure to mention water filled fractures in HH-2z being a reason to stop the horizontal when it happened, silence when HH-2z was overwhelmed with water, silence when Basur-3 drill was stuck and presumably they knew the map was wrong, no map of the Basur-4 target after shooting seismic to better define it - instead drilling Pinarova - also without showing a meaningful map.

So those posters / tweeters suggesting that UKOG should pursue anyone criticising the company and supposedly 'damaging' it by predicting pretty accurately what will happen - read the RNS for the activities / projects before they failed and spot what was known but went unmentioned.

Forgive the rant - there's so many other examples - implying the huge Kurdistan fields were in any way relevant to Basur - Resan..BB testing RNS, Kimmeridge recoverable oil........

Stockvirgin,

UKOG has permission to run up to 16 oil tankers a day out of Horse Hill so just because SGN can accept the volume of gas that UKOG hope might be produced doesn't mean it's going to happen.

Given AIM companies ability to over promise and under achieve let's hope if there is some level of success at Loxley they don't go and hedge and enter into a series of loans like Angus who were simply redeveloping a field that had become stranded and even managed to mess that up with all the benefit of historic data, a wayleaved pipeline route and could kick off production with 2 producing wells already in place.

One worrying aspect of the plan is if Loxley-1 is successful is that it relies on a single producing well until it's production drops off and that well is expected to flow an averageof 20mmscf/d for a year in the P50 production profile / costs case. This of course makes the NPV look far better than drilling multiple production wells but carries huge risk with complete well loss or other flow issues impacting production, getting funding of about £40million might be difficult for a single well production plan.

Before that the planning conditions need sorting, site prepared and then the well drilled. Unfortunately unless a partner arrives and insists on seismic first UKOG are intent on shooting the seismic after the well - perhaps saving the cost of the seismic more important than saving the cost of the well should the mapping remove the closure currently mapped..

Ocelot,

But why would any company capable of taking the Portland gas storage project forward want UKOG to continue as lead - a company who's supposed expertise is exploring for oil and gas and has to hire consultants to do the work on it? They may be able to review proposals regarding the drilling and leaching of the caverns but little else in what will be complex project.

Any government, or other investors, cash will be ring fenced to that project/UKEn so unless SS moves to solely head up the project even his salary won't be covered

But with no possibility of any positive cashflow until maybe the next decade UKOG should sell UKEn the subsidiary running the Portland gas storage project on and use the money to progress its core business, at least then there's a possibility of near term 'success' (or at least a few P&Ds) rather than an infrastructure project that is a different, long term investment, surely not what most 'investors' buy UKOG shares for.

Every time there's a P&D with huge numbers of shares traded ocelot suggests the shares are being bought by investors interested in UKOG's long term future and projects - yet when the last AGM voting figures were released votes of less than 3% of shares were cast.

Trish,

you do know how much an onshore well costs, site prep - how much money has UKOG got?

Even the PPP deal for a proper appraisal well in a producing (just about) field probably won't cover the full cost of drilling.

As for the well - heard it all before.

So far UKOG has predicted for every well transformational results with little justification - the optimists make huge claims on the back of that, the realists say it's unlikely and justify why - guess who's been right so far.

Funny how if you filter posters who seem to be able to better predict what might happen, 'this happens:-

'Boovie

Posts: 696

Price: 0.1375

No Opinion

RE: Finished2 Nov 2020 14:10

Got over 61/4 million and was foolish to hold instead of selling at 10p. I believed the rns’s and SS. What an idiot'

and of course despite it being predicted it's just 'bad luck'.

'Boovie

Posts: 696

Price: 0.14

No Opinion

RE: Finished 2 Nov 2020 14:40

Yes I’m going to hold I’m just not confident enough to put any more in. I mean have they just had some bad luck and good times are round the corner. Could well be , Good luck genuine guys on here'

and almost every post recently boasting about the 'green boxes'

'UK Oil & Gas PLC announced that the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA) has granted its consent to a modified PEDL234 Retention Area (RA) work programme. The revision will permit the company to focus license activities entirely upon the acceleration of the planned appraisal campaign of its material 100%-owned Loxley gas discovery. In accordance with the revised RA programme, the Company has agreed to commencethe Loxley-1 appraisal well by 30th June 2024.'

Billy,

now comes the extremely difficult bit for UKOG - drilling and being successful having never managed to fulfil any prediction of success even at 'successful' HH. But even never knowingly pessimistic UKOG put a probability of commercial success at 70% during the Loxley inquiry, and that was based on a very different development plan (5 wells) replaced by a single producer envisaged in the CPR.

Yes Billy,

It's you!

But this is good news. No more excuses, but they've had a year to sort out the conditions - and knew what they were since the planning application was originally rejected in 2021.

Will anyone farm in and not shoot some more seismic before drilling when one of the problems is the structure is it doesn't close to the east without some dodgy contouring between seismic lines - and don't get me started on the GWC that's 'interpreted' to exist in Alfold, again partly based on a wrong poroperm correlation with GB-1 and partly on a change in resistivity at a facies change.

Let's see what happens now.

Well we're still waiting for the first CLN conversion.

Other 'news' might be they've managed to organise a 7" perforating gun. Then it will be time to find out if there's anything there when the only indication was a smell of oil, and some emulsion was displaced when the casing was inserted. However it's possible the previous test was valid.

With the possibility of an appeal to the High Court decision will anyone farm in to Loxley, and of course at HH Adrian is certain nothing's happening until the Supreme Court judgement is known - and apparently they're not sitting until October, and the result could be some time after that - even though that could mean that they've avoided maybe saving £125,000 since they finished the ground water monitoring for the HH-2z conversion.

Portland Hydrogen - apart from paying salaries (there's a thing) it's a long time before there's any revenue and depending on the finance once there is cashflow will there be interest and debt to fund - maybe they can string everything out until 2030 - or maybe, as it's such a different business split it off - I suspect they won't want any grants being used to chase unicorns in the Weald or Turkey - and take SS with it.........

SRBS,

Lenigas is no fool - but he needs an army of people helping to promote the various business dealings and defend them by any means from anybody who points out the flaws in what's being promoted - and plenty of fools to fall for them and once trapped even more motivated 'promoters added to the pack incentivised by the potential losses, drawing even more into the cycle.

From the billions of barrels of oil in the Kimmeridge and pouring scorn on the BGS report to not mentioning the 'several' wells effectively handed to PPP that had declined to 10 to 20bopd before being shut in (and was there water?).

As for HH he's hardly likely to say it's rubbish when he's using it as a prop for PPP - though I didn't notice any mention of the current production levels nor that seismic doesn't always make a 'better' map as 2 phases of seismic in Basur has ably illustrated.

Laurence,

'Is the rise due to the new perforation guns landing on site in Turkey ?'

Why do you say that?

whilst UKOG quite often don't do what they say they're going to do they did RNS there would be a further update when the date of testing operation resumption becomes clear. I'd hope that would be before the bigger perforating guns turn up on site, though with UKOG anything is posssible, including not doing it at all.

Green Agenda?

Your post is like so many here

PPP is suspended because the auditors were unable to sign off the accounts in time - whether it's because they weren't given enough time or there are irregularities isn't known - but in the 2 raises this year, because of listing rules they had to 'borrow" tens of millions of shares to have enough to sell to the placees - so whilst there are about 100mm shares listed as in issue they need to issue another 50mm to those they borrowed off at some time.

As for the deal - they were practically given those 'several' wells that were, as Adrian might put it, getting on a bit, and the operator gave up their paying equity in the Whistling well - presumably because they thought the workover wasn't worth doing.

Of course DL sees an opportunity in that the 'several' wells may have a very brief higher initial rate having been shut in for years - but before they were shut in they were, as PPP put in an RNS 'Both wells were producing at rates of approximately 15-20 bopd prior to being shut-in and Nobel hopes to restore production to similar levels or better after a thorough evaluation and contingent upon a well workover.'

Pumping profits into UKOG? Any cash flow forecast you'd care to present to justify that statement.

To a cynic it was a fantasy 'deal' to help both company's SPs with little prospect of it happening.

Oil production from HH-1 may be up but water production is considerably more 'up' which is a problem.

Adrian,

Yes, average daily oil production in May was up 23% from April's monthly production which was the third lowest since the start in March 2020, but water production was up 44%.

Compared to March when production was similar to May average daily oil production was up 3%, water production was up 11%.

Worrying that a modest increase in oil production from March to May triggered a much larger increase in water production, it suggests that small drops in reservoir pressure localised to the borehole because of oil production enable even more water to enter the reservoir near to the borehole via the fracture/s.

Pressure support via water disposal in HH-2z may only exacerbate the problem of water production if the water enters the fracture system that is known to exist near the heel of HH-2z and ultimately overwhelmed oil production.