Member Info for Penguins

'Think we would have heard if it was a duster by now'

Why? UKOG have never been hasty to RNS bad news.

The same could have been said during the wait for the previous test - as I posted the morning of 25 April, before the RNS about that test:-

'2 days into a swabbing test no news. I'm waiting for a poster to claim it must be good news because UKOG have to release bad news immediately as some posters were keen to lie about during the BB rampathon'

As fpr 0.8p - what flow rate are you expecting / OIP - That puts a value of £168mm on UKOG.

Still it's a bit of a scale back from this post from yours the day before the SP plummeted.:-

'InvesterInvester

Posted in: UKOG Posts: 1,462

Price: 0.113 Strong Buy

'RE: Ukog 24 Apr 2023 12:34

I agree Bcarm... on the news that l believe is incoming a re-rate of HUGE magnitude to 1p this week is indeed quite possible...'

Unluckyone,

It's a bit like expecting a bottom of the football league club to beat a first division club - it might happen - and maybe a fan of that club might hope they will win - but it's very unlikely. Maybe they'll score a goal and see that as a success.

I've explained over many (boring, over analysing) posts why I think it's very unlikely that any result will be a major or unlikely to be a minor success (whatever the RNS might say in regard to 'initial' results) - you on the other hand post ' if UKOG have found large oil' with no reasoning why that is likely to happen. Posters using an irrelevant field miles away, in a different reservoir as some sort of example of what might happen is not explaining 'why'.

Agreed none of the past posts have any bearing on the next results - but illustates how wrong posters can be 'imagining', believing or hoping for success based on the same absence of news that happened in April, rather than trying to understand what is most likely to happen.

Moneymunch - they didn't have all the 'tools' in the early 1900s that companies can bring to bear on modern wells - even in Turkey. The company didn't mention the oil smell or the displaced oily fluid (emulsion) when they RNS' d setting the casing. Looks like UKOG didn't see either as significant until after they logged the well. Despite the 'flannel' about final interpretations the logs will have been reviewed immediately as a decision on runnung the 7" casing would have to be made - my 'guess' is that that review will have decided there was no or too little 'pay' in the Hoya. As the Germik was already cased the logging would unlikely tell them anything much - so their only shot to save face was to test based on smell and dispaced emulsion.

They perforated Pinarova quite a while ago - they were 'continuing' testing on 11May so at least 5 days of testing has been happening assuming they haven't stopped.

The previous swabbing was going to happen on 21 April, was in action on 24 April and findings RNS'd on Tuesday 25 April. There were many predictions of how good it was going to be - it wasn't.

The 38˚ API oil returned to surface during setting the casing - so not while drilling - and wasn't even thought worthy of mention when it happened - as was the smell of oil.

Does anyone believe that an interval that UKOG didn't even mention whilst drilling will have a good bopd. The primary target (not what they're testing) which was deeper was only expected to be similar to Basur-4, and chosen because it was cheap. UKOG have never given any indication of 'expectation' for Pinarova or Basur-4 but E Sadak, the AME 0.5mmbbls gross remaining reserve nearby lookalike field to Basur, was producing a total of 250bopd from multiple wells (there were 14 drilled, including about 4 in the last few years) according to the AME2022 annual report.

Otherwise over 2 weeks since the logging which was going to identify pay zones in the Hoya and still no mention that the final interpretation in complete.

Are they desperately trying to squeeze some oil out of the Germik so they can report it as successful, but - at the same time as they reveal the 'final' results of the logging?

JR90 - yep up 17% - but the SP has the ability to drop very, very fast if the RNS doesn't deliver the anticipated good news, and looking at some of the posts what's expected is extremely unlikely. This rise looks like a 'pump' based on no news - which adds to the jeopardy.

Unluckyone,

I'd wait for the RNS before declaring who needs to eat humble pie - there was a similar enthusiasm, by some of those posting so enthusiastically now before the RNS about the previous swab test cam out - at least they had cuttings with oil in as the motivation to swab that time.

Unluckyone,

You asked:- 'Are we swabbing the pay zone'

Depends - as it looks like it'll be a 'zero hours' pay zone......... with zero hours, even the rig crew weren't working in the prromotional picture on twitter.

The first and only RNS mention of this layer was in the last Pinarova RNS on 3 May 2023.

What they are swabbing isn't the primary target amplitude anomaly, not the previously unmentioned, 'secondary target' of cuttings with oil in whilst drilling in the Hoya above the amplitude anomaly, but the previously unmentioned oily smell zone above the Hoya where some oil came to surface when they set the casing - so they have no idea where it came from in the uncased hole - but they have presumably perforated the bit of the cased hole that corresponds to the oily smell, and are swabbing in the hope of getting some oil rather than fumes.

They have RNS'd they would be testing 'oil pay' identified by the logging - but the interpretation of the logs is taking a long time to finalise.

'.....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 haven't mentioned running 7" casing though, perhaps the lack of 'pay' in the initial log interpretation led to the decision to not run the 7" casing?

Maybe this time....maybe not.

'I asked admin to delete my account because someone on here/group of people were running accounts/user id's simultaneously to manipulate the share down on UKOG discussion board.'

Bizarre. The only reason the UKOG SP is down is because the company doesn't achieve any of its objectives and keeps diluting by raise after raise, with write off after write off for project after project - HH-1 now worth £0.8mm - the only operated tangible (actual, real) asset.

JR90 you keep deleting accounts because your ramping is ineffective against UKOG's actions and results, not other posters, and your ever mounting and desperate (wrong) predictions were being quoted back at you. When challenged to show predictions that you claim were right you can't, gone with all the rubbish ones.

Only a tiny percentage of shareholders read this board. Twitter would be far more effective at organised share manipulation - (cf FOTH and the self styled 'eyes') just posting researched, and realistic opinions, often proved right- is not manipulating the share - more likely the attempts at manipulalation are the ramp brigade that pump the price with absurd predictions before selling out - they obviously don't believe that the projects will succeed despite their posting, but hope to draw in others so they can sell - and they try to take the moral high ground - more like low life - pontificating about 'nimbys' and 'greens' - as if.

Ocelot,

Don't think the problem with the Kimmeridge has been stabilising the hole - the problem with SFB. BB did have an issue with 'ledging' and they drilled a sidetrack which they were able to log and then test - and test for a considerable time. There was even a suggestion they sidetracked to be closer to an identified fault to encounter more fracturing. Silent Steve didn't mention they were sidetracking until the news broke because the OGA published details ( no change there). Since then despite vague suggestions why BB failed the site has remained in limbo with a series of applications to extend permission to retain the site.

But of course 'new technology' is a great carrot to dangle in front of those that want to believe that's all it will take - strange that the 'new technology' talked about in the early days of the Kimmeridge - fishbones - was never deployed.

Perhaps if DL described specifically what this 'new technology' is, how it works then it might be worth talking about - at the moment PPP SH are also waiting for news of the 'wishing' well - assuminģ this new technology was deployed there has it made a difference? Another share where the hopeful are left dangling after initial RNS's about the testing.

I suppose that in the absence of any follow up to the latest Pinarova 'testing' tweet and picture of a deserted wellsite, distraction, whether it be about other UKOG projects or making up silly stories about other posters, is the order of the day.

UKOG projects are always better when there's no news and it's left to the imagination of certain posters, often those that have been serially wrong in the past but return to make the same mistake again and again, thinking UKOG 'claims' are definite outcomes.

Lots of bravado before disappearing as fast as their appearance or even re-appearance from times past - whether it be on a pump or a dump. Rinse and repeat.....maybe this time......maybe this time......

Ibug,

Haven't even got a nodding donkey up there to try and pump it.

Let them have their moment in the sun. The last swabbed test in the secondary target was such a success surely UKOG can't manage it twice. Just a minute that was posters on 24 April when UKOG tweeted 2 pictures of the swabbing was in progress and before UKOG revealed the outcome. For example:-

'JR90

Posted in: UKOG Posts: 318

Price: 0.1295 Buy

RE: 100% move up this week 24 Apr 2023 09:04

Big move up in the afternoon just like Friday. Big commercial discovery news is imminent'

The next day there was no 'Big commercial discovery', just that the swabbed test produced.....water, and not much of that.

Not even a picture of an empty mud pit to excite.

Luckily success isn't measured by barrels of oil produced, BOPD, OIP, positive RROR - just samples of oil to determine what the source is, whether it's irrelevant or not, and the ability to spin another 'potential', 'possible' or 'may also exist' activity to the waiting gullible.

Ocelot,

Any chance of where UKOG lies on the value of shares traded today - a far better metric of interest. Less than £140,000 so far.

JR90,

No it didn't prove anything. The only mention there might be oil in Pinarova from seismic was this:-

'Both new and legacy seismic data also show a series of vertically stacked seismic amplitude anomalies within the core of Pinarova's Hoya structure, possibly directly indicating hydrocarbons and/or the development of good reservoir within the Hoya.'

'possibly' 'and/or the development of good reservoir within the Hoya.'

There is no underlying accumulation:-

'The geochemical results will assist the Company's current investigations into the possibility that a deeper light oil accumulation may also exist below the Pinarova area within Cretaceous limestone'

'possibility',

Meanwhile in the real world where possibility doesn't mean proved or that an accumulation exists - why don't they seem to want to drill Basur-4 where the hundreds of millions of barrels were going to be appraised by Basur-3.

Straws, grasping - or is it hoping no one checks the rubbish you post.

JR90,

'Oil pool' - the only oil that came to surface from the whole top hole section was when they set the casing, and they didn't even mention it when it happened, and belatedly remembered the wellsite geologist smelt the oil - didn't SS smell the oil at BB, not a good precedent.

There were cuttings with oil in in the upper part of the Hoya - but no mention of oil to surface whilst drilling or during the swabbed test of that interval, and no mention of any signs of oil, cuttings or oily smell in the primary target when they reached TD - which you may remember UKOG did cover themselves by pointing out the amplitude anomaly it was based on wouldn't indicate whether there was oil there or not.

That 'final' log analysis is taking a while to complete over the Hoya though. If it's that difficult to identify oil maybe it isn't there?

Perhaps 'billions of barrels' Nutech need to run one of their algorithms that were so successful at identifying OIP but not how much of it might be producible in the Kimmeridge at HH.

So it's just great that they can 'imagine' there might be a deeper accumulation that magically needs a shallower Cretaceous source rock that the deeper Jurassic source won't provide.

Or is it just another ploy from the distraction department at UKOG.

Unluckyone,

It's pretty obvious you, MM and many others don't understand the difference between wanting the company's activities to fail, and expecting them to fail, and explaining why. Here's a long, boring, over analysing, post to explain why Loxley's success is no slam dunk.

So far, without exception, none of UKOG's activities have achieved success anywhere near that claimed, anticipated or expected - even when outside consultancies were involved - even up to CPR level.

CPR language is extremely careful and UKOG will have worked hard to get the Loxley CPR as positive as possible.

At UKOG's insistence, as the evidence is poor to argue for or against, they have used, and only used the proposed single well for initial production based on another external consultancy's work - this would massively improve the economics with lower up front costs and quicker to production time - details of RPS's reservations regarding the flow rate used are on page 26 of the report.

Whilst they don't seem to have audited the map their assessment of the Risk and Opportunity was:-

'The Loxley-1 well is intended to be the first of two development wells within the PEDL 234 licence. Although it will be designed and drilled as potential production well, it will still have an element of appraisal as it must first prove commercial flowrates are achievable which will depend on the height of the gas column and reservoir properties encountered. For this reason, the recoverable volumes predicted in this report are classified as Contingent Resources, Development Pending in accordance with the PRMS.'

The height of gas column and reservoir properties is important - in the CPR one of the justifications for Alfold's gas column is a claim that permeability is improved above about 2945fttvdss - the GWC in Godley Bridge (page 19). The crossplot demonstrating this incorrectly correlates the poroperm data points (red) above 2945fttvdss with those above the GWC in GB-1.

How this impacts the strength of argument for a gas column in Alfold I don't know - but it certainly doesn't help.

As I posted yesterday evening:

'Will UKOG / any farminee dare fund a 3D over the eastern saddle to confirm whether the doubtful closure exists - and will the comparison between Alfold and Godley Bridge in the CPR stand up to scrutiny.'

Getting a CPR for Loxley appears to be a desperate attempt to get a farminee - but raises more questions than the valuation suggests, where even the NPV(10) quoted by UKOG was not RPS's preferred gas price forecast:- 'At the request of UKOG, a gas price sensitivity using a flat price of 86.05p/therm (£18.61/MMBtu) was also carried out' - the £124mm figure.

Their preferred NPV (10) calculation using their gas price forecast was £86mm - still a lot, but 30% less and still dependant on the single well production levels to start with and UKOG's mapping of closure / gas column being correct.

MM,

Whilst UKOG will almost certainly win the planning appeal unfortunately Loxley is as yet unfunded - and funding won't make the very obvious issues with Loxley go away - they might be why there have been no takers since July last year when the 'pre-planned' farm out was 'implemented'.

Read the CPR without blinkers, look for the wrong conclusion regarding the porosity perms in Alfold, if you understand mapping realise that there is no control of the Eastern closure - if the computer contouring hadn't been messed with the Loxley structure mapped wouldn't close to the east, leaving just a small closure with little vertical relief around the planned target.

Will UKOG / any farminee dare fund a 3D over the eastern saddle to confirm whether the doubtful closure exists - and will the comparison between Alfold and Godley Bridge in the CPR stand up to scrutiny.

Far easier to post 'Massive UPSIDE fast approaching for Loxley Gas approval. Gla holders;-)' without any justification or explanation

Here's a timeline with comments of tweets and RNS about the setting of Pinarova's casing and subsequent events.

18 April 2023 RNS title: 'Turkey: Pinarova-1 9⅝ inch casing set'

'UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that Pinarova-1's 9⅝ inch casing is now set and cemented down to 287 metres below surface. In preparation for drilling ahead through the target Eocene Hoya limestone sequence....'

.......and......

'UKOG's geologist will remain on site to identify and, hopefully, sample any live oil to surface within the newly enlarged mud-pits'

Comment:- No mention of oil in mud pit during casing being set, although UKOG geologist is on site to specifically identify it, nor the 'strong smell of oil relied on later to justify the proposed testing.

21 April tweet 9:50am:-

'TURKEY LATEST: Pinarova-1 encountered oil shows in drill cuttings from 358 to 400 metres drilled depth......'

21 April tweet 2:42pm:-

'TURKEY URGENT UPDATE: Oil recovered from Pinarova-1'

Includes picture of different fluids in a plastic bottle, looks like oil and water.

Comment:- no mention of where the sample is from - but note it's nearly 5 hours after tweet about 'oil shows' in cuttings - not returned fluids - are pi to assume it's from the drill cuttings interval?

RNS 3 May 2023

'The proposed uppermost zone, from approximately 255-285 metres, corresponds to a 12-hour period of strong oil odour at surface and the recovery of light c. 38˚ API oil within fluids returned to surface from the same depth'

Comment: no mention this 'uppermost zone' is not in the Hoya but in the overlying (shallower) Germik, and this the first mention of oil from the Germik. 'fluids returned to surface' no mention it wasn't whilst drilling.

Tweet, 4 May 2023:-

'38 API (measured by hand held density meter) is recovered from the mud pit after setting the 9 5/8 casing at 289m.'

Includes picture of mud pit with emulsion in it and same picture in 21 April tweet of a plastic water bottle with fluids in it.

Comment: by pairing the plastic bottle with fluids and the emulsion in the mud pit they are now implying (but not saying) the sample is from the Germik, not Hoya.

Why was there no mention of the emulsion - was it originally ignored as it wasn't from the Hoya, and only 'returned to surface' fluids in the well during setting the casing - exactly as happened at Kezer - from AME 2022 Annual Report:-'Emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9 5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation'

Did they get no oil in the 'enlarged mud pit' whilst drilling the Hoya (358 to 400m) where there was oil in the cuttings and decided to tweet the picture of the fluids in a plastic bottle nearly 5 hours after tweeting about the cuttings to mislead on 21 April?

Subsequently did the primary target disappoint, no oil in the mud pit, no cuttings with oil, not even the recently deployed new technology of an oily smell?

Unluckyone,

You're right just because UKOG failed before it doesn't mean the next venture will be a failure.

But of course it doesn't mean it will succeed either. So that's why some research to determine the likelihood of success or failure - or 'over analysing' with 'long boring' posts.

Suspicions arise when the company whilst no lying releases information that is either irrelevant that 'appears' good - eg possibility of a shallower Cretaceous source rock or misleading information - it's unclear where the oil sample in a bottle came from, but probably from the Germik when they set the casing though first tweeted while drilling ahead through the Hoya.

Now they're waiting on a 'final' log analysis. If the initial analysis could have been seen as positive wouldn't they have released their findings. They've not been shy of releasing 'initial' anything that looks positive even if it later turns out to be misleading.

At the moment the balance of probabilities, unless they are holding a whole load of positive information back, is thatPinarova is a dud and mention of potential deeper accumulations a teaser.

The likelihood off holding back positive information is low though.

Expect news of Portland gas project! Loxley! HH-2z conversion!

Ocelot,

Why a Cretaceous source rock would make any difference in terms of the Mardin, or even the Hoya, is not clear. Perhaps the structures are post migration? but that's. The Mardin sequence is early to early late Cretaceous so to source the Mardin this elusive Cretaceous source would normally need to be within the Mardin as well.

The source rocks are said to be Jurassic and Triassic, but is migration an issue anyway, lack of migrating oil has never been mentioned - in fact if the area was, as claimed, going to be transformational with hundreds of millions of barrels of oil in place in Basur- Resan the problem in the Resan licence seems to be more related to faulting and water ingress (which it seems UKOG belatedly discovered in 2022) - this from the 30/06/22 RNS:

'Analysis of further geological information obtained from legacy wells in the Resan area indicated that, whilst oil shows were encountered at similar levels to B-1, questions arose as to reservoir quality and the increased chance of fractures acting as conduits for underlying formation water ingress.'

Is it just a distraction - a reason for the Pinarova well to claim some sort of 'success' - oo we might have found a new (but irrelevant) source rock....hooray

Seems it's OK for 'This board will become the biggest Rampathon for years', but the only post after yours predicting a deramp 'mob' was ocelot.

UKOG don't go radio silent on anything that could be misconstrued as good news.

Maybe they are debating whether to bother to perforate and test?

Squeaky b*m time judging by your posting unluckyone. Your posting history is there to see, unfortunately......ramp, disappear, ramp disappear.......etc.

UKOG are masters at equivocal rather than definite news -- or better still no news at all. Can't wait for the re-reappearancs of they have to RNS bad news immediately BS - for instance it only took months to mention that HH-1 was producing water.

I would be surprised if they get any flow from the Germik, certainly nothing significant. Unfortunately I've not been surprised since 2016 (note one key rampers complaint is I'm always negative).

The interval they're going to / have tested wasn't the primary or secondary target - it wasn't a target at all. The only positive is that when they set the casing that both Kezer and Pinarova returned some oil to surface - though only AME mentioned this happened in the Kezer well. UKOG didn't mention that happened in the Pinarova well either when they set the casing, although it seems the oil and water in a bottle tweeted as if it came from the Hoya was from setting the casing - all a bit odd. Luckily the well site geologist remembered that there was a 'smell' in that interval after the logging - but before the final log interpretation was available.

Quelled surprise!

and this:-

'They have a growth plan in Turkey before any placing or treasury shares can be issued...'

Is a load of BS. Their growth plan hinged on the hope that a well next to a well that maybe only flowed a bit of oil when they cased it (Kezer) would be far better then that.

Now they're proposing testing that interval that isn't even in the Hoya, and have avoided any mention of the primary target.

They can place when they like, especially if their growth plan has fallen at the first fence.

JR90,

Not understanding the simplist of things ie what £843,855 nominal value means does rather blow your cover - oops, understanding shares 101. Those 8 billion + shares could punch quite a hole in the SP - though maybe a consolidation first to give plenty of scope for SP decline.

But you do know that PPP only get less than 20% of the oil from the Wishing well (I know that's not what it's called, but maybe it should be) and PPP predicted a gross flow rate between 100 to 400bopd. There's OPEX and ventures / expenditures other tthan the HH farm in to fund as well. Until the rate is known that's a potential less than 20 to less than 80bopd to PPP. When's the HH 3D being shot, and how much cash will they need for that. Looks like DL could be on course to stuff their SP just to fund the HH 3D. and some tweeters and posters want him back here.

For UKOG it's a great deal as there's a good chance the 3D will remove the anticipated closure to the NE of HH-1 as there's currently no seismic controlling it - they wouldn't want to pay to remove their target which it looks like they did (twice) in Turkey - I know over analysing again. But PPP might not be keen to drill HH-3 which would then be risky.

JR90

Just waffle no substance, no details. The £4.6mm is from PPP for HH and they don't have that sort of cash, and are only committed to acquire the3D.

UKOG need to pay for HH-2z conversion - do they have enough left of last year's raisings to do that and pay for Pinarova.....and salaries and consultants fees and other general expenditure - licence fees. AME cash calls for technical work.