Member Info for Penguins

MM,

But better reservoir quality doesn't mean the reservoir is filled with oil. Kezer has already drilled right through the amplitude anomaly (Pinarova presentation) and according to UKOG the well which was drilled at the culmination of the structure flowed fluid with an oil cut on test (2022 Annual Report).

MM,

I suppose it might depend how many times you post selected extracts of UKOG BS and how busy I am.

If you're so sure of success why have you posted 15 times today? I'm sure no one would thank you if they held on the basis of your partial information expecting 'confirmation of a large accumulation' and the well was a failure and the SP tanked. In fact why not wait for Pinarova-1 ressult and see how much oil they find...if it’s deemed commercial, the sp will rise significantly, if it isn't commercial then so be it.

Of course you'll say no one in their right mind would do that based just on posts on this board - and I'd say the same.

BTW have you noticed that the SP is considerably less than when you were here previously - maybe that's why my posting is incessantly negative - as opposed to incessantly posting positively, even if it's extracts from UKOG RNS, and being incessantly proved wrong like some posters. I've always said if I see anything definitely positive I'll say so - the issue really is that AIM oilers aren't able to secure less risky acreage like BP, Shell or even a mid size oiler can.

As you don't read through posters history I'll leave it to your fertile imagination how someone who believes that the projects are risky could make money on the process of repeated P&D's.

btw Wizard - you can be sure that posters that appear just before an activity and disappear if/when there's a P&D aren't investors, though some hang around getting more and more desperate if they get caught on the dump. Believing their short lived but incessant positive posting on this board is not the best long term investment strategy, though admittedly short term it can work.

MM,

where has anyone posted they won't find any oil - the question is how risky is finding an economic accumulation let alone a large one - with the added curve ball that the government, that receives 12.5% of the oil ,can insist on a discovery being produced - I don't know if an operator can plead production would be uneconomic - maybe they have to walk away from the licence but it would be a black mark in any future applications.

Even UKOG don't claim the amplitude anomaly is indicative of oil, and of course there's the difference between AME's and UKOG's more positive version of the results of Kezer-1.

AME don't mention water with oil in it on test, just that 'emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9
5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation', don't mention oil shows within the Hoya (the target formation), just an oil show in the base of the overlying Germik formation, and they don't mention that amplitude anomalies were on multiple seismic lines, just on a single legacy line.

MM,

I suppose your hoped for 'mad dash for shares at 8am on a good drilling UPdate from Ukog at 7am' on Tuesday morning fizzled out you're desperate to ramp the slightest whiff of oil - as no doubt so is UKOG. But the muted response to the RNS on the first day of trading since the drill began suggests that investors were wary of buying on the back of UKOG drilling an appraisal of a previously unmentioned and probably previously not considered worth appraising, well that only produced water with some oil in it.

As you point out the amplitude anomaly could be due to oil fill, but with modern data it should be possible to reduce that risk but instead UKOG put a legacy seismic attribute section in the Pinarova presentation that might identify improved reservoir not oil. As UKOG put in the annual report the amplitude anomalies are 'possibly directly indicating hydrocarbons and/or the development of good reservoir within the Hoya' - but haven't presented any evidence to support the hydrocarbon 'possibility'.

Even UKOG don't claim it's a large oil accumulation so not sure confirmation is the word and UKOG have chosen to pass their volumetrics to a third party to check which - I wonder if they will only emerge if the well is successful.

As you say the results won't be long, but you won't be waiting for them anyway if there's any P&D on an oil show - which I'm sure you will put maximum effort into pumping.

Oh dear, ells back again trying to push the narrative that anyone who sees through UKOG's BS PR must be 'green' or a nimby.

UKOG serially fail to present decent evidence that their hopes for any of their projects will actually come about. Even the testing of BB and HH was an exercise in deception.

The CPR for Loxley is based on tenuous data that Alfold has a gas leg, a dodgy manufacured closure to the east, and if the well is successful a single well will flow an improbable 20mmscf/d. They are now proposing to shoot seismic but not before site preparation and the pre-planned farmout that was a slam dunk for Igas and/or Angus and worth hundreds of millions still awaits a farminee nearly 9 months after implementation.

Pinarova is based on an amplitude anomaly that has not been demonstrated to be due to oil fill, a well that flowed fluid with a 'strong' oil cut, and oil found in a shothole above the fringe of the amplitude anomaly - with the paragraph about Turkey being transformational removed in the revised 2022 Annual Report.

HH despite being their only production is so good they've handed over appraisal to another company.

The Portland project isn't going to generate any income until the end of the decade if it happens on schedule despite it now being the main distraction from UKOG's core business that it has been so unsuccessful at advancing since 2015.

I may be cynical but I'm not a Green or nimby - I just wish that UKOG would also be more open about their projects - seems the nearest they get to accepting everything isn't guaranteed to happen as they hope is the inclusion of 'if successful' when presenting the next steps but never mentioning why these fantastic projects might not be successful.

Any clue why SRBS is listing the nominee accounts that hold pis shares?

Seems even after the Basur-3 fiasco UKOG doesn't want to shoot seismic before deciding where to site a well.

In the AGM notice the plan is to prepare the Loxley well site in H2 2023 - and then in 2024 shoot the 3D, presumably before drilling the well, though perhaps not - in the bizarre world of AIM wasting funds on drilling dry holes is a better option than maximising the understanding of a prospect as it may include destroying it.

There are 3 possible outcomes if they prepare the site then shoot 3D, it confirms that the current map is a fair representation of the structure, it shows that the culmination isn't as anticipated and the site is in the wrong place, and may or may not be reachable - and might be a problem for development if successful, or the 3D doesn't confirm closure to the east and the risk of failure is massively increased. Of course this could be devastating to the SP whereas up to the point of results drilling is usually beneficial to the SP.

Conversely if they drill first and the well is a failure they do save the cost of shooting the seismic, but have spent considerably more.

But there doesn't seem to be joined up thinking here. If a field crew is being mobilised by PPP to shoot 3D over HH surely the sensible and economic thing to do would be to shoot the Loxley seismic programme at the same time.

Is UKOG worried that shooting the seismic before preparing the site might compromise the pretense of certainty in the current mapping that determined the choice of the current site?

Not just planning consent conditions need to be addressed - the Loxley CPR, which was a bit weak in terms of an audit, had this in the 'Risk and Opportunity' section:-

'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.'

That coupled with the news they're planning to shoot a 3D says it's not ready too drill.

The 'pre-planned' farmout has now been running for 9 months (pre-planned?) with no takers so if any one was interested it would be reasonable to suppose they weren't prepared to pay for the drill 100% so very unlikely there will be a 'substantial' offer. Maybe there will be another structured limited cost deal like the PPP HH farm in - 3D first and then drill if the 3D confirms that Loxley closes to the east.

'David Lenigas@DavidLenigas
Mar 12, 2019
Replying to @Adrianwfire
And the oil keeps rolling from Horse Hill.
@UKOGlistedonAIM
So much for the trolls and media that said Horse Hill would be lucky to pull a cup full of oil. Shame on them. Remember Schlumberger said HH has +10 billion barrels OIP potential. I can't wait for the reserves report.'

Well he will probably get a look now at the RPS 2019 report for the Kimmeridge, that UKOG aren't showing their owners, which has 2C resources of 1.5million (not billion) barrels.

plenty of other tweets, but not after the failures - and nothing before Pinarova about Turkey. Maybe he doesn't realise that the transformational Basur-3 well has already been drilled - looks like UKOG only realised after they released the 2022 Annual Report and edited and replaced the 'transformational' statement about Turkey (and almost everything else in the 'Our Business' section), but failed to change this howler in the accounts section - 'Together with AME, the business is working towards finalising the design and delivery of a successful first appraisal well aimed at establishing the commerciality of the aerially extensive and as yet undeveloped Basur-Resan oil discovery contained within the licence.'

Ocelot,

Ocelot, as for the Chairman's statement, many oil fields may have been discovered because of oil seeps but not every oil seep leads to an oil field - UKOG haven't shown any cross sections based on the seismic illustrating their understanding of a migration path from the source rock that includes migrating into the Pinarova structure. The Kezer well located at the culmination of the structure, even based on UKOG's version of results, flowed fluid with an oil cut, which doesn't sound very promising.

See in the AGM notice they're proposing some 3D over Loxley. Let's hope they don't destroy it - the mapped closure to the east looks somewhat contrived.

MM,

'could' be oil - though the nearby Kezer well maybe didn't even flow fluid with an oil cut in testing (see AME's reporting of Kezer below) and despite the possibility of doing so with the recently shot seismic data UKOG hasn't put any evidence into the public domain that might support that the anomaly could be due to oil, such as variable offset stacks - and while the relative amplitudes may look high the anomaly doesn't look very wide.

Strangely AME only saw the anomaly, according to their annual report, on one line vs 'beer goggles' UKOG who seemed to see it all over the place - though UKOG only showed one legacy line - here's another reminder of what the experts, AME, said about Kezer and the anomaly:-

'Oil shows were also observed at the Germik base limestone interval during drilling a nearby geothermal well (Kezer-1) in 2019. Emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9 5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation. Additionally, after identifying near surface amplitude anomalies associated with positive indicators from post-stack seismic attributes on one of the legacy 2D seismic lines...'

Very different to UKOG's PR you like repeating - and the oil shows above the Hoya weren't indicative of a large yested oil accumulation even in UKOG's account - just fluid with a strong oil cut.

Why is UKOG supplying the wellsite geologist rather than an AME, or a local wellsite geologist who has experience of drilling in the area? Is the only qualification the ability to smell the oil, like SS did at BB for a RNS, rather than properly understand where the drill bit is in the subsurface?

With AME's Annual Report suggesting a need to shoot new 3D over Basur and UKOG claiming Basur-4 is drill ready, and AME also planning 2023 2D in the area of Lead A, unmentioned by UKOG, there looks to be a divergence of opinion between the gung-ho approach that has been an element of UKOG's serial failures and AME who are experienced in the area.

Drill first, fail, and then have to shoot seismic later to find out why a well failed is not a serious or sensible way to explore. Unfortunately AIM can reward this approach by providing a window to raise more cash with a temporary rise in SP before the true outcome of a well is know, a sequence well known to unwary investors who, unlike UKOG, don't take advantage of any rise into the SP.

Perhaps AME being a private company doesn't need to engage in this kind of shenanigan, is the very different reporting of the results of the Kezer well that Pinarova is effectively appraising an example of the different approach with AME's version far less positive, and factually different?

There's every possibility that there will be oil shows above the target Hoya formation whilst drilling to the first casing point (not TD Billy) as that's what AME reported. But like the oil found in the shothole hydrocarbons in the overburden may not actually be a positive.

Interesting that UKOG have replaced the 2022 Annual Report and Accounts on the web site with a new prettied up version, though they have kept the date the same as if it's the report posted on that date - and the extract that MM pasted about "potentially transformational growth for the Company." - has been removed. What that says about the Resan licence - you can draw your own conclusion.

AME the operator now carries a gross 7.3mmbbls contingent resources for the whole of the Resan licence when UKOG have 30.5mmbbls 2C resources gross for Resan/Basur calculated by Xodus on mapping that since then must have been updated following Basur-3 and 2 phases of seismic - and tbc for Pinarova.

Adrian,

so I'm not on the board every minute - and MM thinks I have a 'sad' life.

Remember I only report you when you make up stuff about me - so do carry on.

I'm well aware AME are the operator, and I don't suppose they were trying to be negative - perhaps truthful though. Maybe it's for an audience that knows about Kezer-1.

But even UKOG's positives aren't very positive.

Going to be interesting seeing the HH 3D seismic permitted in time to be shot, processed and interpreted in H2 2023 for a well drilled by the end of September - but with the promise of seismic there's every chance NSTA will extend the deadline (again). PPP also need to raise the cash to do it - I'm sure their SH are looking forward to that.

Anyway enjoy your Easter - sad you feel the need to sneak back on here at weekends in the knowledge that all your effort will be deleted soon enough - though of course that's part of it, you can post what you like - lies about other posters, and unrealistic expectations.

Then of course moneymunch's experts put this about Kezer-1 in their 2022 annual report:-

'Oil shows were also observed at the Germik base limestone interval during drilling a nearby geothermal well (Kezer-1) in 2019. Emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9 5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation. Additionally, after identifying near surface amplitude anomalies associated with positive indicators from post-stack seismic attributes on one of the legacy 2D seismic lines.......'

Not my words, but very different to the UKOG version you pasted.

Let's hope Pinarova is a gusher - well looking at that kit perhaps not.....

MM
Apologies - I assumed that was the gist of your post - 'Lol ibug, sorry mate but you're wrong again you desperate numptie.....it's exactly what Ukog said.....ho ho ho ;-)', which seemed to be in reply to this from ibug 'UKOG have never given a spud date in an RNS'

But why can't you be civil .....certain posters just can't help themselves 'numptie' such eloquence.

But Pinarova could certainly be high risk low reward. Even UKOG's version was followed by 'if successful', even the bit you like to post isn't great - when cheapness is the main positive I doubt transformational is the expected outcome. Funny how the SP is down around 0.06p and not 10 years ago but 7 (2016) the SP was over 2p. Stupid of me to not hope for failure (your lie) but posting good reasons why transformational HH, BB and Basur might fail rather than UKOG's hopes RNS'd and repeated here as slam dunk outcomes.

MM,

Considering there was oil within metres of the surface in some shotholes, albeit about 1.5kms away, maybe they've hit oil already, At least the oil from the shotholes didn't look like water with oil contamination - might have been a cheaper option and would have just needed a post hole auger for an oil show.

The nearby Kezer well did have oil shows but how good depends on which company's reporting you believe, never knowingly right UKOG claimed Kezer flowed fluid with a heavy oil cut during testing, or according to the experts - AME - some emulsion came to surface whilst inserting casing.

Neither sounds that great

Yesterday you posted that UKOG had RNS'd the spud date and posted as 'proof' an extract that cleary didn't specify the spud date - just a time range as timings slipped, though previously UKOG had hoped to start drilling in Q1.

Now, according to you, the market was caught unawares despite you claiming UKOG had RNS'd it and rampers boasting about getting in cheap before the drilling started, no doubt hoping to sell Tuesday morning rather than holding to see what the value of an oil emulsion is.

Recently hoped for P&Ds haven't been that great as those that got in cheap bail out as fast as possible whilst the price fails to allow those that bought 'cheap as chips' previously in all time lows to sell at a profit watching the price fall back and forlornly posting about a late surge, 'can't buy' (as if their finger isn't hovering over the sell button) or more bizarrely wait until the US market opens - whilst all those recently appeared super enthusiastic cut and paste posters disappear.

MM,

It's all about risk vs reward and if you only read UKOG's version which you keep repeating as if it's gospel you would think the risk is a lot lower than it probably is from reading AME's synopsis - and that's without any understanding of any of the other data that is being misused to justify drilling the well.

Of course it's up to you whether you stay for results, but repeatedly pushing UKOG's PR narrative to encourage others to buy to hold for results that may be good, though appraising a well that at the culmination, even according to UKOG, flowed fluid with a heavy oil cut (displaced emulsion?) does sound like a long shot.

Moneymunch

You cut and pasted a resume of AME into show how expert they were.

But their synopsis of the Pinarova target in their 2022 annual report, unlike UKOG's 'gushing' RNS, is somewhat muted. One of them must be right - according to you it would be AME.

Was the Kezer-1 oil show in the basal limestone above the Hoya target as AME state, not oil shows 'throughout' the Hoya as UKOG state.

Was UKOG's heavily oil cut fluid during flow testing the emulsion displaced as they inserted casing down to the top of the Hoya as in AME's report?

.....and the series of amplitude anomalies on new and legacy seismic according to UKOG whereas AME state on one legacy seismic line - Specsavers eh?

Here's the extract from AME's 2022 Annual Report, you can read MM's ,and other's of that ilk, cut and pastes for UKOG's version.

'Oil shows were also observed at the Germik base limestone interval during drilling a nearby geothermal well (Kezer-1) in 2019. Emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9 5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation. Additionally, after identifying near surface amplitude anomalies associated with positive indicators from post-stack seismic attributes on one of the legacy 2D seismic lines.......'

It's a 'working hypothesis' that the shothole oil found nearly 2km away from Kezer-1 is associated with the shallow oil seen in Kezer- and is irrelevant with Pinarova much closer to Kezer-1 - though UKOG's version of the Kezer-1 'findings' is somewhat more positive than the local 'experts'.

...and whilst UKOG claim the amplitude anomalies 'could be indicative of the presence of hydrocarbons and/or the development of higher porosity within the Hoya' - the attribute shown in the presentation is that used to find the development of higher porosity - ie 'sweetness'. Only pre-stack date can reliably used (and not always) to indicate hydrocarbons.

Perhaps AME aren't as keen on Pinarova as UKOG?

Ocelot,

'Far more PIs keep a close eye on UKOG than this board suggests'

Fortunately for UKOG they just lap up (like ocelot etc) what UKOG feed them and avoid research.

From the AME 2022 Annual Report:-
'Oil shows were also observed at the Germik base limestone interval during drilling a nearby geothermal well (Kezer-1) in 2019. Emulsion came to surface during lowering the 9 5/8” casing to top of Hoya formation. Additionally, after identifying near surface amplitude anomalies associated with positive indicators from post-stack seismic attributes on one of the legacy 2D seismic lines'

Interesting different review of Kezer-1 and the Pinarova target.

Oil shows in the base Germik limestone interval - not Hoya. Germik is above the Hoya - Stratigraphic column in 'Turkey Resan Licence Overview July 2020' presentation – but linked on the website by ‘10/12/20: Agreement with Aladdin Middle East Ltd’ page 8.

Emulsion came to surface during lowering of 9 5/8" casing, no mention of heavy oil cut during flow tests.

And positive indicators from post stack attributes - except post stack is not how to identify hydrocarbons on seismic - and on one of the legacy 2D lines

…….vs these extracts from the UKOG 11 Jan 2023 RNS:-

'Kezer-1 reported strong oil shows throughout the Hoya and flowed heavily oil-cut fluids to surface on a short open-hole geothermal test'

'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'

Perhaps AME didn't read the same reports as UKOG?

Then there was this at the end of the AME 2022 Annual Report:-
'Mardin “Leads” in the city of Siirt area is another prospective area which requires additional gravity and 2D seismic data acquisition to mature them to prospect level for drilling. Therefore, additional 2D seismic program has been planned for 2023'

Has UKOG mentioned this new seismic and gravity data? Perhaps AME is even looking at Lead "A" as a next well in preference to Basur-4 - though UKOG don't mention the 'if' unsuccessful case for Pinarova-4.

Ocelot,

your'e sounding more and more like someone with their fingers in their ears going lalalalalala I can't hear you while project after project fails - as if it's a smart thing to do whilst predicting riches to come and surely wondering why before each well, activity or fantasy plan the market doesn't rerate and stay there awaiting certain success, instead seeming to agree with those that you ignore.

For years you've been repeating UKOG BS as if their claims and hopes are guaranteed to happen - filtering those that disagree and challenge that view means you don't have to jusify your blind faith.

The most positive thing UKOG can say about the next well in the once upon a time transformative Turkish venture is it's cheap, shallow and quick - and a nearby well that flowed water with an oil cut had oil shows UKOG and AME had ignored until Basur vanished - and don't forget the oil seep UKOG headlined whilst they were still pushing Basur-4 based on a dodgy looking closure mapped between dip lines that needed 'confirmation' with more seimic.

To avoid having to mention their expectations they've decided to pass it through an external technical audit (to be taken with a pinch of salt if it's anything like previous reports - eg Nutech Kimmeridge, Xodus Portland flow rates) - is it because their 'expectations' are so large it will look stupid if it fails - though it hasn't stopped them before with multiple failed transformational projects - or so small - will they say before the drill or results?

Moneymunch.,

Any chance of you posting something with the slightest bit of detail -- like what this Pinarova transformational 'potential' is, as UKOG seem to have forgotten to mention it.

UKOG have been unusually silent about this appraisal of a well that flowed water with an oil cut and is hoping that an amplitude anomaly is indicative of an oil filled reservoir (often channel sands) rather than just an improvement in reservoir quality, but still filled with water- and then used a seismic attribute (sweetness) to illustrate it in the presentation slides when hat attribute isn't (can't be?) used to identify an oil fill. But no OIP, or should that be water + oil in place. No information about Kezer-1 such as even an estimate of what it flowed or the oil cut.

Kezer which was drilled in 2018 and despite being just to the north of Basur was so fantastic it wasn't mentioned until, presumably, the phase 2 seismic (and probably the phase 1 as well, hence perhaps the 'discovery' of the oil seep before the phase 2 seismic was shot) showed that Basur wasn't very good.

As for Loxley I hope that any farminee checks the CPR better than either RPS or UKOG seem to have done - with a mis-identified CPI (Computer Processed Interpretation, figure 5.17 is Alfold-1 not GB-2z) and getting muddled about the improvement in poroperms above the supposed GWC in Alfold (in figure 5.14).

The Petrophysics section of the CPR should have been checked more thoroughly than any other part as the interpretation that Alfold has a gas column is central to making the Eastern end of the mapping close off abruptly, without this closure Loxley would be left as a pimple with the likelihood of a shallower GWC than Godley Bridge or requiring a large stratigraphic element to the trapping mechanism.

The 2 stage farm in at HH needs the seismic to prove up yet another map with a culmination between seismic control before PPP commit to drill a well that even with high res 3D seismic would have the risk of intersecting, like HH-2z, or being near, like HH-1, a water producing fracture. The seismic is not expected until some time in H2 2023 - presuming unlike almost every other UKOG activity it happens on time. PPP also need to raise cash to do it as the recent raise was predominantly to fund a drill in Texas.

Still at least the HH-2z conversion should proceed.

it's believing posters like moneymunch that probably helped to persuade you to keep on buying UKOG shares when they were selling.....they're the pervasive presence on this board.

I have for years pointed out that UKOG's claims don't add up and explain why their activities are likely to fail.

In contrast to yourself and other posters, like moneymunch, who parrot UKOG PR as if UKOG's opinion and hopes are indubitable outcomes.

If all those activities hadn't failed the SP wouldn't be where it is - blaming anyone other than UKOG for the low SP is laughable.

It's always the next one that will definitely work - the triumph of hope over experience.