Member Info for Penguins

'Quick Google search'

Finds supposed 2023 price forecast of SP 7054% higher than Friday's closing price.

says it all

perhaps if you did some research you might not keep posting things that are embarrassingly out of date - and obviously just plain wrong.

'The Sarah Finch case in June will be a paradox. As Finch and her cohorts on here have done everything they can to harm UKOG'

Is it just coincidence that the drop in the SP since 2017 coincided with failure of BB after UKOG 'bigging it up', failure of HH-2z, failure of Basur-3 and since March 2020 the HH-1 well not only producing water from June 2020, not being dual completed in the Kimmeridge, but also production dropping from 'over 300bopd' according to UKOG (301?) to an average of less than 50bopd in November 2022 with gradually increasing water cut - November incidentally when you 'fooled' ells into thinking production was improving since th new pumps were installed because of the tanker pictures - and is it more fool him as he's saying the same for January - we shall see

Still pushing the line that while it's OK for you to voice your concerns on the Angus board anybody doing the same here - who have also denied any involvement in the green movement - are accused of being in league with Sarah Finch.

Quite a serious allegation for something that you have absolutely no proof (and in my case absolutely no possibility of proof) - just that the UKOG SP has dropped no doubt because of the incredibly poor record of success - quelle surprise.

Adrian / outlook,

you said:-

'Penguins.
Its all about timing. Get in before the fully funded drill starts and wait for the bull run up to spud date and beyond. Waiting for results is risky. Its not rocket science.'

Adrian - 'Waiting for results is risky' -what have I (and others) been posting for years the diference being I (and others) explain / justify why I've said it for every drill that UKOG has been involved in since HH-1 (and for that well pointed out that the seemingly 'good' flow rates RNS'd by UKOG during the ewt actually weren't that good) - you're just saying do it regardless.

I see you're playing the Adrian isn't outlook game on Angs.....really - not sure anybody is fooled - if anythigng it just confirms what a liar you're prepared to be..

ZYX,

Just getting the subject right - and not repeating the misleading mostly intangible assets thread title.

There was mention that 88E had a market cap of £124mm - and zero production. But as UKOG would make a loss doing nothing (despite the 'cash machines' of Horse Hill and Horndean) and like 88E has always had to raise to do any exploration, though it now has enough to drill Pinarove having raised about £4mm net last year. So it would be fairer to compare what 2C resources they are ciurrently about to drill - in UKOG's case it's unknown what resources are likely with Pinarova - they rather cunningly say it's similar to Basur-4, but don't say anything about Basur-4 either.

I see outlook / Adrian thinks it's OK for him to point out his 'negative' opinions on the Angs board because he 'loves ' oil - from his post:- 'I love oil and gas. I sold Angus.......' - but thinks doing the same here makes everyone a green.

I also like oil and gas E&P (love's a bit strong) - it also doesn't mean that I'll not post my researched opinion about UKOG - and not just because I've just sold and want to buy back in for less (technically shorting it -makes him a 'green' shorter).

Over the years there have been many calculations that have assumed the next well will be the one to succeed, with predictions of successful well after successful well. But we're stuck at HH-2z (2019) which was the next HH well after HH-1 (2014), BB-1 (2017) and UKOG's first well in Tukey Basur--3 (2020).

So I'd wait until after Pinarova-1 before counting the pennies.

Of course you, like all the other recently arrived 'positive' posters, hoping for a P&D, won't be here for the results of Pinarova-1.

Basur-1 tested 500bbls of oil, yes, but then the test was stopped because of water production. Strangely UKOG has never mentioned the production from E Sadak - a field described as a producing and geologic lookalike operated by AME.

There are now 14 wells on that field - most are still producing a few from sidetracks drilled because they missed the reservoir (perhaps UKOG should have mentioned that).

On AME's web site they report current E Sadak field production of 400bopd -you can do the maths.

But it isn't Basur they are drilling its a different shallower (hence cheap to drill) structure - the one where the well at the apex flowed on test water with an oil cut - a well not previously mentioned in any context.

Dicko,

Note the date of your 23 June 2020 RNS - part of the BS build up to drilling Basur-3 - so I'm afraid the first two thirds of your post about Turkey has rather been shot to pieces by drilling a well that missed a much reduced structure than AME / UKOG claimed - then shotting two phases of seismic that proved oiit was smaller and then it llooks like it proved the Basur-4 target shrunk as well.

Perhaps the saddest bit is repeating the recent 'good' news they're 'appraising' a geothermal well that produced water with an oil cut at the apex of the structure.

Still at least you've shown how misleading UKOG RNS can be by repeating the proven BS in the 23 June 2020 RNS - any chance the 11th Jan 2023 RNS will be any more accurate?

Dicko

I suppose you must be an anti oil and gas greenie posting on Angus this scaremongering:-

'When is the next placing coming 19 Feb 2023 10:30
My gut feeling is some time very soon'

Adrian,

You keep forgetting it costs a lot of that revenue just to dispose of the water, on top of that are other OPEX, site, licence costs - then there are the salaries consultants and legal costs.

Amazing how many times you're reminded and then you instantly forget.

Nomlungu,

It's accounting - a truly dark art.

But the more I think about it what the **** had UKOG spent over £30mm on by 31 March 2022 that was still included in intangible assets?

Whilst UKOG can argue previous work on Loxley counted as they still hold the licence and plan to drill a well- but that has all been 'deskwork', consultants and legal. BB drilling expenditure had already been removed.

As for Turkey at the time of the March 2022 accounts expenditure on Turkey would be included, but that was capped at $5mm for the well and seismic that had been done by then, other costs should not be in the millions - apart from that all HH previous expenditure should be represented by the tangible value.

Net assets may beerfectly reasonably stated in the accounts at £36.1mm, but what do those net assets consist of?

Mostly a totting up of expenditure on exploration and evaluation that as of March 2022 was considered to be ongoing - intangible assets.

The only tangible assets are Horndean and Horse Hill, and they are valued at £5.5mm - though it should be noted that UKOG unusually determined the value for Horse Hill themselves rather than commission a CPR, which would have to have been published.

Unfortunately either ocelot is predicting a share price of less than 0.05p or has forgotten there are over 21 billion shares in issue - the rounded mcap is actually £13mm - over twice the value of the two fields producing fiields UKOG has equity in - though without a CPR there is no way of knowing on what basis Horse Hill is valued.

It will be interesting what thay can justify retaining as intangible assets in the accounts to be published before the end of March with no firm committment to drill a Basur well. Unfortunately they don't have to specifically identify where the money was spent, and what it was spent on, that comprises the 'intangible' assets amount.

Ocelot,

probably one of the few posters - apart from those with new accounts - ocelot sees has been telling us that there has been accumulation going on since November 23rd when the SP closed at 0.0675p.

There have also been plenty of tweets and posts claiming that news / catalysts were coming soon - and indeed there's recently been news about Turkey (though not that good in reality) and 2 RNS about Loxley, though no mention of the pre-planned farmout that has been anticipated almost since it was implemented in July last year, plus of course Hydrogen Week (as ells put it on 9th February - 'Expecting a large volume move tomorrow in anticipation of the UK’s ‘first’ official Hydrogen Week NEXT WEEK!!!') and HH - sorry no news for HH as we'll have to wait until June.

So plenty of opportunity for those likely to suffer from FOMO to become holders of the golden tickets, plus all that 'new' accumulation money pouring in for months, yet apparently, 'It would take very little new money coming in on FOMO to raise the share price considerably higher' - I suppose that's different money from the months of accumulation buying?.

Meanwhile in the real world all the news, FOMO and accumulation has seen the SP rise to the magnificent heights of 0.0615 - and only that high because there was a late trade.

I'm not sure which of the market experts to believe - though by past performance - neither, possibly because neither seems to be capable of critical thinking where UKOG RNS, tweets or interviews are concerned - though ocelot has had a lot longer to see several times the progression from transformational / nationally significant project or activity through to failure - or never being mentioned again.

ZYX,

They did mention 'dry oil' in all the ewt RNS - including for the Portland.

But given that it was a while after production commenced before HH-1 produced water from the Portland it's quite possible the same could happen to the Kimmeridge. It's likely that the faults / fractures which have produced water in the Portland cut through both levels - but in the duration of testing the Kimmeridge, like the Portland, water breakthrough hadn't happened.

I'm a bit suspicious that the June 2019 RPS report (based on the earlier Kimmeridge ewts) led to the HH-1z sidetrack no longer being mentioned - and having gone back to look at the Kimmeridge testing in the latter half of 2019 (as detailed in my 14:48 post) confirmed that there were problems with the Kimmeridge.

Was the continued talk of converting HH-1 to produce from Portland and Kimmeridge just keeping the dream alive while they searched for a distraction - Turkey! Transformational! - even more essential when the 3 month delay to production figures revealed the water production from the Portland - and decline.

ZYX,

'If it is just a simple case of a precipitous decline in initial producing rates, it's doubtful the the test was long enough to tell them what the recharge rate was - unless it was very quick, but water.'

The test IBug and I mention was the last one they gave any information on - and it continued until some time before January 16:-

'In order to conduct interference testing, HH-1 Portland EWT production was resumed on 16 January 2020'

But there were plenty of Kimmeridge tests during the ewts carried out in 2018 and 2019. The test that finished on 27 November had been underway since 12 September (RNS 12 September:- ' Kimmeridge test oil production has now resumed and will continue until the rig arrives, when a further short shut-in will occur to enable the HH-2/2z drilling set-up to be assembled) this from 9 October, though no flow details, just an update to total production, 'over 41,800bbls.

'Continuous Kimmeridge oil production from Horse Hill-1 ("HH-1") has been maintained since the start of the Horse Hill-2/2z horizontal drilling campaign on 29 September 2019.'

In the 12 September RNS total Kimmeridge production was also mentioned 'Prior to the current shut-in, Kimmeridge test production reached a total of 36,559 barrels ("bbl")'.

This means between 12 September and 9 October the Kimmeridge test produced 5241bbls.

The number of days is uncertain as the test was suspended while rigging up but assuming about 4 days less that means about 23 days which gives an average of about 230bopd - way below the sort of flow rates that were been headlined during the tests - the previous test they ran at 313bopd in the final 24 hours.

There are other clues as to what the previous Kimmeridge flow period produced.

1 August 2019 - 'From 6th July to date, the Phase 2 Kimmeridge test has produced a further 5,524 barrels ("bbl")'... &.....Total aggregate Portland and Kimmeridge test oil production .........now totals a significant landmark of 60,186 barrels ("bbl").'

26 days = average about 212bopd

and again on 12 September 'Total aggregate Portland and Kimmeridge test production now stands at a landmark 66,127 bbl'

So 1 August to 12 September Kimmeridge production was 66127 - 60186 = 5941bbls - although production was suspended whil;e flow lines were being rerouted in preparation for the rig arrivsl. That work commenced 30 August so assuming 29 days production that's about 205bopd average.

You might assume like all these tests mentioned here thAT the final Kimmeridge test into January 2020 had an overall average of low 200's which would mean very low flow rates at the end - until there's a published report or CPR we shan't know

Bit long wided - but they certainly had some fairly long tests and shut in periods to determine what was happening even though they've used lots of smoke and mirrors to disguise it.

Ibug,

Before Portland production started in MRch 2020, after the last Kimmeridge testing, they would have inserted removable packers to seal off the Kimmeridge so neither, later, 2020 workovers, or any later workovers, would have had any effect on the Kimmeridge which would have been closed off to the works.

28 January 2020 RNS :- 'The HH-1 Kimmeridge interval will now remain shut in for a further long duration pressure build-up test.'

A very long pbu........

Some posters did try to suggest that the pump was being set lower in the Kimmeridge but that would not be the way to try to produce the Kimmeridge and Portland - the method that UKOG said would be used was using 2 electric submersible pumps - one for each layer with separate production completions so production of both layers could be monitored and controlled as required.

The very last mentioned Kimmeridge test starting at 354bopd but averaging 301bopd after about 5 days (18 to 23 December) illustrates what I mean about 'hinting' at rapid decline.

If there was linear decline it would suggest that the rate dropped 100bopd in the 5 days of testing......and the Kimmeridge had been shut in since November 27 before that test.

I really should read back thoroughly to see what autocorrect has done:-

'that omitted of rapid decline' should be 'that hinted at rapid decline'

Ibug,

UKOG never published full results for either the Kimmeridge or Portland ewt at HH, and despite several 'plans' to commission a CPR haven't done so - although they did have an HH Kimmeridge report done in June 2019 by RPS they quote for contingent resources in the more recent annual reports.

During testing they quoted a mixture of flow rates sometimes with high initial rates and much lower averages over fairly short periods that omitted of rapid decline - even faster than the Portland.

It was many years ago, 2018, that Neil Ritson the Executive Chairman of Solo Oil, at the time a 10% SH in HHDL,said this about the KL layers at the UK Investor Show :-

'Now these are fractured reservoirs and they will have been offloading the oil from the fractures. What we are going back in this year to establish is if you leave them open for a period of time what is the sustainable rate, which you would expect to be down in the 100 to 200 barrels per day range if it's going to be commercial.'

The fundamentals of a reservoir don't change and perhaps the hoped for forecast during production of 100 to 200 bopd didn't happen. I'm not going back to check but the silence about HH-1z being sidetracked into the Kimmeridge probably started mid 2019, although talk of dual completion of HH-1 continued into 2020.

I don't believe the Kimmeridge was damaged by testing at HH, nor to the extent UKOG like to make out at BB, in fact at one point SS refuted an Angus opinion thay had.

I'd go by actions and for 5 years there has been no move to get PP for more drilling, just site retention, at BB, and no movement to produce the Kimmeridge from HH-1 since it was last suggested 3 years ago. Spending money on a risky well in Turkey being a more attractive proposition to UKOG - and now concentrating on a long term gas storage 'utilities' project.

Bizarrely the excuse for not doing further work at BB was to test Kimmeridge production methods for BB at Loxley (where UKOG have cited a 30 to 40% probability of success for the Kimmeridge) - why not Horse Hill, or even better at BB where there's already a site, if there wasany real hope of success.

Ocelot,

'Think the market should get behind SS.' of course you do - but why.

This ideas man doesn't seem capable of finding a successful idea. Even HH hasn't been as successful as UKOG 'expected', and everything else has failed to date - and it hasn't just been bad luck as most of the reasons for failure were obvious to those that researched the wells before they were drilled - UKOG only presenting highly skewed positive expected outcomes.
Bear that in mind when reading RNS, and posters presenting a researched different point of view.

'who doesn't give up easily (BB, HH-2z).' - really - Did you mean do nothing for years (BB, HH-2z)

But the lack of parrtners in the projects has probably meant that there hasn't been any restraint on SS's decisions - a manager used to the financial backing of a multinational - and his desire to continue at any cost in the hope of something coming up.

The Portland project is essentially a 'utilities' project, without the possible quick financial returns of a successful O&G E&P project, with huge upfront costs and slow payback. Will the city back SS doing that - what risks are there - perhaps even that large scale gas storage may not be wanted by the time the facility is complete.

Calm down

Your posting has got sillier and sillier, throwing out accusations about other posters and trying to police the board - deciding who can - rampers - and who can't - any one with a realistic outlook - post.

Claiming expertise while demonstrating, where UKOG is concerned, a complete lack of expertise, wrong predictions of SP and ridiculous claims of 'catching posters out' making sensible comments about UKOG.

You're now resorting to lying about the rules of LSE and of course continuing to lie about anyone you don't agree with.

Don't expect any further Q&A though as it seems whatever the answer it won't be enough - and you seem to think you can expect an answer to any personal question - whilst not answering questions about your opinion of UKOG - the purpose of this board.

Maybe it's time to change your account again?

I can only assume your trading strategy is totally different from you posting as I don't believe you have poseted anything negative about UKOG while, over the years, the SP has seen rises but far more often, and for longer, falls. If you had bought and never sold, because of the rosy future you always post about means the SP will always rise even when it's spiking, you would surely be massively underwater assuming you're backing your posted opinions with buys.

The last major P&D in March / April 2021 saw you agreeing to a prediction of 0.9p by the end of May 2021 and still repeating it as the dump proceeded.

It seems that rampers either lie about their opinions, selling even when insisting the SP will always rise into a rosy future (surely not!), or are harbouring huge losses?