Member Info for Penguins

ells,

'Ibug & Penguins are both greens'

you just keep on making up stories about other posters - it's as accurate as your prediction of 0.07p by the end of last week, and many of your other predictions.

I have no idea about Ibug, but I post an honest, realistic, opinion about the projects. I've often challenged posters to find any post for an activity that is completed that suggests a worse outcome than the actual outcome. So far no takers - whereas posters like ells make repeated over estimations of the SP and production figures and deflect from their ridiculous predictions by claiming any poster with a different opinion is some kind of activist - with zero proof apart from their fevered conspiracy fantasies - in ells case even posting links to equally fevered tweets as some kind of justification.

I'd challenge ells to find any post of mine that shows hostility to oil, or gas, production - which isn't the same as saying that UKOG's projects are in essence high risk, low reward and a lot of so called good news has been, and likely is, BS.

Ells,
You posted:-
'Pointless hanging around in them bushes pingu'

but it was you posting 'Everything is now positive. Gas detection cameras are showing high levels of success from here on out.'

It was only after questioning what you meant did you come up with gas 'flaring'.

In fact your first reply was 'Got ya greenie. More powers to the police in the new bill.' No mention of gas flare.

Only after it was pointed out, again, that 'gas' being detected wasn't that great on a well site did you come up with flare - where a better description would have been products of combustion rather than 'gas'.

As I posted in my second reply in January:- 'though in reality you had no idea what your post inplied - just mindless, or meaningless ramping, like most of your posts when you're not making up stories about other posters being green, activists etc.'

Ocelot,

unsurprisingly UKOG seem to want to make it look like they moved more quickly in Turkey:=

'However, in 2021 UKOG entered into an agreement with operator Aladdin Middle East Ltd to acquire a 50% interest in the 305 km² Resan Licence in the Republic of Turkey.'

But on 23 July 2020 this is what was RNS'd:- 'UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that it has signed a binding heads of agreement with Aladdin Middle East Ltd ("AME")'

We were then told how quickly things happened in Turkey - yet the formal agreement took until January 2021.

You may have noticed that the first well Basur-3 was a failure and now instead of this:-

'A June 2020 report prepared by Xodus Group Ltd ("Xodus") for AME calculates that two identified geological targets within the Licence's Cretaceous Mardin limestones, the undeveloped Basur oil discovery and the Resan "missed" oil pay opportunity contain an aggregate unrisked gross mean oil in place, or oil in the ground before extraction ("OIP"), of approximately 253 million barrels ("mmbbl"), with a significant high case (P10) gross aggregate OIP of 495 mmbbl.'

Yet the next well won't be on the 'undeveloped Basur oil discovery and the Resan "missed" oil pay opportunity'.

and talking about rewriting history Ells seems to think he 'tricked' posters with this in a post on the 17 January:-

'Everything is now positive. Gas detection cameras are showing high levels of success from here on out.'

and when it was pointed ou t- 'Last thing you want is 'escaped' gas on a well site that a specialised camers can 'see' because EA don't like it, and because it could be dangerous.'

you decided to backtrack after this had been pointed out:- 'Gas detection camera as in "gas flaring". The byproduct.'

Funny you forgot the word 'flaring' in your first post.

I suppose we'll have to wait until April to find out what the level of success in January was, can't wait, probably little different from ovember - and of course there's no evidence that anyone with a gas detection camera was at the site.

Basically it was all BS.

You're wasting your time posting about number of posts and 24/7 when Adrian comes on here spouting trash at a rate of tens , if not hundreds, per day - you post hundreds of times here a month (over the 312 recorde), a lot copy and pastes of your own posts or the other not so reliable source - UKOG RNS.

You're just adding to your post count as this is to mine (144). The difference is I don't make wild claims that just show how desperate you've been.

I'm just waiting for the garden to warm up to go out and tame a few overgrown shrubs - how's your day? I'll be back lunchtime to have a look and see howmthe morning ramping went.

You posted:-

'Here's the facts.
SS got permission to drill multiple wells at Horsehill . That took years via the SCC planning department'

Yet the 'fact' is it took 10 months, not years and a lot of that was due to UKOG submitting more required documentation after submission:-

UKOG's application for the additional wells was received by SCC on 7 December 2018 and approved by committee on 27 September 2019 - fact.

SS has the planning permission, UKOG can do anything within that permission, including as UKOG stated in May 2022 after the EA approval was confirmed, and as you quoted when you were deramping on twitter:-

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

Another missed target, and according to you (when you were ramping) something if it had been done in 2022 would have been paid for by the additional cashflow by now.

I'm afraid your little fantasy about Sarah Finch causing one of the mighty oil and gas exploration and production companies grinding to a halt is just stupid.

UKOGs claims about HH and Broadford Bridge have been proved to be wrong by drilling and testing. At HH the Kimmeridge testing did not lead to dual completion, or a sidetrack of HH-1. Broadford Bridge has not been returned to and the closk is again ticking down on the planning permission for keeping the site.

As for every other test of the Kimmeridge none have lead to it being produced.

Like UKOG at HH Angus managed a couple of initial tests which had high flow rates during what Angus describe as short tests and are returning to perform longer term tests - like UKOG did - and you were constantly quoting the sum of all the best 2016 tests as an example of 'production' flow rates - iirc - 1688bopd. During those tests at HH UKOG RNS'd a variety of flow rates an volumes produced but never a start rate and a finish rate - the last released flow rates were in December 2019 when the initial rate was 350bopd and over a five day period the average was 301bopd. That suggests in 5 days, after the well had been shut in for some time the rate fell from 350bopd to something approaching 250bopd.

As for water injection you've previously claimed it would be cheap. Yes it took a while to get EA approval - but one year of the delay was UKOG withdrawing the original application and resubmitting a comprehensive revision to the application. They have had permission since May last year, Injecting the produced water would save the cost of disposal and according to many posters and you it would significantly increase production - which if it were true and injecting carried no risks could mean a rapid payback - ie the activity would be paid off far quickerand improve profitabilty long before any forced closure in the extremely unlikely event SF won.

Yet UKOG has done nothing, and doing nothing means that the drilling on HH-3 which will have a high risk of high water production - which constrains oil production - which probably means that without water injection working drilling the well is uneconomic.

UKOG has never said that progress at HH is slow because of the legal challenge that they describe as almost certain to fail, and I expect that come June, when Finch loses, nothing spectacular will happen at HH. Have you not noticed distraction from all the transformational projects is the order of the day:-

Gas storage! Hydrogen Storage! Potland Project!

Of course the content of Adrian's posting is irrelevant - he knows they will be deleted, he just wants the number of posts to be high to get on to the leader board. Responding just helps the cause.

Ocelot,

'At present, significant additional work is required to determine the development potential of these reservoirs.'

But then the web site licence descriptions are out of date.

As in early 2020 UKOG were RNS'ing that HH-1 would be dual completed - 28/04/2020:-

'As previously reported in the Company's latest Annual Report, a series of interventions aimed at significantly increasing field production are also planned. These include interventions to add commingled Kimmeridge oil flow.'

Nevertheless it will be interesting to see what happens in a proper test at Balcombe, and whether there will be a sustained flow from the Kimmeridge. That may depend on the well being within a structural closure - something that UKOG's plan for the Kimmeridge appraisal well at HH appeared to acknowledge - ie even if the oil potential is regional, it's producibility may be limited to structural closures.

'The Kimmeridge HH-4 well, also situated updip of both HH-1 and HH-2z, ..........'

Although UKOG's view was that even at Loxley, where they map a small closure within the Kimmeridge (though may not exist), the probability of success told to the inquiry was 30 to 40%.

You posted:-
'Under 0.057 is a sell. Above and accumulation around 0.06 is a buy.'

Do you wan to be taken seriously - posting something as ridiculous as that?

I think you'll find that there are sells at above 0.06p, not just 'abov'e 0.057p and 'around' 0.06p and using your terminology these are ex- 'accumulators' (or 'buyers as they are known) de-accumulating as sellers.

Adrian,

'Its better to under state production at council planning meeting '

But these figures are from the planning inquiry - so you're saying that SS lied to the inquiry?

How many times are we going to get the UKOG are being 'conservative' excuse - yet when it comes to it they haven't been conservative - with failure after failure. Same as silence means they're holding back good news - that worked well for BB, water production at HH, Basur bit stuck.

We'll only find out, like we did with BB, HH-2z and Basur-3. if Loxley is drilled - but the record isn't good is it - and it's yet another 'nailed on' appraisal of an unsucessful well......

As for SFB you don't know what each well is flowing, but this is what Angs RNS'd on 9 September 2022:-

'The Company has achieved flow rates from well A4 of 4 mmscf/d (million standard cubic feet per day) at approximately 55 bar and well over 4.5 mmscf/d from well B2'

SFB economics were initially blown by the closure of the nearby entry point - UKOG don't mention how near Loxley's will be - so stable flow rates will be critical to economics with the probable need for an expensive pipeline up front.

Adrian,

if 1.44mmscf/d was any good do you not think Godley Bridge would have been put into production with more wells?

UKOG's calculation for the Loxley base case was barely over 3mmscf/d per well - the single well at SFB produced more than that.

Nice field though, maybe they're going to shoot some more seismic through it to see if Loxley is really there - like they should have for Basur-3.

Well they're not deramps - but UKOG provide a continuous supply of things to comment on.

Only in the last 2 weeks UKOG got confused, in RNS, as to what they planned to do at Loxley. Put an exagerrated figure for potential, if successful, production from 4 wells - but in the previous week RNS'd that production would be from a single well- and a second well would only be drilled to maintain the plateau production rate.

UKOG provided to the planning inquiry figures for production from 4 orizontal wells - the base case being 13mmscf/d. so only alittle over 3mmscf/d per well. The high case was 25mmxcf/d, (less than the 30mmscf/d mentioned in last week's RNS), but no low case was mentioned - probably less than 10mmscf/d, or less 2.5mmscf/d per well.

Bear in mind that none of UKOG's wells have produced anywhere near their base case predicted oil production, mostly it has been zero.

We'll see if there's any significance in the new picture on UKOG's home page, if anyone reads the UK Assets - Loxley they'll be surprised to readthat:- 'in November 2019, UKOG submitted a planning application to extend the existing Broadford Bridge planning approval by 24 months to March 2022. Also post period, OGA approved an amendment to the PEDL234 Retention Area work programme, wherein Loxley-1 is to be drilled by December 2021.'

Maybe they'll rewrite it before any more Loxley RNS.

Just catching up on your endless posts:-

'Penguins.
My figures are based on todays spot oil price. Ive showed my workings'

Your 'workings' are spot price x bbls. No OPEX, no workovers, no site costs, no licence costs, no head office overheads - yet I quote what's in a UKOG financial statement - btw find it yourself - here's a clue SS got, including a bonus, £624,000 or £766,000 depending on what you include.

and you also don't know what SS's salary is currently or any of the other figures for sure - so it's just guesswork - or to put it another way, your opinion which has been shown to be mightily flawed over the years. We won't know until March 2025 what SS is earning today.

As for Loxley there's no vertical well there - the figure is for Godley Bridge some way to the west and UKOG's mapping only just shows Godley Bridge and Loxley within a continuous feature (and you can bet they've pushed the interpretation and depth conversion for that).

The figure of 2 to 3 times a vertical well flow is just a rule of thimb and will depend on a lot of factors - but if the Loxley well is dry assuming the rule of thumb applies the sum is 0 x 2 or 3.

Adrian as sexysadie,

you posted:-

'What will have done via this converasation is just how much money is coming from Horndean and of course Horsehill.'

I really don't think you understand, are you trying to make a fool out of everyone?

The results will be in the next 7 weeks or so util then my opinion is UKOG probably can't even pay the wage bill, including the consultants they employ for all those reports they don't publish and the Portland project, with the profit from Horndean and Horse Hill.

Which is why when they want to do anything they need to do a cash raise.

As for Turkey - it's a cheap but risky well for anything but an oil show. At best feeble oil production with lots of water if Kezer is anything to go by - that the government can insist is put into production.

It also suggests that the remaining Basur-4 target is small.

'More misleading imfo. UKOG pay taxes lol. They pay Zero tax .What expenses ? You dont know of ANY!'

Adrian no one here including you knows what costs are currently deducted, however the last year UKOG showed Horndean revenue and costs in the cashflow account revenue was £213,000 and costs were £97,000.

So how misleading is it to claim that your calculated $345,000 revenue covers all SS salary, and more?

Very out of date.

Horndean November 2022 production was an average of about 111bopd with a 35.5% water cut.

Loxley no mention of the pre-planned famout, nor the more recent planning extensions (March 2022!), nor the more recent extensions to the drop dead date for drilling Loxley.

Avington is still not producing though.

Thet's better.

Hadn't read the thread name properly!

Ells,

Can you point us to a post where you predicted 0.13p - perhaps more telling is you thought 1p by the end of the year (2022) was 'very conservative' when the mid price was 0.12p during the P&D where the SP peaked at about 0.13p.

Nevertheless you did predict 0.07p for today

Nor do you have to be a 'green', a 'nimby', or any of theother attempts at insults to post an honest opinion about UKOG's projects and RNS.

If that honest opinion appears negative to you then maybe you should research the company and its projects rather than just repeating and believing what the company say - with any prediction about what might happen even what the company say is only an opinion, and UKOG is extremely selective in what it does RNS,

Often what is most telling is what they don't say. Just about current projects.

No mention of any details about the Pinarova structure, OIP, expected production and no revised volumetrics for Basur despite 2 phases of seismic and 2 new maps - the latest of which they haven't shown.

An RNS today, nearly half way through Q1 - when UKOG has said the well would be drilled, and no mention of actual progress towards drilling the Pinarove well.

2 RNS about Loxley and no mention of the pre-planned farm out - and confusing information about flow rates and number of wells planned - both quite different from the published information provided to the inquiry based on the new mapping in 2021. They also haven't submitted their work to independant audit in a CPR since 2018 - this more importantlys also applies to HH where promises of CPR's following various periods of production haven't been kept.

Specific to HH UKOG has had a Kimmeridge report done, with contingent resources orders of magnitude less than the numbers bandied about previously, by RPS in 2019 but only mentioned as a footnote to the resources table. Is this why HH-1 was not dual completed despite suggestions it would be in early 2020?

and of course HH-1 has been producing from the Portland for nearly 3 years. In that time the only information about flow rates of oil and water is that released by the OGA, and then the NSTA. No mention that decline would be so aggressive, nor water production such a problem - and no comment as to why the planned conversion to HH-2z to an injector hasn't happened.

Having already committed all raised funds to Turkey - virtually stopping any work on the previously transformational or of national importance Weald projects, the Turkey project is now relegated to drilling a risky, but cheap, well on a previously unmentioned structure already tested with a flow of water with an oil cut.

But never mind now we have - Gas Storage! Hydrogen!

I see you removed the reference to the tankers in November when production averaged 49bopd and drilling basur next - instead it's now just January tankers, and they're drilling a previously unmentioned prospect based on a previous well at the apex flowing water with an oil cut.

Time is ticking on the millions in the bank and time is money (out) with UKOG, the water reinjection's been soon for months - and with UKOG that doesn't mean it's more likely to be soon.

There have been two recent RNS about Loxley recently without a mention of the pre-planned farm out that was, as UKOG put it, implemented in July last year.

But everything's OK - Look over here - UKOG is planning a gas storage facility that will take years to be operational and will be hydrogen ready - but dependant on others for that aspect.

I suspect there will be years to 'pounce' on UKOG shares if you believe the hydrogen story.

'people opening new accounts spraying around derogatory comments 24/7'

Seems you don't recognise yourself as well as Adrian.

For a first post as ells_valexpert it's pretty strange:-

'ells_valexpert
Posted in: VAL Posts: 2,926
Price: 16.75 No Opinion
Well well well... 24 Jun 2022 16:44
...my prediction came true but no one listened. Rates are rising and a fund raise lingers in the air. Hands up who sold above 50p along with the experts ??'

You admitted closing down your old account - I can't remember the reason you gave - but I suspect you haven't changed and your posting 'style' was a factor.