Member Info for Peterashbeck

"Where d'ya think all that's coming from?"

Horse Hill production?

If you look at page 17 of the IPO document then it clearly states that at the time of the IPO their existing PRODUCTION from both Lidsey and Brockham was approx. 50 bopd gross: as can be seen here: https://ibb.co/Q9hM57q

For anyone to deny that the value of Angus Energy was all focused in the exploration of the Kimmeridge at Brockham is just ridiculous. The company was not valued at £16 million upon IPO based on 50bopd and anyone trying to say different is deliberately misleading investors for their own malicious agenda.

Why are the AAAG always posting false facts?

I find it very strange that some posters on this board are trying very hard to convince others that Angus never had any interest in oil exploration, simply because it fits the anti-angus narrative that they currently wish to push.

If you look at page 4 of the IPO document http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Angus-Energy-IPO-Investor-Presentation.pdfit is labelled PRODUCTION and under Lidsey it says: “Second production well to bring production >300 barrels per day”.

Under Brockham production it says “Side-track to increase production to~150bopd from Portland Sandstone”

Then under Brockham EXPLORATION it says: “Kimmeridge limestone layers to be assessed with same side-track”

If you look at page 5 of the IPO document https://ibb.co/HqhtLX1 it has an entire section entitled EXPLORATION and in this section it says that the aim is to “Explore Kimmeridge Limestones at Brockham”.

If you look at the firs activity RNS that Angus every issued on 14th November 2016 : EA Permit Brockham http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Angus-RNS-EA-permit-Brockham-16.11.14.pdf it says: ““The upcoming sidetrack will allow the Group to increase and prolong the production from the Portland reservoir while also giving the Group an opportunity to assess the potential of, and if successful, produce from the Kimmeridge limestones and Upper Coralian layer.” So pretty clearly this is exactly following what they say in the IOP document. The well is to increase PRODUCTION from the Portland and carry out EXPLORATION in the Kimmeridge.

On the second activity RNS that Angus ever issued (15th Dec 2016 Angus Receives OGA Approval And Commences Operations At The Onshore Brockham Oil Field) http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/RNS-Angus-receives-OGA-approval-and-commences-operations.pdf it sates "All the original BP wells at Brockham that passed through the Kimmeridge and Corallian formations were drilled without properly assessing their hydrocarbon potential." Again, this makes it very clear that this section of the drill is EXPLORATION.

The Brockham Drilling Results RNS form 3rd March 2017 makes it even clearer: http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Brockham-drilling-results.pdf
“The Brockham X4Z well was intended to establish whether the evidence of a potential reservoir reported at Horse Hill extended further North into the Brockham Licence. The well was therefore intended to answer three main questions. Is the reservoir section in Brockham similar in thickness and reservoir properties to what had been reported at Horse Hill? Is there evidence of naturally occurring fractures to enable production of oil using conventional means? Is the content of oil in the Kimmeridge similar to Horse Hill where oil was tested at substantial rates?”

So there we have it. It was an EXPLORATION drill which also had the benefit of increasing their existing (miniscule) production.

FWIW I definitely would not believe any "leaks from inside the police station" posted on one of these forums!

Skwizz - that made me laugh.

Hi HeadintheSand,

"It's also worth remembering that, no matter how often you ask someone to prove a negative, it is logically impossible for them to do so."

If you read my post properly I said that I am perfectly happy to take his word for it. All he has to do is say "No I am not a member of the AAAG" and I would accept that he is telling the truth. In no way am I asking him to prove a negative.

Thanks for your input though.

This used to be 11p a share when it was producing in the UK and people still believed the claim that there were hundreds of millions (well they actually claimed billions) of barrels of oil that could be delivered onshore in the UK and then used within this country.

The fact that they flow-tested HH and claimed decent flow rates made it all seem as if this was possible. Angus had Brockham and had encountered oil on their oiriginal exploration drill. The rising tide was lifting all boats.

But then the tide started to go out. UKOG drilled dry at Broadford Bridge, Angus announced that their crown jewel Brockham was a duster and then it transpired that Horse Hill was simply not going to flow in anything like the commercial quantities that was hoped.

The Weald is dead. Angus recognised this back in January 2019 when they changed their focus away from the Weald and towards their gas asset in Saltfleetby. UKOG have now recognised it themselves and realised that for the company to survive they need another project to become the crown jewels. In this instance it is Turkey.

Diversifying is a great idea. Whether Turkey is the answer only time will tell. Angus look as if they should have success with Saltfleetby (though this will not be 100% clear until Jan 2021) and there is no reason that UKOG should not do the same with Turkey. However, to believe that this is the same company that previously got the share price to 11p is completely wrong. UKOG is know essentially a completely different company to that which is was a year ago. No historical prices are of any use to assessing this.

Oh gkb47 me old china, you are such an amusing fellow. You asked the following questions:

1) How does anyone know about your holdings in Angus?
2) How does anyone know that you are a member of the AAAG! ?

Well, it’s pretty simple really. You tell the entire board every time you post.

Today when Takeyourbets accused you off being a member of the AAAG! And also not holding Angus shares and you immediately said that he was wrong about the shares and you were a shareholder but did not deny that you were a member of the AAAG! You simply challenged him to provide evidence that you were.

Yesterday when I asked you about your membership of the AAAG! You also refused to answer and said that it was none of my business. It seems strange that your membership of the AAAG! Is not the business of any other poster but that you are perfectly happy to be open about your shareholding.

But when you think about it, it is not that weird. By saying that you are a shareholder you make yourself “just a regular poster interested in his investment” but by being an AAAG! Member you admit to being part of a shadowy group whose members will not admit to being members and who arrange off-board how they are going to deramp the share on this forum. It’s not really a good look for someone pretending to be an independent investor is it?

I always said I was happy to take your word on your AAAG membership and equally I am quite happy to take your word for it that you DO own shares. I mean I suspect that you own a small number and that they are held solely so you can answer the question of “do you own any stock?” with a yes, but I do believe that you hold here.

However, by being happy to admit that you do hold shares but not happy to deny that your are a member of the AAAG! you absolutely confirms that you are a member of the AAAG!

So there it is. That’s how we know.

Good luck with your search for 35p. I will be both very impressed and also very surprised if you get it.

I will also be very much poorer if you do - just in the interests of transparecy.

gkb47 - There is no requirement that someone should be a holder but in the interest of transparency non-holders should be honest about their non-holding position and even more so about their membership of action groups that are organised outwith this board and dedicated to a group action to try to deramp this share on this board.

Why are you hiding the fact that you are a member of AAAG! and that you don't hold any shares. These are not bad things in themselves, but they are bad when you hide them and pretend to other investors that you do not have an ulterior motive.

If you would admit you were a member of AAAG! then it would explain to honest investors why you spend so much time on this board deramping a stock that you no longer hold. More importantly, it would mean you were being honest with fellow investors as opposed to extremely underhand.

Why would an action group that was committed to transparency from the company be so deliberately opaque about its own membership?

It's really very concerning and slightly sinister if the members are busy deramping Angus while pretending to be impartial to ordinary investors, especially since the AAAG is organised outwith this board in order to try and manipulate opinion on it.

Well I was only a day out in my weekend prediction then!

Sorry - my post below was directed to dreamachine.

This is nonsense. Of course you trade shares. People were saying don't trade it all week during the recent crash and those who held lost significant money while those who traded made money.

This share will definitely recover and the share price will definitely go up long term but I do not see why you wouldn't want to make money while it is stuck in it's current trading range. I have not made massive trades on this but I sold out my holding when the Times article came out and I have substantially increased by overall holding by buying and selling since.

The aim of the game is to make money not to fall in love (or indeed hate) with a share.

or Natwest as I suppose I should now call them.

Well, on the plus side it is not RBS!

You may have hoped that it did not sound evasive but it was not only very evasive, it also meant that the only possible answer was yes, you are part of the Anti-Angus Action Group.

However, the big question really is why would you not admit to being part of the AAOG? I mean presumably you are proud to be part of this fine upstanding collection of individuals fighting the good fight and therefore you should be proud of your membership of said organisation...

On the other hand, it would make things slightly awkward for you to have to admit that you are not truly impartial and were actually part of the hidden agenda of a secretive action group.

Eek, I can see your problem. You don’t want to lie, as you do not see yourself as a liar but you don’t want to tell the truth either as it would mean that the impartial on this board viewed you in a totally different light.

I am not trying to have a go at you here. I simply believe in transparency on these boards and I think that the existence of a shadowy off-board group who have an agenda to deramp Angus and do not admit to their membership of said group is simply not an honest way to go about things and decent people would not act in such a cloak and dagger way. Why do you not all simply come out of the cover of darkness and admit who you are and what you are doing? That would be the decent thing to do.

If you would like to simply state that you are not a member at then I will of course take your word for it and withdraw all accusations while making profuse apologies for my mistake.

The thing is though, I’m not wrong am I?

Thanks you for your evasive reply gkb47.

It would have been so easy for you just to say no you were not part of the anti-angus action group if this was the case, but the kind of answer you gave is one from a person who does not ant to say yes but cannot bring themselves to lie either.

So that is one AAAG member confirmed. I wonder when Alan will reply.

Thanks for that Ocelot but I would very much prefer to have it in his own words so there can be no misunderstanding. i have asked Alan the question several times and received no answer which I think speaks volumes. If either of them tell me that they are not then I will absolutely take their word for it, but if they are then why will they not be up front about it?

Jut to reiterate: "gkb47 are you part of the anti-angus action group?"

This looks like it has established a new trading range of between 210-280. I don't think that it will move out of this without news.