Member Info for StarBright

That’s an easy question. The placing - whilst at a 4p discount - was only for a small number of shares, so its dilution impact was limited to 1.7% (£170 on a £10k holding). As so often with AIM resource companies popular on bulletin boards, the knee-jerk herd saw only the word “placing” and lacked the knowledge to understand that this was no big deal. MM’s saw the opportunity and helped themselves to shares from indiscriminate sellers. Cooler heads have now prevailed, and the MM’s have profited by selling those very same shares at higher prices today. This buying has driven the price higher. Next....

SP has been at this level (roughly 2.1p +/- 0.3p) since the announcement of the EWT programme back in June. Even allowing for the activities of the day/swing traders, it's been pretty stable. I think that investors have sized their positions, and are waiting for news. They are not so much buying on dips or selling little spikes now. SOLO look to have had a tougher time moving theirs on than they perhaps expected, but must be getting closer now.

The last few RNS's have perhaps allowed reality to catch up, and UKOG is a better investment proposition today than it has been at 2p in the past. Those of us who believe in the potential of the Weald project can just hold...

I don't think a merger is likely. It's not that long ago that Mr Sanderson issued a statement criticising Mr Vonk for his public discussion of whatever happened at Broadford Bridge...

“We respectfully suggest that, given Mr Vonk has no access to specific technical information to support his spurious claims regarding our Broadford Bridge discovery, it was unwise to comment publicly on such matters. Instead of casting aspersions on UKOG’s activities, Mr Vonk might be wiser to devote his time and public comments towards explaining the seemingly poor results of Angus’ programme at Lidsey and the regulatory issues at Brockham, which we understand from media reports, are unresolved.”

If it was to happen, then it would be usual and efficient for the larger company (by market cap, clearly UKOG at present) to acquire the smaller one. This might well be described as a merger, with care given to semantics, management roles etc. However the substance would be that ANGS would agree to be acquired by UKOG (let's leave acceptance criteria etc for another day) for a price that would be satisfied by the issue of UKOG shares in exchange for ANGS shares at a fixed ratio. UKOG would issue new shares for this, so yes the number of shares in issue would increase. However, UKOG's net assets would also increase as would the company's opportunity set. If the pricing was right, and the market bought the narrative, then the original UKOG shareholders wouldn't lose out.

7.5x is spot on as the multiple in an EV/EBITDA calculation for a company like UKOG. I’m happy to support this with industry comparatives if necessary.

Don’t confuse E as in EBITDA with the E in a P/E ratio. They are two quite different things. EBITDA (as estimated by Rodders74) deliberately excludes DEVEX, CAPEX, SG&A, Interest costs, Tax etc. That’s why the multiples applied are lower.

You can’t apply the multiplier from a P/E ratio to an EBITDA figure.

Careful EOTP - the last time I suggested a doubling of the SP within 6 months was possible, I was set upon for de-ramping...

Rodders - your first calc looks good to me, although your 7.5x is an EV/EBITDA multiple not a P/E. What you have used is consistent with industry norms.

You can't use a P/E number like that quoted for CEU though. Not the same E! E in EBITDA can be calculated as you have, in which case 7.5x is good. If you want to use E as in earnings (different as its after DEVEX, CAPEX, SG&A etc - I didn't make up the confusing terms...) then you need to calculate it differently. I don't think we yet have enough information to do this yet. Doesn't bother Mr Vonk though....

22m new shares at a 4p discount. Market cap £53m. Dilution impact is 1.7%, £170 if you own £10k.

I don't think that's a big deal. If they are successful - as most (but not all) investors in the Weald story hope, it will be quickly forgotten.

allthatguff is one the money. This placing looks like it was agreed a little while back, and possibly interrupted by the leak. As they needed the money there'll have had no opportunity to go back and say "but our SP has risen". 1.7% dilution impact, just 22m shares = no big deal, no one has been "shafted".

DHC that is - I'm afraid - just wishful thinking.

The good news for holders is that there aren't many new shares. Dilution impact is only 1.7%.

Dilution impact is 0.04*22,222,222 / 53m = 1.7%

If you hold £10k it's cost you £170.

Yanis2005 - they'll have known about it because someone (probably at one of the "institutions" approached by Stockdale) broke the terms of the NDA that will have been signed, probably in return for a similar favour in the opposite direction next time the opportunity presents itself. Once your broker is doing the rounds for a placing and the list of people on the inside lengthens, it is very very hard to keep the lid on. Not great, but that's how it works...

*ponzi

Please no more on this. It is totally off topic.

And if a moments thought doesn't tell you that this should be dismissed as it will inevitably turn out to be a ponsy scheme of some sort, then I respectfully suggest that investing in AIM resource stocks isn’t for you.

Yanis2005 - the problem for Angus (or any company where there are media/online rumours) is that to put out a denial creates an awkward precedent. The next time there are rumours, you have to issue another denial as not to do so will now be interpreted as a confirmation. One day your company will be need a little bit of quiet space - for example to work on a placing or an acquisition - but you won’t get this if you’ve allowed denials to become the norm. So the usual practice for listed companies is simply to say that they don’t comment on rumours and speculation. Whilst this can be frustrating and tough in the short term (believe me - I have been there!) it is usually the best policy. Sometimes, companies can be forced to speak because a “false market” has been created, or - with respect to takeovers etc - because they are instructed to do so by the Panel. It is also true that investors generally prefer management to concentrate on managing their businesses not the share price; it is normal for there to be periods where the price is out of line for whatever reason. In the long run this is not an issue that affects investors, even if it winds up short-term traders...

Agreed. If the oil is there and flowing it makes sense to take as much as they are permitted, using as many days as they have to do this.

Sadly not roganjt. But rest assured, someone will be along soon after the race to tell you that they did just that...

argus1 - I am neither a geologist nor an oiler, but wouldn't such a test result prove only the connection of the KL3 and KL4 layers in the vicinity of the HH site?

I think the underlying points made in this thread - that the testing programme is likely to have been flexed by results, and that they'll want to complete the work properly - are spot on.

9 RNS's in the last couple of months.

Looking at your post history I think you are more likely to find the instant gratification you seek by going to Ladbrokes.

That would put them at close to 40% of all sells since the RNS, which seems unlikely. I expect they are still holding some. Perhaps they are hoping for another spike to sell into?

Sorry - 1mil not 200k.