Member Info for StarBright

Moroccoknows, a quick look shows you have about double my post volume... And that you haven’t contributed much in terms of thoughtful/original analysis or content in any of your 396 posts in the last 30 days.

I am humbled by your last sentence though big man!

WiFi - your numbers are very much in line with mine posted last night. Therefore clearly not codswallop at all... ;>

“HH at 3000bopd could generate £30m+ of EBITDA for UKOG, perhaps in itself supporting a valuation between £180m and £300m, or an SP between 3p and 5p. That would be a huge uplift for even recent investors.”

moroccoknows doesn’t know the difference between valuation and price. In the long run, hard earnings (specifically distributable cash flow) will overcome the swings of sentiment. You need to understand and have a feel for both in order to invest successfully. I am happy to be a buyer and holder whilst valuation < price, and this hasn’t always been the case with this company so recent developments are welcome. Others may enjoy success buying on sentiment and momentum alone, but perhaps not in the long run.

It was previously my opinion that postings here do not affect the SP, but I revised my view after the 10 September RNS. Within minutes of that being posted, we saw a spam-storm of:

“Get them brochures on order: 2nd homes, Luxury cars, Exotic holidays, Rolex's. Paying the mortgage off first could be the order of the day. Lambo's and Rarri's for the high value investors.”...

Also posts on the need to act immediately: “...might have to be very quick etc..."

My view is that these comments were made by traders and targeted cynically at the many inexperienced investors who visit this site. The traders fuelled the short term spike we saw, and profited at the expense of those that were sucked in and spiked. Anyone counselling caution (as the Portland news was evidently well priced in) was lambasted as a swampy, shorter, de-ramper etc. For some reason this is a share that provokes an emotional engagement - frequently expressed in terms of national pride etc - that seems to make it even more sensitive to sentiment than would ordinarily be the case. There are posters here who have learned to manipulate this to their advantage, and I expect we’ll see the same pattern on Monday. Traders have had the opportunity to rebuild their positions at or around the 2p level, and will seek to ramp this as hard as they can in order to get a profitable short term exit.

In the end there is no lasting impact on the price. Investors with longer time horizons can look through the noise, but the short term volatility that is propagated here serves only the interests of those responsible for it.

Not aimed at you at all Sting69. Targeted at the “Lambos, Rolexes and Ferraris” frequent offenders.

It’s impossible to answer unequivocally at this point as we know neither the company’s current position or the development cost with any certainty.

But with a credible plan and a strong CPR it may be possible to organise any financing that is required without significant dilution. This might be achieved through a combination of debt and equity, with the equity not needing a massive discount to be placed.

Raising finance for accretive projects is a good thing!

The planning application hasn't been made yet. The document you have linked to is a request to the planning authority to be explicit on what they will require with respect to environmental considerations when the full application is submitted.

Please - either read the document you have linked, or my earlier post above. Both explain this clearly.

JBG - the submission you have linked isn't the planning application. See my earlier post in this thread at 08:05 for an explanation.

Sting69 - that’s a good observation.

The “spiked and spiteful” contingent should direct their anger toward the “spikers” who have been successful in ramping up previous spikes on news. They are very much still here and will be looking for personal profits at others expense on Monday morning.

If you believe that the Weald oil story is credible then long-term holding of a carefully sized allocation to the various companies with Weald exposure is the best strategy. It’s important not to get spiked as may here seem to have found to their cost. And don’t make the mistake of thinking that the most enthusiastic and uncritical rampers have your interests at heart....

The company has already RNS’d it’s intent to make a planning application. From the 10th September RNS:

“A planning application for long term production is planned to be submitted to Surrey County Council shortly, prior to the completion of the forthcoming Kimmeridge EWT programme.”

This isn’t the planning application itself - see earlier post - but it is a step in the process. Very much business as usual.

The document is HHDL’s request to the planning authority to state in writing what will be required in the Environmental Statement that will form part of a planning application.

It is an “ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT SCOPING REQUEST REPORT“ (caps not mine, copied from the doc!).

It contains the following explanation as to its purpose:

“Based on information acquired to date, once operational, the Site could briefly produce in excess of 500 tonnes of petroleum per day for commercial purposes, the threshold at which the proposal becomes a “Schedule 1 development”3 which means it is “EIA development”4 and must be supported by an Environmental Statement (ES).

A person who is minded to make an “EIA application” may ask the relevant planning authority to state in writing its opinion as to the scope and level of detail to be provided in an ES5. Such a request must include:
i. a plan sufficient to identify the land.
ii. a brief description of the nature and purpose of the development, including its location and technical capacity.
iii. an explanation of the likely significant effects of the development on the environment.
iv. such other information or representations as the person making the request may wish to provide or make.

Purpose of this Report
This Report has been prepared by Zetland Group on behalf of HHDL. It has been the subject of careful consideration and informed professional opinion. It focuses upon the environment impacts likely to be significant in isolation, combination and when considered cumulatively with other relevant proposals and operational developments. It records the methodology to be adopted within each environmental topic and proposes a proportionate and appropriate level of assessment to inform an accurate and complete Scoping Opinion.”

JayKay - I wouldn’t worry about any of that, but if I were mistaken for ifonly I’d be heartbroken...!

Great effort nomlungu!

The document says:

“Based on information acquired to date, once operational, the Site could briefly produce in excess of 500 tonnes of petroleum per day for commercial purposes,”

and

“Production could exceed 500 tonnes of oil per day which will require a peak flow of up to 16 two-way oil tanker movements per day but this will reduce with reservoir depletion.”

and

“During production (phase 3) the Site becomes fully operational and produced oil will be exported by way of 16 tanker collects per day for a period up to 20 years. This amounts to an average of 1 tanker collection every 45mins within standard operating hours; a flow rate which is not significant.”

As previously posted, 500 tonnes is about 3600 barrels. This is consistent with 16 tankers

No worries JayKay.

Monday will be interesting. The usual suspects are saddling up even as we speak...

JayKay - the “just” in your sentence is yours not mine. Please take care to own your own interpretations.

I have set out before my thoughts on the potential for HH and UKOG. I am equally dismissive of the “duster” brigade and the “national significance” crew with its associated rampers. We’re simply not going to see hundreds of tankers daily in this part of the country, and the pipeline conversation just seems fanciful. So low(er) impact production at a scale fundable without huge capex has seemed the most likely operating model to me for some time. If you can be bothered to dig back through my posts you’ll find me outlining this whenever the few remaining posters here interested/capable of discussing valuation have convened.

HH at 3000bopd could generate £30m+ of EBITDA for UKOG, perhaps in itself supporting a valuation between £180m and £300m, or an SP between 3p and 5p. That would be a huge uplift for even recent investors.

The full document is worth a read as it appears to outline the companys thinking on what a fully operational HH might look like. 6 producing wells on a low profile site, requiring 16 tankers a day at peak production.

The timing of the filing is obviously interesting too given the ongoing EWT process. I wonder if it was understood that the document would be placed in the public domain so shortly after receipt?

Swampy explosion incoming. I’m looking forward to drillordrop’s coverage already...

? The prospective applicant is named as HHDL.

This discussion should be in the original thread started by DrRich who found the document on the Reigate & Banstead planning portal...

Multiple threads make useful discussion much harder to follow.

He’s already posted it on this board too...

No need for you to repeat.

"The prospective applicant anticipates that, at peak, production could achieve rates in excess of 500 tonnes of oil per day."

500 Tonnes = 3,676 barrels

"The prospective applicant(Horse Hill Developments Limited) intends to apply for planning permission for the drilling of four new hydrocarbon wells (adding to the two existing wells on-site), one produced water reinjection well and the subsequent installation of six surface mounted pumps (one pump per oil producing well); the construction of a process and storage area and tanker loading facility on land to the east of the existing well site to accommodate 7 oil storage tanks (capacity of 1,300 barrels per tank), 2 fire water tanks, 2 produced water tanks, an enclosed ground flare, an oil heater with an exhaust stack, 4 gas-to-power electricity generators within acoustic enclosures, oil separators, above ground pipe and cable tracks and ancillary development enabling production of hydrocarbons from six wells for a period of twenty years followed by decommissioning and site restoration.

The prospective applicant has indicated their intention to provide an Environmental Statement alongside the application for planning permission that is to be made in respect of the proposed drilling of an additional four wells at the established Horse Hill Well Site (Planning Permission RE10/2089 and Planning Permission RE16/02556/CON), the installation of equipment and infrastructure necessary to the production of hydrocarbon, and the extraction of hydrocarbon from the Portland Sandstone and Kimmeridge Limestone members. The anticipated operational life of the well site would be 20 years, subsequent to which it would be decommissioned and the site restored. The prospective applicant anticipates that, at peak, production could achieve rates in excess of 500 tonnes of oil per day.

The existing well site extends to some 2.08 hectares, which area would be increased under the proposed development to some 2.6 hectares. The additional land that would be brought within the developed area is located immediately to the east of the established well site. The well site is situated on land that forms part of an active farm, and subsequent to the decommissioning of the wells would be restored and placed in aftercare for a period of 5 years. Access to the well site is gained from the east, off Horse Hill (D332), which links to the A217 (Reigate Road) to the south and north."