RE: Production = greater sales percentage to UKOG13 Mar 2020 16:45
Penguins I presume that UKOG (137/246) Ltd share is net of extraction costs but I cannot find it anywhere. I also presume that it has to pay from now on for exploration. However, I have looked many times and cannot find that it is liable for any costs. I could use your theory in that as it hasnt been mentioned in a RNS then they do not have to pay, but I wont.
Before today UKOG was receiving 77.9% of net as of today they are receiving at least 85.635%
YA are still holding plenty of shares at 0.5055p so I cant see them selling until they can get at least that, they will probably want more. I cant see them converting many in this volatile market at present either - to risky for them.
Telluran, will they really want a dollop of new shares on 31 March? If RBL is possible in the near term I would have thought they would be happy to defer the payment.
If and I agree that it is a big if. UKOG have someone who knows what they are doing re finance then RBL negotiations will be ongoing now with the amount dependent on the CPR. I can see RBL and a CPR being released in the same RNS.
StrollerB Well said. UKOG had a commitment of possible issuance of c.1Billion shares but only had the authority at that time to issue 717m. Therefore they called an EGM to grant further authority. I presume it called for 3Billion to give it plenty of wiggle room.
Wizard125 The significance of the RNS statement you quoted is that, unfortunately the oil sales is not Revenue but a negative cost. If it was Revenue then UKOG would be entitled to the Telluran 35% bit. As it is set off against costs we are not. The costs are also historic costs not just current. The whole purpose of the restriction is to stop Companies having a production licence via the back door (EWT)
Respected posters of this thread I think that there are possible ways to be punitive to Alba if wanted. Issue more shares, if Alba don't take them up then they are diluted. I have seen this done successfully and also seen it done and got messy. Solicitors saying it was only done to dilute when company doesn't need the money. This could easily be argued when HHDL is getting a significant income. Perhaps not enough to progress at the speed that UKOG want but still enough to progress.
Also why the presumption that UKOG want to get rid of Alba. They are providing the services of George Frangeskides for free.
Seadoc I think that you are looking for skeletons that dont exist. You previously suggested that there would be something in the HHDL accounts (which you expected) that would be unpleasant to UKOG. By you not coming out and showing us this red flag, are you saying it isnt there.
I also think that these accounts are over 16 months old and have no relevance to where we are now. To me annual accounts are of little relevance because they are historic (16 to 28 months in this case) and I make investment decisions based on current and future not past.
The skeletons arent there so I will quickly answer your points.
Loans to subsidiaries 23m v loan to parent 12m, there are other subsidiaries you know ie re BB
24. Commitments & Contingent Liabilities - it is a legal requirement to put this note in there arent any, the auditor agreed and signed these accounts off.
12 & 3 Not sure what you are after here but UKOG gets money by selling shares and lending it to to its subsidiaries.
Enjoy the rest of your day, I would stop looking at the accounts for something that isnt there but if you actually enjoy that sort of thing then crack on.
Seadoc You were constantly deramping about HHDL accounts suggesting that they would prove something nasty. The accounts are now published and in a lot more detailed than you could have thought they would be. Can you tell us what you think they show. Or was it an error on your account (again) like the £10m error you made on UKOGs full accounts.
Ewqwe1234 I think you do not understand the basis of investments and of AIM.
It is about future prospects not current position.
If you think that the Mcap should be based on its current position then it should be £Nil as it is currently making losses. But on that basis so should Fitbit before it was bought out and so should Tesla right now. I am not trying to say that UKOG are currently comparable but just showing your complete naivety.
BTW UKOG isnt producing 300bopd it is currently in an extended well test of a vertical well and a horizontal well. It also has planning permission for more wells.