Member Info for Thorpedo

Ninvestor
If you bought at 6p and sold half at 9.5p your average is 2.5p you are not 85% down on that. Also to be 85% on 6p the current SP would have to be 0.5p. I think you must have made up some numbers and didnt get your boss to check them for you before posting.

Mirasol
I agree that the Farm out and JOA are separate agreements, it is just that the later one says that costs are shared. Therefore the presumption is that it supersedes the FOA.

The FOA was for the drill (which was completed in 2014) and a flow test. Flow Testing ended in 2016.

Penguins
The Joint Operating Agreement in 2014 postdates the Farmout Agreement which was to drill and flow test HH-1 only. (in 2014)
From the Joint Operating Agreement in 2014
"All risk, obligations, losses, damages, liabilities and associated expenses incurred in or arising out of the conduct under the joint operations shall be borne by the participants in proportion to their respective participating interests in PEDL246. The
operator is required to obtain and maintain all necessary insurance regarding the PEDL246 operations. The cost of the insurance is borne equally by the participants."

Costs are split and have been since 2014 - simple.

See his post at 16:05 today, he values Portland at £69m.

Personally I have it calculated at higher.

Mirasol
and when was the JOA? Sometime in 2014. Even Penguin agrees that. Read the Admissions Document.

If each party can sell its own share of the oil separately then who pays the operating costs?

Penguins
"Thorpedo,

I have read the re-admission document and as you point out ' Its about sharing costs not a free carry'.....precisely."

Glad we agree then.

Penguins
If you are reading the "Re-admission Document" then please read on to the bit further to the bit about the "Joint Operating Agreement" dated sometime in 2014 (after the Farmout Agreement) Its about sharing costs not a free carry,

From the Joint Operating Agreement is 2014
"All risk, obligations, losses, damages, liabilities and associated expenses incurred in or arising out of the conduct under the joint operations shall be borne by the participants in proportion to their respective participating interests in PEDL246. The
operator is required to obtain and maintain all necessary insurance regarding the PEDL246 operations. The cost of the insurance is borne equally by the participants."

Mirasol
So you are guessing then, based on your misplaced interpretation of the term free carry.

Free Carry means no cash outlay not that once the project turns good that the capital expenditure wont be recovered out of the profits.

It makes commercial sense for both parties the way that everything is the way that the deal is. Loans that are repayable out of profits.

Penguins
You say that loan by its shareholders - do you think it would be any different if the loan was from a bank?

Where anywhere does it say that the costs arent revoverable? Where is the turnover going to go once HH is in production. HHDL.

Penguin
Unfortunately, not true. "Carried" is not a legal term.

I am not sure what Seadoc is on about with the Novation of Loans. This is a good thing for UKOG. Once HHDL starts producing later this year the profits will go to repay the loans (to UKOG) before splitting any profits with Tellurian. So UKOG will receive 77.9% of the first production profits.

Ibug
Please stop wasting everyone's time the reason for the 50.635% and 46.735% quotes from yourself is because UKOG acquired some more shares in HHDL thus upping its interest.

HHDL receives 100% of all tanker money. It uses it to offset the costs of HHDL ie testing costs, delivery costs, planning permission costs and future drill cost of Horse Hill which HHDL is 100% liable for. Ukog has a liability to pay 77.9% for HHDL's costs. Therefore any money in to HHDL reduces any money Ukog would have to pay by 77.9%.

Ukog is fully funded for HHDL future expenditure so any tanker money in means that Ukog saves 77.9%.

Seadoc
Leave the cash figures to your chums who may have some credibility left you stated on 27th of Jube 2019 "Ninetais, The £3.5m is already spent and the funding call is nigh. I prefer a bit of wind, she is a wide and heavy boat very safe with force11 up the chuff but she does go well in a few knots with the wind ahead of beam."

So only £10m+ out.

Penguins
Someone has sent the deramping wordsmith who can read a set of accounts over.

Agreed that there was a £3.9m over six months for "exploration and evaluation assets"but this includes the cost of purchasing other companies share of HHDL (I cannot see it anywhere else in the CF) as none of these one off costs have occurred since 31 March surely you agree they cannot be included in the running costs. Similarly the cost of producing the PP report was a major cost the updating will be a cost but not of the same proportion.

The income in the interims for 6 months was £1.773m so I believe that 4/6ths of that is a reasonable estimate.

You are also very cleverly mixing costs and cash outgoings to suit. Decrease in trade and other payables means that we (Ukog) paid £1.232m more than it actually spent. It was cash rich in the period so it paid off creditors over and above that what it spent. No-one with any intellect would consider this as an ongoing cashburn - do you?

One day I will DM you so as to understand why you do what you do (obviously professionally) as I cannot work out your angle. If/When (I admit there is still an if) this comes good will and how will you have made money?

Seadoc
What utter Balls your making up figures again, it will have plenty of cash still. Remember just before the 31 March Interims came out you said it would have no cash, but instead it had £7.2m plus it received £3.5m since then plus a probable additional £1.2m from oil receipts from HH and the Company should be in a health cash position.

As the running costs are only about £300K per month then the cash position should be about £10m.

Ibug
You seem to have plenty of time - you have been on here since 9:30 this morning.

No inclination to or just cant link to anything that shows you being correct - thought not.

"HHDL is now a subsidiary of Ukog albiet the two companies are independent" - You cant have an independent subsidiary it is owned by UKOG ffs. SS is MD of both Companies House shows that UKOG is the person of significant control of HHDL https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08808553/persons-with-significant-control - independent my arse.

Ibug
I have can you please link me to the point you are getting wrong.

I would actually be happy for you to be right (although your not) as this would mean that in the test period in the six month to 31 March 2018 test production was well over the one tanker a day (even accounting for shut downs and workovers) as reported in the accounts. https://www.ukogplc.com/ul/Unaudited%20results%20for%20the%20six-month%20period%20ended%2031%20March%202019.pdf if you look on Page 8 of 9 its shows cash in flow from "Receipts from sale of test volumes to be £1,773,000 or about $12,664 a day equivilent to about one tanker per day (£1,773,000*1.3$/£ /182days)

So your suggestion means that if UKOG only receive 50% then actual income is double this which is more than 2 tankers a day.

Ibug
Ukog don't get 79% nor 50% they get $Nil HHDL get 100% which they use to offset drilling and operating cost. This means ukog don't have to contribute the 79% that the revenue has reduced for any cash calls

So effectively they save Ukog 79% if some want to say that 79% is credited to ukog then whilst not factually correct it is practically correct.

Btw ukog is also fully funded for any costs it may need for the drills.

Wow Penguins
You really do a lot of reading and work to try and deramp this share.

As yet BB and HH Kimmerage havent been declared as Commercial (It is in RNSs) therefore they are sub-commercial. Once the CPR comes out then I believe they will be Commercial, but until then they are sub-commercial. The terminology is just a simple use of English. It may be better for you to take an English lesson than spend hours upon hours going over everything Ukog has produced with a fine tooth-comb.

You pays your money, you takes your chance.