Member Info for wealdpwr

When has Postalot ever been correct on Angs share price? He thought it was a bargain at 6p over a year go and encouraged all to keep buying as the share lost 96% of its value . He has never made a pence for anyone on this board except Lord Lucan and JTP. Does anyone know how many options have been issued at 1P or less?

Mirasol

Surely you think Alan2017 is far more important than Ocelot on this board? I'm glad his knowledge and analysis is ****ging off individuals that are across all spaces, left, right & centre.

GLA/ DYOR

HITS, The summer carnival is definitely in full swing on the ANGS bb. Per usual , on the last three run ups, dilution is next. River4themselves has an admirable operation, the slide is quite nice. If they could only give away stuffed bears.

GLA / DYOR

I pointed out Paddy's predicament six weeks ago. Yet he is still the Chair of Angs. The shoe only fits when there is a shadow director...

YL

Postalot has now admitted , not once but twice, JTP is in charge and has control of the company. For the past year he has stated otherwise. More deception from a simple shareholder.

What is curious is that these statements have no impact or reference the company's fundamental performance , hence its value to shareholders. All of these statements by Postalot does only one thing , soothe the egos of ANGS management. One has to ask why?

Maintain social distance and wash your hands before you DYOR

GLA

LLtm,

Look at any RNS / Lucan's interviews, there is not a single fact that I am aware of that supports Postalot's statement. Add in Mirasol's account, that SFB was shopped around to all the players.

Postalot said: "GL brought with him the Saltfleetby project, so it looks as if JT-P was seeking a change in the company's strategy."

Which is nonsense because on 23 April , Postalot quoted Lord Lucan:

"Originally, Saltfleetby was thought by my predecessor not to be worth the candle – to be treated as
an abandonment issue. Actually, when I first joined, that was still the technical team’s view. "

Why would a simple shareholder resort to being so deceptive? Perhaps the answer is that he is not a simple shareholder.

DYOR /GLA

Postalot

For reasons only you know, you keep trying to rewrite history . None of the facts support your case nor do you have any proof GL brought SFB with him.

Before this RNS , I wrote about Riverdance

ANGS: "The remaining GBP500,000 balance of the facility may be drawn down, subject to material adverse change and liquidity restrictions equally on 31 March and 30 June 2020"

One would think the current state of oil, the credit markets and non production by ANGS is indeed a material adverse change. Conversely it could be a material adverse change for Riverfort, hence a possibility we had no draw down in March. We don't know Riverfort's obligation. Why? I think rationally, Riverdance was not obligated to loan any more funds, given the oil collapse .

The company was likely running out of money and needed financing. KP was probably the lender of last resort as a placing would have been not possible in this crisis. KP has been there from the beginning and seems oblivious to the risks as their investment cratered.

The point regarding a ever present 'contradiction' does not reflect the facts. There is no hypocrisy by either YL or myself. Tidswell says he did nothing for 6 months and got paid. The company stated he was in charge of operations at Brockham and Balcombe. And it was Tidswell who promised via tweet big things at Brockham after he installed Lucan, which obviously had no merit at the time. It was then Tidswell who installed his lackey Lucan - see the requisition. Here you have Tidswell who does nothing and has an inordinate amount of power and control. Worse, he misled his shareholders and BOD about his share dealings. It is what happened and remains the case. Tidswell does nothing and holds the cudgel of requisition over Lucan. In fact, it is not a contradiction , it is the status quo. He remains a threat to everyone's holdings.
DYOR/ GLA

This obsession with YL is truly unhealthy ..

He brings legitimate facts, ideas and analysis to the table. Unlike some who cut and paste. Some say they are a 'simple shareholder' but I find that a stretch. As a simple shareholder you would rely on management and not the conversation on this BB to make the company valuable.. The idea this BB is hurting the shares of ANGS is self delusion. The only reason to fear this BB is if the members of the company are simply supporting their lifestyles on the back of Punters (ie JTP). You can't have a lifestyle if the Punters don't want to waste money on a company - your shares are worth sub 1p . The only thing that will make this company succeed is ANGS actually accomplishing real revenue, not the promise a year from now.. IMO it is fair to question whether that is even possible given the behaviour and decisions already taken... I can't see how a simple shareholder would find the JTP situation tolerable.

Postalot , let's not let interest, fees and daily expenses get in the way of your borrowed 'cash resources' a resource that depletes each day, shall we? Oh , and did you mention economic crisis and oil prices ? No? That's right, Lord Lucan said , it is not an issue.

More smoke...

As usual Postalot is playing with fantasy cash. Where does one suppose the real cash will come from to expand JTP’s empire on distant lands? Tax losses pays for nothing. Overseas means one thing only, dilution. If ANGS makes it that far. And right now , ignore the smoke and mirrors, burn rate is the true flame. This company will be forced to go private if they can’t get another loan and/or dilute further.

Postalot wrong per usual.

Whether YL invested now or based on your guidance he would still have nothing given zero revenue and a 96% decline in share price. . Why does he need to take the risk , given his sound reasoning? Your cut and paste changes nothing. Tough times, you need a paycheck, carry on.

One day, I do hope you too will get a pair and do the right thing. In the meantime, stay healthy.

Postalot

The question is not whether to 'risk' everything, the question is whether to risk anything. Your repeated response" since the 28/06/19 Brockham RNS" has been to risk something. And since the beginning , you have been quite wrong -strctly assessing the returns and decline. Very sensible authors on this board have made it clear, there are better investments out there, no one expects you to take that advice. In turn , sensible people will not take yours. But that won't stop you because it is not the sensible investor you're after.

Anyone recall:

"The remaining GBP500,000 balance of the facility may be drawn down, subject to material adverse change and liquidity restrictions equally on 31 March and 30 June 2020"

One would think the current state of oil, the credit markets and non production by ANGS is indeed a material adverse change. Conversely it could be a material adverse change for Riverfort, hence a possibility we had no draw down in March. We don't know Riverfort's obligation.

How will Lord Lucan pay everyone and polish his 'gem' if there is no revenue or essentially a lifeline from Riverfort? Perhaps a dip into 'ring fenced' funds and dilute the shares to make up for the shortfall. The clock is ticking.

Malcy interview was unsatisfying to say the least.

Croqman

You seem to be suggesting Lord Lucan is blind to this BB. And that a real act of character would be to directly post a question to essentially the company website’s BB. Neither of which are true.

A real act of character would be to eliminate the negative impact of JTP ‘s lifestyle position as head of business development. I’m sure all those keen to ensure JTP ‘s and Lord Lucan’s compensation will disagree no matter what is arguably common sense or happens in a real company. Let’s be honest, no one on this BB expects any real accountability from ANGs , let alone meaningful revenue anytime in the next year, if at all. No matter how much they have invested this year, lost or want to recover.

I'm sure Postalot understands that the approval of 5 + 6 is not good for PIs, at best it means further dilution. I'll let others speculate to what the worst case scenario is first, before offering my opinion, only to say that the worst case has been discussed on this board a few months ago ....

LOL!

Postalot , are you suggesting someone should invest in ANGS' because it has borrowed money or as you refer to it 'cash resources'?

" the current price offering a 20%-discount to the company's cash resources."

Sigh.

YL , it is curious how others have no self reflection as they promote , prodigiously, investment in a company that has lost apprx. 96% of its value in the same period.. that is true madness.