Member Info for WG818

A Simple question Ocelot.

If they manage to secure this £12 million to replace the existing loans, how exactly are they planning on paying for the £9 million worth of unavoidable costs for the upgrades and new well listed in the CPR for next year?

And just for good measure the CPR clearly shows the flow dropping off to around 7MMSCF for a large portion of next year!

More comedy gold. The senior debt seems to have risen from the August CPR, and doesn’t include the October payment!……and he seems to have forgotten that they have £9 million in expenses listed just for Saltfleetby next year (accelerator string, £700k,booster compressor, £2.6 million, well SF9 £5.7 million) and they only need £12 million now???erm …how is he proposing paying for that lot?….and not forgetting mr Forrest’s £5.2 million due by early 2025!!

Balcombe will need to blow the bloody doors off, or it’s curtains (it won’t) and what about the other “hahum”assets that need de-com or a couple of million each??

He seems to have forgotten that lot! ……I’m sure a prospective lender wouldn’t have missed it!

Oofy

If you read the RNS regarding the £6 million bridge loan, it states that

“ Alternatively, the Company and the Lenders, by mutual consent, may either agree to extend the bridge facilities until the Saltfleetby Field cashflows can be utilized for debt service or, convert part or whole of the Bridge Facility into shares at a 25% discount to the 30 day VWAP, subject to a floor of 0.4p/share, ”

So they can convert only a part if they wished. And 25% below 0.4p is 0.3 p isn’t it?? Would the 300 million warrants also fall to this price if that’s what happens?

Actually bridge, the only thing that those resolutions have changed is the fact that they could now convert the next £6 million if they had too.

Funny how they didn’t mention the 3rd resolution in those RNS,s isn’t it?…….Didn’t they mention that Kemexion were also waiting for the reservoir re-modeling to be completed also.

Just to remind you again that the RNS covering the “proposed” Refinancing mentioned the facet that is the hedges were cut(which they have been) that could act as an alternative to the re-financing!….don’t hold your breath as they have nothing to gain from supplying the money until January anyway!

I can see why some on here want the Kimmeridge fairytale kept alive as you made good money convincing mug punters that the experts were wrong , and fat 10 gallon wearing Australians and sacked and descraced directors were the ones to trust!!…..how’s that gone?

Link to the planning.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjDkPGesPOBAxVNgf0HHedmDg4QFnoECB4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwestsussex.planning-register.co.uk%2FDocument%2FDownload%3Fmodule%3DPLA%26recordNumber%3D1635%26planId%3D43947%26imageId%3D614%26isPlan%3DFalse%26fileName%3DHydrological%2520Risk%2520Assessment%2520and%2520covering%2520letter.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2Wad6gz3sBzLmbM17ZllaR&opi=89978449

Erm…..the cost for the Balcombe test 30 months is £6.6 million and all at Angus expense until oil is proven commercially viable.

The site needs upgrading!! It’s all in the planning documents!

Noel

If you take a look at the recent CPR page 67 it gives details on the Loan.

When the Company says Accelerated loan repayment, I think what they are referring to is the minimum distribution to licensees if profit of £600k pcm. That would tally with what has been paid back so far.

It also says the overriding Royalty interest @ 8% kicks in after 85% of the loan is repaid. This is Angus, but it would be hard to imagine even the incompetent previous Lord Melton Mowbray would think paying a 16% loan by borrowing at 20% to pay it back faster (only to get to the Paying The 8% royalty was a good idea)

Offy

The RNS relating to the £6 million bridge loan gives details on the accompanying 300 million warrants.

When they converted the £3million at 0.66 the price of the warrants also fell to 0.66.

“The warrant strike price will adjust to the price of any equity issued during the term of the Bridge facility”

If they need another raise or Aleph/kemexon decide to convert only a percentage of the £6 million at a lower rate the warrant price would again drop pressumably to whatever the price falls to?

Bridgedog

You’re talking rubbish again. The RNS gives you details on this! The share price was 066 when they converted! …..nothing to do with a placing from a couple of years ago!

Bridgedog

On August the 1st, the date the COR is based on, Angus had a £9million bridge loan fully known to OIL the authors of the report. No assumptions needed to be made, they were facts that Angus presumably didn’t want included in the sums they did?

No reference was made to them in either the calculations, material risks, or the notes at the bottom of the individual pages. Take the partial payment of the original loan for example listed for September.

Bridgedog

My original point was that, as far as I can see, no one had mentioned that the “Global financial package” not being included in the CPR. Either in the actual figures, which as you point out wouldn’t require them, or in the material risk section and associated caveats to the report.

After all oil would have been aware of the £9 million bridge loans Angus 1st August when the report is dated but didn’t include that in the figures or even mention it!

Ditto the upbeat RNS relating to release of the CPR fails to mention the outstanding bridge loan or hopped for finance package isn’t included in the figures.

They do have form for this. When the Original CPR was released they even gave guidance on what they thought the share price should be. Unfortunately it was a total scam as they knew at that point that the figures they supplied to the Author the report were fictitious. How do i know that? Because they were in talks at the time with a well known bank for the £12 million loan!……And as Lord Melton Mowbray would say”10 minutes on Google” would have told them the figures were farcical!

Bridgedog

I take it you haven’t bothered to read the CPR then?

If you had you would have spotted that they mentioned changes in circumstances such as the new Compressor being delayed until October.

If a small change like that was inserted, surely a $25 million dollar loan warranted a mention, don’t you think?? …..it’s kind of important!!

So trying to keep the conversation about Angus as LSE rules dictate. The only relevance to Brexit and Angus is this from May 2020.

“ We have extended the bidding deadline well into May in order to accommodate some of the issues surrounding Covid-19. Whilst the market for such equipment is global, procurement into the European Union is not a simple affair and even procurement from within the Union is demanding in terms of the paperwork which must ultimately certify the origin of kit and its compliance with CE standards. Most bidders are experiencing some delays internally and anticipating others externally but overall the Company believes that delivery and construction during the latter half of Q4 is a realistic target with first gas to follow shortly thereafter.

This was the first clue that it wasn’t going to be built with the £2.5 million they were given to do so. In fact it’s about £50 million now.

The CE mark was has just been replaced by a UKCA mark, at great expense and absolutely zero benefit to uk business.

The interesting thing is that the cheerleading squad here aren’t mentioning the fact that the second hand equipment mentioned above, seems to be malfunctioning again. It’s monthly now!?

Little talk of the Eye watering CPR with its £20 million costs just to stand still!….or the fact that the re-financing figures aren’t even included.

Obviously if they convert at that price 0.3p , they would own more than 50% and have taken control without anyone being able to stop them.

Oofy

It’s difficult to see why the lenders of the hedge won’t be thinking our best bet is to drop the price as low as the RNS suggests and convert the £6 million @ 0.3p as it suggests they can.

They will have the less than favourable CPR just released , the costs for the legacy “ha hum assets” at least £2 million each, and the abandonment costs for all 4 sites. ( I noticed the Saltfleetby de-comm costs had risen dramatically in the recent CPR) they would be taking on to counter that position however.

Perhaps they are slightly up the food chain when it comes to storage information than your average mug punter.

Time will tell but highly unlikely to be favourable to your average pi!

Oofy

That 8% is Gross on sales from Saltfleetby isn’t it.

Being as it’s the gross figure, not sure if they will get hit by the tax levy, or if the sales count as the hedge portion for the next couple of years or the daily spot price.

If Angus were only making an 8% margin in a couple of years time if gas prices fall to historic averages that would be interesting?

Highlyy unlikely that if the “Global Finance facility” ever materialised there wouldn’t be a similar cost applied to that much higher loan also…I mean why wouldn’t they want the same terms?

On that note. The sharper eyed amongst you may have noticed the wording in the paragraph regarding the “proposed” Global finance. And the reference to the hedge facility being restructured being an alternative to the global refinancing facility.

As they converted that £3 million and re-structured the hedge, is the said facility now dead?

Hits

Yes, Lord Melton Mowbray told some whoppers in his time as the “pen holder”

Some of my personal favourites were

“we won’t be rushing to market for finance” despite having been looking for the £12 million for at least 3 months when he took the interview.

First gas won’t go more than a few hours beyond the July 1st deadline before the hedge kicked in for production to start…

That only cost a minimum £10million minimum.

All those Twitter clips and interviews confirming that all the Saltfleetby works were fine….only 300 welds to do, all skids on site….compressor on way.

Only for drone footage proving it was all made up!

Completely inaccurate production RNS’s for Brockham, ditto Q&A answers.

Claiming the plant would be producing 14mmscf…..when it is designed for 10Mmscf and the CPR gust confirmed that’s all it’s capable of handling.

Actually , pretty much everything he told us actually…just watch any interview given.

On another subject.

Looks like compressor trouble again on site looking at that production figure.

I’m not sure what you have been reading bridgedog, but it’s definitely not the CPR from yesterday.

more than £30 million needed to fulfil getting all the sites up and running to what we have been previously and currently advised!

Best you buy some new batteries for your calculator!

My mistake. Page 64

Remaining CAPEX assumptions for cash flow forecasts.

2024

P90…….£8.5 million

p50…….£8.1 million

So they have assigned the well SF 9 into next year’s costs.

So add another £2 million for Balcombe minimum, if they decide to proceed! Listen carefully to what he actually says Ocelot, and a couple of million each for Brockham and Lidsey, ditto if they proceed with the “asset’s”

Looks like that “Global finance package” may be a bit short.

And all in the year that they will only be marginally beating the hedge!!

So it becomes absolutely obvious why Push2 disappeared and re-emerged as Bubblepoint.

What he posted has turned out to be largely cobblers when you actually read the CPR. Of course it also explains why he prefers not mentioning it and posts platitudes.

Almost as much BS came from Push 2 as came from Lord Melton Mowbray.

Come to that the lack of comment on the highly illuminating CPR is surprising to say the least……it’s obvious that the cheerleaders don’t want to discuss it.

Even the interview isn’t exactly inspiring.

Fair play to mr Herbert. He is at least seemingly trying his best and not blatantly misleading like his predecessor. Even the CPR figures seem plausible now.

Accelerator string for A4…..£700k

Booster compressor £2.6 million

Both costs for next year!!! That compressor price has increased by £2 million from the last CPR!!

Both new wells at a cost of £5.7 million each??!!

Then you have the drop off page 58 which falls to 6.5 MMscfd from 8.5 at present early next year!!

The condensate figures they RNS’d also turn out to be completely fictional….I guess they must have included that water cut as I suggested.

And just for good measure the plant is running at more or less design capacity, and oil recommends dropping production to extend the lifespan on a couple of the carton graphs.

And if it get’s over 23c the collers can’t handle the heat and they are limited on production!

Pressure dropping off rapidly…….the list goes on!