Member Info for WG818

Lol, Donk…. If you call dodging all the difficult questions, he did very well. …how much was the sidetrack again….and is there condensate being produced from SF7?

I especially liked his describing Angus as a “single asset company” in his introduction!!!

He might as well have confirmed that the previous 9 drills failed, a Donk, when explaining the difficult Geological conditions...lol.

Had to laugh At George not getting the over promising message in predicting flow rates again. Interesting that the Tax clawbacks from previous losses doesn’t appear to be available from Angus or Saltfleetby Energy.

He was a charmer! Was he part of your boiler room, I mean telegram group guys?

More like it had some highly incriminating information on it!!

Very impressive Lee! If only there were any greens or swampies on the BB who give a tupnytoss!
Perhaps with your potty mouth, and very poor come backs you’re actually not a big boy after all?

The filter button is there fore a reason big boy. Feel free to use it!

*120 barrels *

You don’t have to trust me baits. The NSTA publishes the figures supplied by Angus and they are legally bound to be correct. They are showing no where near 129 barrels of oil a day.
As for trusting Angus! Well just have a look at The Brockham figures. Not producing anything at present (not even water) and shows clearly that figures both RNS’d and via the Q&A where fantasy!

Thanks for posting that baits. As I said no mention of dry gas or other normally released information is there?

As for no water I suggest you have a look at the increased rate produced by SF4 from restart. If you’re keen enough you can work out that the claimed 120 barrels a day isn’t actually happening!

https://www.nstauthority.co.uk/data-centre/nsta-open-data/production/

I think what he may be insinuating is that SF7 may actually be producing water and that combined with SF4 the production equipment can’t handle it. Hence why he suggests examining what the RNS does not say. Like no mention of dry gas only, or condensate and water percentage. To be fair the Q&A giving a figure of only 8 To 10Mmscfd was a bit of a clue. If it’s water being produced that’s a big problem!

Crocqman
What else did you expect??
The company’s MO is to take a (let’s call then “distressed Assets” AKA clapped out) and present them as a missed gem. To be fair they came remarkably close with Saltfleetby by pure dumb luck as gas prices went beyond their wildest dreams!…… yet with breathtaking incompetence even managed to fail at this open goal opportunity!

Crocqman
Well the very obvious positive is the well appears successful. However not a successful as hoped for see the latest Q&A “there is clearly potential to produce at 8 to 10 mmscfd from the three wells” not the 12GL was predicting or the 14 that push2 predicted) If it reaches either 8 or 10 it may justify a re-rate. That is obviously off set by the uk natural gas price (again at a year’s low this morning 82p) (again Push2 told us it wouldn’t drop below £1) but most importantly by the drop of rate that the CPR the previous operator Wingas and And the company itself gave10/15% per annum. If they manage to get it flowing at a decent figure they should be ok once the massive debt is paid off for a year or so. You then need to consider that the lenders take 8% GROSS yes GROSS after 85% of the loan is paid from Saltfleetby.
They unfortunately have all the other “assets”that need investment or de-commissioning and that takes care of that money! Geothermal is a pipe dream in all likelihood, and a risk reward so awful few would be keen, and the Storage option had A £200 million price tag more than 10 years ago. As far as I’m aware they only have licenses for oil and gas extraction or geothermal so not storage so not sure how that works either?

So in answer to your question. Well done for getting the plant running the very day gas prices started to plummet, and getting the sidetrack producing as natural gas prices fall to yearly lows on a daily basis.That’s about as positive as I can be on the information available!

Thanks for admitting I know my stuff Howey. Now how exactly do you define “focus on the negative stuff “?……because in case you haven’t noticed the price is where it is for a reason, mainly being all that negative stuff i focus on!!
Absolutely no agenda other than passing my knowledge on so, yes “mug punters” those that a large majority of the sharks that post on BB are targeting !
Some truly awful examples like Adrian and his many many aliases, up to the highly believable like the one that departed earlier.
I’m not sure where you fit as you actually seem fairly rational. I suggest you have a look back at my history and accept I have largely been spot on!

Garwool1
A bit more research needed on by yourself?

The information I posted about the failed drill is actually the same well that we are waiting on results. The sequence of events that happened back then actually mirror what happened this time quite closely, and they have even drilled to a similar location west. It’s probably missed your notice but it actually failed at the point we are about to enter, “connection to the plant”!

Got to say I’m enjoying the fall out of the old boiler room crew! All obviously had a fall out when they turned on each other!! I thought you made £65 k profit on Angus Bates but yet you’re now poor but honest??
Out of interest what was push2’s previous name in your group?….

Morning Donk……..as you know it’s actually 11 now and number 12 is still not yet producing anything is it as yet?

Perhaps this explanation as to why a previous failure at SF7 occurred might explain the lack of an RNS?

“ The Saltfleetby 7 sidetrack was drilled from the B site towards the West, as can be seen in Figure 5 in the CPR (Structural Map of the Top of Westphalian Reservoir (Unit 2b)). The well was first perforated in the Brinsley Abdy formation, but failed to flow oil. Thereafter there was significant differential sticking in the Westphalian unit and the well was sidetracked to penetrate the Namurian C which was thinner than prognosed due to faulting, and so another sidetrack (SF07Y) was drilled into a thicker Namurian C sand. After completion and perforation in 2003 the well flowed 2.4 mmscf/d of gas on test. However, once the well was linked up to production equipment it became clear the reservoir had suffered some form of permeability impairment and the well gas rate was restricted."

Will you be selling them before they need to pay that £ 4 million plus next month then?

If you’re as truthful in your trading as you are in your telling this BB that you’re taking a break for 2 weeks, or signing off for the day or I won’t be posting for a couple of days, only to re-appear an hour later and post 10% of the days messages push, then maybe the mug punters shouldn’t trust you quite so much! £27 k you claimed to have made trading this wasn’t it!
Uk Natural gas down again this morning by the way!

Just as a reminder to all those who fall for our resident experts opinions on hedge payment (that have obviously been missed) and on the sidetrack not mattering if it’s a few days, week s, months late.

From the Annual accounts.

““It is also noted there is a catch-up derivative payment of £4,175k due in June 2023 which the group is forecast to meet however should there be a timing difference between cash inflows and outflows then Further funding may be required. The Directors have therefore identified a material uncertainty which may cast doubt over the Group's ability to continue as a going concern.”

That’s next month and they actually only scraped through the fist Hedge. The CPR gives a revenue figure of just £640k for that figure!!

So the information that became available yesterday and today only a confirms that previous Q&A answers, Interview’s and even RNS,s have actually at best been misleading and at worst, and a four letter word that isn’t permissible in parliament. (The opposite of being true).

Hopefully the new man in charge as hits says will turn the tide on the constant BS that his lordship has spouted, but as I suspect he has been appointed by the group of individuals concerned that In which hope the saying “ birds of a feather flock together” won’t be apt!

The other information is the NSTA production figures.

Again Brockham showing as not producing., Saltfleetby condensate being around half of that claimed by the company and water cut percentage up again!!

HTTPS://www.nstauthority.co.uk/data-centre/nsta-open-data/production/

Mr Singhie

Only fair to point out that UK natural gas fell this afternoon (after your post pointing out it had risen) to another yearly low and closed at 87.980.

As for your explanation. Well your assumptions regarding my views are as wrong as your constantly wrong guesses are. I have held this share from just after the IPO and have followed the RAMPs pump and dumps, constant management incompetence and share dealing scandals, Appointments to the board of highly questionable individuals on both suitability and in the ex chairman’s case installed during a scandal at a PLC he was involved heavily, the drilling of the wrong well, the £12 million loan they didn’t need, the Balcombe purchase that crashed thee share price, the dozens of RNS,s that turn out incorrect, the comedy interviews by both mr Vonk and his Lordship ( available from links here) in which literally everything they told us turns out to be cobblers, and most recently the 2 year overrun to build the plans at £25 million more than they told us and the now over 6 month drill which has diluted the company by nearly 2billion shares.
Absolutely nothing to do with me being a greeny because I’m most definitely not!