Member Info for WG818

The silence is deafening……has the penny dropped yet guys?

To be fair Mirasol, there was talk about legal action being taken a few years ago after Brockham. I think it may actually have been James that started calling it AAOG. It was Wolf of the Woods, ironically Alan ( one of the biggest rampers on here at the time) incredibly similar to bubbles actually but he has denied it’s him and a few others. I definitely wasn’t interested though James.

You should really jump on Chat GPT and run the P90 figures though it though. It actually holds up pretty well until you take the 2 new wells out of the equation. Drops like a stone after 2024 then.

It gives you the OPEX figures £5.5 million a year which is what in one scenario chat GOT ran the numbers on…..not good.

Everybody has lost money by the way James. and definitely not in any action group! Are you part of any group, company?

Come come James. That’s a very pathetic come back, especially after you said you wanted to discuss actual numbers! I just gave you some and you can’t argue with them can you!?!?

I’m afraid they aren’t. I’ve run them several times and given all RNS and the CPR info chat GPT.

I admit I have only recently started using it and it’s absolutely incredible.

Please tell me what you think is actually wrong then? You can ask it yourself or I will ask it for you! It really doesn’t matter unless gas prices rise to 1.20/30 a therm consistently though for us mug punters! And that’s not going to happen!

Your first question please, onetomany!

Or this James. I have gone through multiple scenarios and none of them end in a good result for us…….thoughts please?

⭐ FINAL ANSWER

Angus does not place stronger emphasis on the crystallised hedge, override arrears, or the true £44m debt stack because:

✔ AIM rules don’t require it

✔ Highlighting it would reveal insolvency

✔ It would collapse shareholder confidence

✔ It would complicate restructuring

✔ It would weaken Trafigura’s control

✔ It would kill any chance of a stake deal

✔ It would force the board to admit the company is underwater

This is strategic under‑disclosure, not an oversight.

Care to comment on the figurers you were keen to debate James?

So what is the total amount owed including everything?

Trafigura loan (from RNS): £29.0m

Crystallised hedge (3 years @ 20%): £6.9m

Forum (SONIA+12%): £2.2m

Override arrears (8% + 13.2% interest): £6.1m

Now add them:

⭐ Total liabilities = ~£44.2 million

🟦 5. Why the RNS number confused people

Because. The RNS reports only the senior loan

The hedge, override, and Forum liabilities are off‑balance‑sheet or subordinated

They are not included in the headline det number

But they are absolutely real and must be paid before equity sees anything.

------------------

6. Outstanding Balance as of May 2025 (from RNS)

The RNS confirms:

First £1.25m repayment was deferred

Therefore no principal has been repaid

Therefore the outstanding balance is still ~£29m

This aligns perfectly with our amortisation model.

Principal £20,000,000

Interest accrued (grace year) £2,640,000

Interest accrued (amortisation to date) ~£1.1m

Total outstanding (RNS) £29,000,000

Total economic cost over full term £29,757,000

If you listen carefully you may hear a dozen keyboards asking chat GPT the same questions I did and getting the same answer.

Anyway this Chat GPT (smart plus) final thought on the eventual outcome.

🧾 Bottom line

I think:

Suspension drags on

Cash is swept

Debt is slowly recovered

Equity remains optionality

And eventually, something small tips it into enforcement

Not because anyone wants that outcome —

but because the maths leaves no other stable endpoint.

Happy new year all!

From chat GPT.

— it does include opex, and that’s a crucial point.

Let me be very explicit about what was and wasn’t included in the figures I’ve been using, so there’s no ambiguity.

✅ What is included in the cashflow figures

When I quoted ~£3–4 million per year of free operating cash, that figure is after:

Field operating costs

Staffing

Routine maintenance

Chemicals

Insurance

Compression power costs

Electricity (the largest single cost driver)

Rising with declining reservoir pressure

Royalties

Site overheads

Corporate overhead allocation

Routine sustaining capex

In other words, this is post‑opex, post‑royalty, post‑maintenance cash — the money that would actually be available for:

Debt service

Hedge settlement

Principal repayment (if it were possible)

❌ What is not included

The figures do not include:

Principal amortisation

Hedge settlement payments

Any growth or optimisation capex

One‑off failure events (compressor replacement, major outage)

Those sit below the free operating cash line — which is why the structure breaks so badly once you add them.

📊 Why this matters

If the £3–4m were pre‑opex, the situation would be salvageable.

But because it’s after opex, the reality is:

Required annual outflows (amortisation + hedge): ~£9m

Sustainable free cash (after opex): ~£3–4m

Structural shortfall: ~£5–6m per year

That gap exists even before decline accelerates.

🧠 What Trafigura sees

Trafigura isn’t looking at EBITDA‑style numbers.

They’re looking at:

“How much cash hits the sweep account after the lights stay on?”

And the answer is:

Enough to recover value slowly

Not enough to amortise

Not enough to absorb shocks

Not enough to support equity‑friendly outcomes

🎯 Bottom line

✔ Yes — opex is fully included

✔ These are true free‑cash numbers

❌ The debt still doesn’t work

❌ Adding the hedge makes it worse, not different

This confirms the same conclusion from every angle:

Saltfleetby is a run‑off recovery asset, not a repayable loan structure.

Just going through the figures on chat GPT. Have run the figures owing as the figure seemed light with the amortisation of the £20 million loan, Forrums £1.88 million owed today and the 8% override.

It’s cheeked the figures and tells me that the £4 million crystallised hedge is not included in this figure and payable in cash over time.

This puts Angus amorisation at circa£9 million a year. That’s before interest, maintenance capex or contingencies.

It doesn’t hold out much hope for poor old Mr Forrest (Forum Energy Services) getting his £1.88 million plus interest tomorrow either!

Lol……why don’t you ask chat gpt what it thinks the chances of Angus paying the £29 million back.

Don’t think you can call a computer program a De-ramper. It gives a best case scenario off being diluted by 70-90%! And that’s the best case!

🎯 Final Answer

Angus doing a deal in the Gulf of America is virtually impossible under their current financial, regulatory, and technical constraints. The probability is effectively zero unless the “deal” is symbolic, non‑operational, and requires no capital.

🎯 OVERALL SHAREHOLDER OUTCOME SUMMARY

Scenario Likelihood Shareholder Outcome

1. Keep Angus alive ⭐ 60–70% Equity survives but decays; dilution; zombie company

2. Enforce security ⭐ 20–30% Equity wiped out

3. Sell asset ⭐ 10–15% Equity likely wiped out unless sale > debt

4. Redevelopment/storage ⭐

4. Redevelopment/storage ⭐

Clearly Angus is not in default.”….. In other news, the world is flat, the moon is made of cheese, and Lord Lucan (not our Lord Melton Mowbray Lucan) has been seen riding Shergar….and Angus shares are open to trade!

This is what AI has to say on the Matter.

📌 What this means in practical terms

Angus should have defaulted under the strict loan terms.

Trafigura instead granted informal waivers and entered restructuring discussions.

Angus is therefore in technical default, but not declared default.

Other answers it gave!

🎯 OVERALL SHAREHOLDER OUTCOME SUMMARY

Scenario Likelihood Shareholder Outcome

1. Keep Angus alive ⭐ 60–70% Equity survives but decays; dilution; zombie company

2. Enforce security ⭐ 20–30% Equity wiped out

3. Sell asset ⭐ 10–15% Equity likely wiped out unless sale > debt

4. Redevelopment/storage ⭐

Mmm. The company would have to issue an RNS if they defaulted…Erm they have issued several on the subject haven’t they? Like the last one that gives us a figure of £29 million owing, that lists 3 parties that haven’t been paid because….yes you guessed it, they defaulted!… next question please!

Well they really didn’t have much choice in the matter. Replace “enhanced protection” with to stem Terminal decline (the actual reason)and it reads like they had little choice but to agree.

Did you take time to consider why the finance director signed off on this?……Perhaps because not even King Rat fancied the job!

Hits, yes the sudden arrival of all these mates of Lady of Aim does suggest something is about to happen on the suspension front. Only 5 working days until Mr Forrest is due his £1.89 million plus interest. I wonder if he will get it ?

With all due respect James. Yor posting History shows Angus and Alba!perhaps you are thinking of one of your other accounts? And of course your schoolboy attempt to point out you wouldn’t say I’m a paid deramprer(obviously not required for this stock) by actually saying it is hilarious.

The underlying details we don’t have. We know exactly what they produce gas wise as it’s available online. Unfortunately the NSTA now requires a log in to see monthly production figures, but Brockham had dropped back to around 30 barrels a day! Yes break even territory not including de-com provision.

What we don’t know is what Angus have agreed they are receiving for the gas from three off taker as the original agreement is obviously void as they haven’t paid the contracted installments for knocking on for a year. I guess that money means they can afford the work overs, but I very much doubt it will cover Mr Forrest now £2 million due in 12 days time, or the 8% gross override also a year behind

And you conveniently ignore the point I make about the 2 essential new wells to service the now £25 million dept. These aren’t an option they are essential. Pretending that they will be successful when all the evidence points to the fact they won’t can’t be put down to “past exploration mistakes “ it’s the reason Wingas AKA the Russian federation didn’t do it.

You quite obviously don’t know what an FDP is. I suggest you find out and read it as it gives you the history of all the previous wells and their lifetimes. SK4 is included and it would be interesting to see if it’s going to have a workover as it’s the problem child well. Yes I have read the CPR also and the results are far worse than the P90 estimate FAR WORSE.

Finally where exactly do you think they are planning on getting the money for this imaginary farm in? If they are planning to borrow it they better get a hell of a return as 8% plus Sonia that the current loan is a pretty tall order.

I’m not hinting at anything. Your history’s are there for all to see.

As for production figures. Well the share price is at pretty much all time lows before suspension.

Brockham may just be breaking Even and Saltfleetby may make a couple of million a year…. But only for a couple of years and without spending circa £10 million on those 2 new wells into geology that failed on the 8 attempts before the most expensive drill in UK History that was also a failure to a large extent.

Try having a read of the Wingas FDP and the CPR listed in today’s RNS!