Member Info for ZYX098

PBoo,

Looking at the past few weeks posting history, it seems more like BP is the one residing in your head...

Usual load of misdirection and small spherical objects from the Guardian.

Doesn't mention that most of the increase is due to the UK being used as a hub to transport gas from Norway to Europe, or that our LNG terminals have been running at 100% so that the excess can be exported to Europe to compensate for the loss of Russian Gas.

After all, which headline did the Guardian print?

Was it;

A) Centrica's gouging of consumers allowed them to make an obscene profit of £1.3 Billion, which they paid in dividends to fat-cat shareholders.

or

B) Centrica's profit of £1.3 Billion was artificially boosted by the sale of Spirit Energy for £1.1 Billion. Losses in their consumer supply division were offset by production, which allowed them to make a small dividend payment for the first time in 2 1/2 years.

Answers on a postcard please...

BTW, fat cat shareholders = Pension Funds.

Utterly clueless, aren't they?

UK oil consumption will drop by c. 15% by 2040 and by 2050, we will still be relying on fossil fuels (i.e. gas) for 25% of our power generation.

statista.com/statistics/749076/projected-uk-oil-production-demand/

gov.uk/government/publications/modelling-2050-electricity-system-analysis

In the meantime, we are the first G20 nation to successfully half it's CO2 output and the carbon footprint of someone living in the UK is now the same as it was in 1850.

spectator.co.uk/article/uk-becomes-first-g20-country-to-halve-its-carbon-emissions/

Currently (and clearly a lot more to come) there are 28,658,513,710 shares in UKOG out there.

The World population is c. 8,084,879,000, so that's 3.54 shares for every man, woman and child on the planet.

Or c. 5,731,702,742 shares per BOPD.

Or c. 0.00002774 ml of oil per day per share.

If you printed each share out on A4 100 GSM paper, they'd weigh 179,116 Tonnes (that's 63,742 top of the line Range Rovers).

Printing 10 shares per minute, it would take 5,449 years to print them all.

Laid end to end, they'd stretch for 8,511,579 km (that's 212.4 times around the Equator, or 11 times to the Moon and back).

It would take c. 573,170,274 Tonnes of Water to make that paper - that's the same amount of water the UK drinks in eight years.

It takes an average of 24 trees to make 1 Tonne of paper, so that's 4,298,784 trees.

Just sayin'....

Somebody (I forget who) did that a few years ago.

It was just beginning to gain momentum when SS announced that he was going to commit to buying shares in tranches every month for a year.

That killed the momentum and SS (later than he said he would) eventually did - a magnificent £1k per month for a year.

A genius move by him (his only one), as for around two weeks pay, he managed to stave off the PI's and continue milking the Company dry.

Apart from that, not one of the current BoD have ever bought shares in UKOG.

So they don't even think it's worth investing in themselves.

Sonmoon / JR 90 / Ells / G-Martin / Whatever,

Wow.

Just....wow.

We realists must have really got under your skin for you to post such tripe.

Best calm down and have a drink before you have a coronary.

If you believe what you have posted, you probably also believe the Earth is flat, aeroplane contrails are really chemicals designed to subjugate the human race, a UFO crashed near Roswell in 1947 and the Lizard people are running the World.

But then again, you obviously aren't particularly smart, since the 'Francis Howard' reference went clean over your head and in any case it was YOU who sounded like him, not Skwizz or Ibug or anyone else.

Oh, just for the record, nobody pays me to post on here - I do so of my own free will.

If you think otherwise and my posts amount to 'market abuse', then take me to Court.

Go on.

I dare you.

But you won't, will you?

You are nothing but hot air and bluster.

Oh, and if you are so convinced that someone is posting from multiple accounts, you should report them to LSE for being in breach of their site rules.

But you won't will you?

You've been challenged to do that in the past and you haven't - or you did and LSE did nothing because your claim was wrong.

Apart from anything, it would expose you as having had multiple accounts in the past.

Just the same as you claim that some posters on here are behaving illegally (or 'market abuse'), but won't respond when challenged to take them to Court.

You are all hot air and bluster - nothing else.

Sonmoon /Ells / JR 90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

Still reverting to type I see.

Have no answers to fact & logic laden responses to your posts by the likes of Penguins or myself, so you ignore them and make wild accusations about other posters.

What's next?

Are you going to accuse me of having multiple accounts because I used the word 'Loxley' in one of my posts, as did many other posters?

You were an absurd fantasist under your previous ID's (including when you had multiple ID's running at the same time, in contravention of LSE rules) and nothing has changed.

Actually, one thing has changed - RR is now at 300.60p, up from c. 125p when you were claiming it would drop to 50p and heaped abuse on this who disagreed with you..

That 50p short you had on RR must have really, really hurt.

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

So BP appears on the board for the first time today and you claim "Within moments Bubblepoint is trolling."

Yet you have been on here all day.

What does that say about you then?

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"Yes I know what these people are doing and have been doing for a number of years. Complete illegal activity."

If you really think so - take them to Court.

Go on.

I dare you....

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"The board needs closing down. And then all of this will stop in an instant."

ROTFLMAO.

Didn't read what you'd actually said before posting, did you?

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"All oil and gas exploration firms proven reserves start at zero until they are actually proven"

That's in the initial prospect report for an undrilled structure.

It's not for a CPR on a structure that's already had two Wells drilled on it and the current Operator is calling the proposed Well (i.e. Loxley) an "Appraisal" Well.

For a CPR to have zero Proven reserves is a huge red flag, and one of several in the CPR. It's almost certainly why the "pre-planned farm out" has had no interest.

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"Gary Williams / Gary Martin you are the most vile person around.

Christopher Iles from Surrey. You are also an awful awful person bribing people with cash to post market abuse.

Just awful people that need to give their head a wobble."

So reverting to back to type - threatening to take people to Court and claiming to know who posters are.

You tried that on with me under your last couple of guises - it didn't work then and it won't work now.

You have no idea who I am, other than I run Drilling Rigs for a living.

How's that RR 50p short working out for you?

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

Since you didn't answer (or tried to ignore, because it pointed out the giant holes in your logic);

Why are you selectively posting essentially irrelevant information from the CPR?

The CPR actually says Proven reserves = Zero.

That's what Companies look at when deciding an asset valuation.

Contingent reserves carry almost no weighting at all.

The CPR showed that closure couldn't be proven on the East side of the field – the contour map is clearly guesswork in that area. It needs some 3D Seismic to cover that area, but UKOG seem reluctant to combine HH & Loxley 3D program - probably because they are worried that it would show there is no closure at Loxley.

The CPR showed that RPS were forced to use an unrealistic pricing model by UKOG. That RPS insisted that statement was included in the CPR was one of several red flags.

In the CPR, RPS clearly stated their doubts about the reservoir quality “it will still have an element of appraisal as it must first prove commercial flowrates are achievable”

So that's why when the CPR was issued, UKOG's share price barely moved and nobody has taken them up on the "pre-planned farm-out" that some posters assured us meant a farminee would be coming in 'very soon' - that was in July 2022.

Remember, UKOG stated they would start work on the Loxley site in H2 2023, but – as IBug correctly points out – they still haven’t cleared most of the panning permission conditions yet.

Sonmoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"Committing market abuse because of hatred, paying people to commit market abuse and abusing any new innocent poster with a positive opinion is quite frankly immoral."

So you admit it's immoral to try and represent a share that is something it's not?

Like, for example, selectively posting from the Loxley CPR to try and make it seem like an attractive asset that another Company might farm into?

Sonmoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

"I could take it to court tomorrow and you would all be convicted of market abuse."

Go on then - why don't you?

SonMoon / Ells / JR90 / G-Martin / Whatever,

Why are you selectively posting essentially irrelevant information from the CPR?

The CPR actually says Proven reserves = Zero.

That's what Companies look at when deciding an asset valuation.

Contingent reserves carry almost no weighting at all.

The CPR showed that closure couldn't be proven on the East side of the field – the contour map is clearly guesswork in that area. It needs some 3D Seismic to cover that area, but UKOG seem reluctant to combine HH & Loxley 3D program - probably because they are worried that it would show there is no closure at Loxley.

The CPR showed that RPS were forced to use an unrealistic pricing model by UKOG. That RPS insisted that statement was included in the CPR was one of several red flags.

In the CPR, RPS clearly stated their doubts about the reservoir quality “it will still have an element of appraisal as it must first prove commercial flowrates are achievable”

So that's why when the CPR was issued, UKOG's share price barely moved and nobody has taken them up on the "pre-planned farm-out" that some posters assured us meant a farminee would be coming in 'very soon' - that was in July 2022.

Remember, UKOG stated they would start work on the Loxley site in H2 2023, but – as IBug correctly points out – they still haven’t cleared most of the panning permission conditions yet.

Yes, but:

Every bbl of oil and cuM of gas produced is one less needed to be imported from Overseas at a higher carbon footprint and lower HSE standards (except Gas from Norway).

Every bbl of oil or cuM of gas produced in the UKCS provides revenue for HM Treasury (in production taxes & royalties), produced by workers based in the UK (paying Income & NI taxes) by Companies based in the UK - either HQ (like BP or Shell) or through a UK subsidiary (e.g. Total, Equinor) that pay Corporation, SC & EPL taxes.

The only other industry that pays SC taxes is the banking sector, and they pay 3% - we pay 10%.

We are still subject to the 35% EPL, even though the price of oil is now below pre-Ukraine invasion levels.

Oh, and on Production, we pay 30% Corporation tax, not 25%. That is also ring fenced ("RFCT"), so it cannot be offset against expenditure or losses elsewhere in the organisation.

We'll still need fossil fuel for around 25% of our electrical power in 2050, according to the lates Govt modelling.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/modelling-2050-electricity-system-analysis

To be fair, I wouldn't have expected any different.

They didn't expect to be on location for long, so didn't use an all weather finish on the pad (too expensive).

As for the Cellar, it's ALWAYS full when you go back to a location that's been left alone for a while, and it needs to be pumped out.

Onshore most pad designs are sloped such that any rain that falls onto the location either goes into a network of drainage ditches around the perimeter, which go to a collection point for treatment / disposal. Or (more normally) it's contoured so that rain fall goes to the Cellar which acts as the same thing.

However, it's clear from the photo that the HSE standards for pads are much lower there, as none of that is immediately obvious. I'm willing to bet that they didn't lay an impermeable membrane underneath the pad to prevent ground contamination from any spills either.

But what really bothers me about the second photo is that there is no sign of the Wellhead....