Member Info for ZYX098

And yet in UKOG's own words....

RNS of 23rd Feb 2023

UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that, as a necessary precursor to its planned Horse Hill-2z ("HH-2z") Portland formation water reinjection project, the Company has now installed three, shallow, groundwater monitoring boreholes at its 85.635% owned producing oil field.

RNS of 15th August 2022

Preparatory work towards converting HH-2z into a produced saline water reinjector continues.

"Additional disclosure requirements for publicly traded companies include the requirement to disclose any inside information to the market without delay"

I'd say that failure to notify the market of the results of the "specialist" log interpretation, the Geochem work and failure to source the 7" guns all fall under that remit.

And of course UKOG still haven't done the HH-2z conversion.

Those who were saying that the SC Case is why UKOG haven't done it yet were conveniently forgetting UKOG's own statements in RNS's that surface conversion works for HH-2z are ongoing and that they had drilled three water monitoring Wells during the same period.

Ocelot,

This coup is relatively low key and very unlikely to affect Gabons O&G production - as evidenced by the lack of movement in the oil price.

Far more worrying is the current situation in Northern Iraq and the possibility of it descending into a civil war which may pull in SE Turkey and NW Iran.

Of course, none of which is of any concern to UKOG or it's share price.

Gents,

Have you not worked out who SS is yet?

Suddenly appears on the UKOG Board, yet appears to know everything about the people on the board and their motives for posting.

Hangs on every word that DL says or Tweets (X’s?).

His modus operandi is deflection, not answering direct questions, accusations of other posters being upset, twisting other posters responses, self righteous condescension and subtle (or unsubtle) ramping without any justification.

Doesn't this all ring big bells?

He stopped buying as soon as he could.

He was forced into a position to start buying as an online petition to get rid of him was gaining momentum.

It's about the only smart thing he has done - for a total expenditure of £12k spread over 12 months, he's managed to keep his job (at £1k per day) for at least another couple of years.

That the CEO has to be forced to buy shares in his own Company speaks volumes.

As far as I am aware, no other current Board member owns shares.

The only one in the past who bought shares was KM, and he took a bath.

BP,

I have used those size guns with that shot pattern to perforate 9 5/8" casing (to circulate cement behind it) late last year - though we did use eccentric stand offs to ensure the gun was hard against the casing so at least some shots would get through.

But your comment triggered another thought - I've been presuming that W/Ford probably wouldn't use the larger guns at that depth for safety reasons, but on Pin-1, is there enough hydrostatic head for the shot to form properly in the first place?

If not, wouldn't W/Ford's pre-job modelling have shown that?

Agree - this whole testing because there was a smell of oil during drilling is a BS distraction.

Ah yes, the Good Law Project.

Founded by a Barrister who specialises in tax law and was on the verge of being thrown out of his own Chambers while other law firms declined to do business with him, due to his penchant for tweeting on legal cases which had nothing to do with him or his speciality. He was also sued by builders over an unpaid bill of almost £500k.

SS,

All the perforating companies use 3rd party suppliers for their charges and will have a contract in place, covering pricing and T's & C's.

So all they have to do (Weatherford in this case) is go to their supplier to get an updated quote (which would include lead times & things like transportation & paperwork costs).

W/Ford would add their own costs on top (importation, internal transport to their workshop, gun loading, transport to site and running charges) and present a formal quote to AME/UKOG for their acceptance or otherwise.

AME would get involved as although UKOG are paying 100% of the Pin-1 costs (according to the AME Chairman), the charges would have to be imported under the AME operating license and the W/Ford contract would be with the licence Operator (AME) irrespective of who is paying the bills.

The whole process from requesting the quote to actually being presented with the cost figures and lead time for delivery to site would take 7 - 10 days max.

UKOG wouldn't be involved in that part - all UKOG would be required to do is say "Yes" or "No" when presented with the quote.

So UKOG have had around three months to let the market and PI's know the forward program and timeline, but have conspicuously declined to do so - despite issuing several RNS's in the meantime.

Note that they have also declined to advise the results of the specialist log interpretation (despite having that within a week of running the Logs) or the Geochem analysis results (should have had around 2 months ago).

From this, we can deduce that there are the following possibilities;

A) UKOG think that the original DST was actually mechanically successful, but the Well is dry.

B) UKOG blanched at the costs (my back-of-the-envelope cost estimate was north of $200k) and are looking for an alternative method.

C) W/Ford have declined on safety grounds to use that size and amount of charges so close to surface.

For B) & C), an alternative method is available which uses hydraulics to mechanically push a blade into the casing and create a vertical tear.

However the tear is short (about 1m) and since UKOG didn't run any logs (because they didn't think it was worth doing so at the time of drilling....), they won't know where to position the tool within the test zone. That there are already pre-existing perforations will also complicate the running procedure.

In addition, those tools are few and far between and are not yet available in Turkey. Given their normal running charges and the cost of transport / importation, their overall cost is probably not much different from the perforating cost.

Don't forget that along with the many red flags in the Loxley CPR, it only quoted 2C reserves (zero 2P reserves) despite being classified as 'a discovery' and Loxley-1 being called an 'appraisal' well by UKOG.

Ninetails,

Don't worry - the 'realists' aren't the ones who lost their shirt on shorting RR to 50p..

Don't see why this should change things - they really haven't shown any interest in the past, so why now?

TweedleDumb and TweedleDee not spamming the board with their nonsense has helped.

SS,

"The gov might do a U-turn and lift the threshold for fracking, which would transform UKOG into a share all we all thought it could be."

Even if the Govt did a U turn on fracing (they won't), it won't make the blindest bit of difference to UKOG.

Apart from UKOG's long held position that they won't frac, we already know that HH has natural fractures which are water bearing. BB is too shallow, even if there was anything worth producing (BB-1 failed in that respect).

The Bowland Shale should be the main potential source of shale gas, but the eco-warriors succeeded in getting all testing shut down before there was any chance to prove it could be commercially produced.

Even if it could, it would require a bonfire of the planning regulations for shale gas to be economical in the UK - something that the Tories would never do, although, oddly enough, a Labour Govt might do with their statements about reducing planning requirements for onshore wind farms.

In the meantime, the two deep Geothermal projects in Cornwall both produced "induced seismic events" that would have got them shut down had they been Gas / Oil Wells.

Oh, and before all the BS about fracing reached the public consciousness, we frac'd some 250 Onshore Wells without anyone batting an eyelid, including under the most expensive piece of real estate outside London - Sandbanks Peninsula in Dorset.

SS,

I'm not sure where you got from my original post that I'm "frustrated"?

Just pointing out why having a long lead time for delivery was no excuse to not place an order.

You seem awfully sure for some reason that many posters on this board are still averaging down - I think if you look at the posting history, you'll see that most people realised that trying to average down on this share was a waste of time several years ago.

The only way to make money was to catch the P&D's which used to be fairly predictable, but even those are fading away.

My UKOG shares aren't in the bottom drawer - they are (literally and metaphorically) down in the basement.

On the other hand, I keep my mining shares in the top drawer - with one exception they have done nicely in the last couple of years (including ANTO), but AAL are getting very close to my stop loss.

ShouldveSold,

The 7" gun carriers are basically an off the shelf item and almost certainly immediately available in Kurdistan. Even if not in Kurdistan, they are easily transported (no explosives content prior to being loaded) and there has been more than enough time to get them to the local W/Line workshop for the prep work required.

The perf charges will have to be ordered separately, but long lead times for delivery are no excuse.

The last I heard about charges was 2 - 3 months lead time ex-works, but that could easily change either way in a relatively short period of time.

Even if the lead time is 2 -3 months, you don't delay ordering them - that just pushes your order further down the queue. You order now for delivery ex-works in XX weeks. - otherwise you'd never order anything.

If you really, really, really need something, you can normally pay a premium to get your order pushed further up the queue.

For example, typical lead times for even standard Wellheads and Casing is now 40 - 50 weeks ex-works, but you order now and let your logistics people know when it's due out so they can arrange the paperwork and shipping.

Once the order is placed, you can easily work out the time frame with respect to shipping into Turkey, transport to the workshop, prepping & loading the guns and then transport to location.

UKOG have had almost three months (and several RNS's) to update PI's (as they said they would) with respect to the time-fame for recommencing testing.

But they haven't.

There are really only three reasons why UKOG haven't announced when the perf gun can be expected on location;

A) They baulked at the cost (my back-of-the-envelope guess was around $200k) and are looking to quietly drop the whole idea

B) The W/Line company have run some more simulations and decided it's just not safe to use that amount of 7" guns at such a shallow depth.

C) They know that the original test was actually good and the perforations did reach the formation - but there is nothing there to flow.

With respect to AME, their Chairmans statement indicated that UKOG were sole risking the Pin-1 Well and that AME weren't actually putting any money into it.

BTW, when Oil & Gas Companies invest in renewables, the Eco-warriors often decry it as 'greenwashing'.

But if you took away the O&G Industry contribution, who would replace it?

Private equity is fleeing the renewables market, as they are only just beginning to realise that the mantra "cheap renewables" actually is nothing of the sort.

Norway has shelved their Floating wind project, Denmark has shelved virtually all of their offshore wind development projects and Vattenfall have just suspended construction on the UK's Boreas offshore wind project due to rising costs.

BTW, two of the three companies that invested most heavily in Solar R&D in the 1970's?

BP & Shell.

GE was the third.

The R&D division of which Company invented the Lithium-ion battery?

Exxon.

They just keep their heads buried in the sand.

I'd say buried up somewhere else, but it would get moderated.

In the meantime, the UK's oil consumption will drop by less than 15% by 2040 and UK home produce supply will drop to just 20% of demand - and this study was done before the ruinous EPL devastated the UKCS.

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

By 2050, even if we meet our Net Zero target (and the UK is rated in the top 10 Countries most likely to according to a report in the June edition of 'Science'), we'll still need fossil fuel for around 25% of our electrical power.

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

And while they protest here, between them China and India are building three new Coal fired power plants every month and Germany shows no sign of closing down it's 63 coal fired power plants - something it was supposed to do by 2030 to meet EU legislative requirements.

A Politician who is also a hypocrite.

I'm shocked, stunned and amazed.....

IIRC morefondle listed his filtered posters a while back, and most of them were actually an Adrian ID!