Industry

UKOG calls meeting to approve share issue for Turkish operations

The weald-based drilling company, UK Oil & Gas, is seeking support for a share issue to fund new drilling in Turkey.

UKOG has said its activities in 2021 would focus on the SE Turkish Basur-Resan oilfield, where it has a 50% licence stake. The company has also applied for an interest in neighbouring licences.

In a statement to investors after the close of trading on 21 May, UKOG said the Turkish interests had been assessed to contain “significantly greater discovered oil volumes than any of the company’s UK projects”.

It said:

“In order to deliver the Company’s stated strategy and growth objectives, it will require further funds in the near future for, amongst other things, its funding obligations under the agreed work programme for the Resan Licence and any of the new Application Blocks should they be awarded to the Company and its partner.”

The company has called a general meeting next month to seek shareholder approval for the share issue and the removal of the right of existing shareholders to have first refusal.

The statement said the approvals were needed so that the company could “raise money for its working capital obligations”.

Under the agreement to acquire a stake in the Basur-Resan licence, UKOG agreed to wholly fund the first $5m of the work programme. This is for four wells and 100km of seismic surveying. After this, UKOG will pay 50% of all costs.

Drilling consent for the first appraisal well, Basur-3, was granted in April 2021. Yesterday’s statement said construction of the well site and drilling pad was nearly complete. Drilling was expected to begin in the summer. The 2021 work programme also includes 120 line KM of seismic surveying, UKOG said.

The company said it expected a further appraisal well, Resan-6, would be drilled in 2022, along with processing and interpretation of new seismic data.

The statement added that if UKOG and its partner were awarded the licences to the south and south east of the Resan, the seismic programme would be extended into the new block.

  • The meeting is at 11am on Monday 7 June 2021 at Hays House, Millmead, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 4HJ. Shareholders have been asked not to attend the meeting in person because of Covid-19 restrictions and vote by proxy by 11am on Saturday 5 June 2021.

22 replies »

  1. Based on Horse Hill they have a proven history of over-hyping the potential for their sites, presumably to suck in yet more gullible investors. I bet there are many current shareholders regretting ever buying into UKOG. Should have listened to David Smythe! Strange that a company that is trying to sell itself as a ‘transition company’ (in transition from fossil fuels to renewables and geothermal) is still focussed on exploring for yet more fossil fuels. Perhaps ‘transition company’ is yet more hype from SS, being paid a large wadge at the expense of shareholders.

  2. There will be more shares in issue than barrels of oil that Lenigas said was in The Gatwick Gusher 🤣

    [Typo corrected at poster’s request]

    • According to UKOG share chat, currently 13bn shares, plus another 8bn if this latest call for cash goes a head.

  3. And the shares will be subscribed. Maybe you two will not purchase. That’s your choice. You can spend your money on funding failed attempts to stop UKOG, but one has to ask if the company is doomed to failure, why bother to do so? That really does seem to be an investment for the gullible.

    I know there are some UKOG shareholders who are quite happy with their investments as well, Malcolm. I have no crystal ball to say who will end up happy and who will not-but neither do you. But, that is the same for just about every company exploring for minerals. There may be a few UKOG investors who don’t realize that, but it will only be a few.

  4. Hope springs eternal, Robert, but the history appears to indicate your hopes will be dashed.

    This issuing of extra shares is often referred to by the antis as a rinse and repeat operation. Well, there is some truth in that. The repeat does not seem to be a problem which is why companies like UKOG find it the most effective way to raise the money it requires-just like most AIM companies. AIM investors should know that before they become investors in such companies. Those who don’t, get a little excited, and some antis even more so. However, UKOG have made it perfectly clear for some time what their intentions are and many share holders had the opportunity to bale out recently having made around 50% return within a short time frame. If they did, they have the money available to bale back into the lower share price when the extra shares kick in. If they did not, they accepted this would be the case and just decided to ride it out.

    In other words, unlike some others, the investors were aware of this event on the horizon and will already have been persuaded.

  5. The Gatwick Gusher has so far produced about the same volume of liquid as a stallion at stud.

    UKOG’s balance sheet will not stand anymore leveraged lending and so it can only fund further speculative development through the Equity market.

    For one who argues that there is a strategic necessity to extract hydrocarbons here in the UK ( or Turkey), it is a pretty feeble block of votes for the industry when you cheerfully commend those who buy shares in UKOG as an alternative to having a punt on the Grand National. If people are buying shares as if it was another bitcoin, I don’t think that these purchases can be interpreted as a ringing endorsement of policy.

  6. Well. PT, it is up to each individual to decide how to spend their money. If you wish to spend yours on something else, that is up to you. Jono spends his on crowd funding legal challenges against UKOG, that is his choice.

    You may be correct regarding policy, but there are very few investors who do NOT think they could do a better job than the company directors for the companies they invest in. Just like those who purchase a season ticket for a football club.

    Your reference to Bitcoin was a little unfortunate. I believe Mr. Musk decided to make a huge investment into Bitcoin not so long ago, and then decided within weeks that was unwise! Yet, those who want to, still buy Tesla shares.

  7. The point is, Martin, that you regularly advocate the benefits, both financial and environmental ,of the UK expanding its own onshore extraction of hydrocarbons.

    Not a single “major” is behind such a strategy. Instead this policy is pursued by a handful of tiny companies that are all seriously over borrowed and which rely upon dribbles of new cash from small investors whose interest is purely speculative. If money talks, then your preferred policy is pretty much heard in silence.

    Why do you suppose that the Collyer wisdom is so poorly received ? It couldn’t be that the policy is completely Tonto could it ?

  8. Ermm, is the answer not clear to you, PT?

    Why would the “majors” be interested in UK on shore. The clue is in the name! Sorry, but do you really think that vast reservoirs of extractable oil have been sat undetected? You have been seduced by your own buddies waffling on about “industrialization”.

    I have never made any claim that remaining UK on shore reservoirs of oil would be large enough to attract the majors, hence the smaller companies looking to find them and develop them. I know it is a shame that the reality doesn’t fit the fake narrative, but it is the antis who have tried to create the fake narrative.

    However, whilst UK on shore oil reserves will be modest, it does not mean their use could not still be beneficial. Every little helps, otherwise you have just destroyed the whole premise of the local farm shop. Of course you could now be excommunicated having ventured into an area to identify that there will be no vast industrialization, which was obvious to most for a very long time-including the majors! And, perhaps look at the AIM market as a whole, and you will find that the same funding is utilized by the vast majority, not just those involved with fossil fuel. It is not true that such funding is the preserve of fossil fuel companies, and the continued attempts by some of you to change that again just indicates to most others your need to change reality to try and make a point. The reality is that the extra shares will be purchased, not by me, but by others. So how will that fit “poorly received”? I can see 4 of you who may receive that news poorly, but within the scheme of things, that will make no difference at all.

  9. The basis of ‘the local farm shop’ is that the community feeds itself and excess produce is used to help the community and the producer. Community cohesion is furthered.
    The local gas/oil well, on the other hand, will have some, usually overestimated, community income and minimal employment benefits but will at the same time, planetary emissions doubling, involve the destruction of the planetary environment and prejudice the continuing existence of us all.
    The comparison is a diversionary tactic.
    Those advocating a local fossil fuel industry, large or small, are in effect denying the climate catastrophe, and, in so doing, slowing the massive investment in renewables which the world desperately needs. They act against that community solidarity and concern for the individual they claim to espouse. The planet has no time in which to search for, develop and exploit polluting fossil fuels, diverting investment from renewables, possibly to provide short term benefit for the few at the expense of us all. How often do the industry and its supporters need telling before they face up to this obvious truth?

  10. Whilst you “tell” nonsense, 1720, you will certainly need to keep retelling it! Maybe the two are connected?

    “There is no suggestion that this proposal would increase the use of hydrocarbons, and the evidence demonstrates that the effect would be simply to TRANSFER production to a more local source”.

    You have the nerve to talk about community income, yet by ignoring the above were implicit in costing a community £400K. The record of history may need trashing for your arguments to be sustained, but it is still there for all to see, whilst you have your “fun”.

    And, another nonsense, there is NO slowing of investment in renewables from fossil fuel. Indeed if you look at the huge tax take from fossil fuels in the UK, money is actually AVAILABLE to subsidize renewables from that tax eg. fuel duty-and it does. And, the “basis of the farm shop” is that the farming community can sell their produce at a profit, and gain some advantage over imported goods by being able to demonstrate their higher environmental and other standards to the public. Bit inconvenient, but exactly the same for an oil well in UK. Does that happen? Yes, indeed it does and I have knowledge of a University lecturer who uses Wytch Farm as an example of how local industry can exist within a sensitive environment and be a good neighbor-and then compares to same industry in some other parts of the world. Fortunately, some Universities still teach facts, so you will have a long career trying to sow your fantasies, but the facts are there for all to see. Just like using daylight saves energy! Tut, tut. Preaching and practicing?

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s