UKOG reports £1m+ loss in six months

UK Oil & Gas plc has reported an operating loss of £1.02m for the six months to the end of March 2021.

This was slightly up on the £0.90 million loss for the same period in 2020.

According to interim accounts published today, revenue for the six months increased to £72,000, compared with £8,000 in the previous year. This was the result of the start of oil production at the Horse Hill site in Surrey.

Net cash outflow from operations fell from £1.06 million to £0.96 million. The decrease was because of a fall in trade and other payables, the company said.

Onshore updates

Horse Hill, Surrey

UK OG said it had cut total operating costs at the site by 66% from January 2020 to January 2021.

An energy efficiency study concluded savings over the life of the project could be achieved by the installation of 250kw of photovoltaic panels and 67kwh batteries.

A study began in May 2021 on the geothermal energy potential of Horse Hill and the surrounding area, UKOG said.

Loxley/Dunsfold, Surrey

The public inquiry is scheduled to start on 27 July after refusal of planning permission for the site.

The deadline for drilling an appraisal well in the licence area has been extended by the Oil & Gas Authority to December 2023.

Arreton, Isle of Wight

The decision on a planning application for drilling is expected to be considered by Isle of Wight Council in late summer, UKOG said.

Angus half-year report

Angus Energy has also reported its half-year results.

The company had no earnings from the sale of oil in the six months to 21 March 2021, compared with £68,000 for the same time in 2020. Data from the Oil & Gas Authority shows that Angus Energy produced no oil during this period.

Operating losses were slightly down at £1,443,000, compared with £1,604,000 for the six months a year before.

The company said it had cash of £591,000 and net current assets of £1,351,000.


19 replies »

  1. Take a long while before these two rack up the losses that Tesla did for many years!

  2. Friends and Enemies, Lets hope Ukog go into administration Or better still go bust

    Remember its not the communists that’s the enemy Its god himself See morning star today God is your enemy

    By the way it is 100 years since the Chinese Communist party was formed Greetings to ours and my Chinese friends in the CCP

    Rob in Lincoln


    Sent from Mail for Windows 10

  3. You hope away, Robert, but there have been similar hopes expressed for a long time, and no sign of that happening. Many businesses, including Tesla, operate for a very long time without producing a profit and without going into administration or going bust. Maybe a little more knowledge of the capitalist system would be wise if you are commenting about the capitalist system? Although, that is a bit harsh as DoD does seem to be a safe zone where comments can be made without them having to have any basis in reality or fact.

  4. Always happy to oblige, 1720! All my own work. No “we” involved.

    Not sure you will get to read me praising the Chinese Communist Party though who have not exactly done that well keeping a pandemic from the rest of the world.

    But, always interesting to observe those who seem to find the anti “we’s” irresistible-a collective who then claim the moral high ground. Shame that observation shows the individual parts erode that facade. (Could always be Big Oil to blame, putting up fake messaging! LOL)

  5. I don’t think you need to know very much about Capitalism to grasp that there is a world of difference between TESLA’s early development and that of UKOG.

    Elon Musk had a war chest of his own money before diversifying into the development of electric cars. UKOG , on the other hand , was highly leveraged right from the start.

    For one who claims to understand finance, Martyn , you do seem to have an enormous blind spot when it comes to equating two entirely different financial models. TESLA could easily afford a huge burn rate of initial capital whereas UKOG had to exaggerate the potential of the Gatwick Gusher in order to attract Equity finance – all of which it has long since burnt. Hence its derisory share price.

    TESLA, on the other hand, has a rising share price which often features in your own posts.

    Who is it that is actually failing to understand the Capitalist System ?

  6. I never thought I’d see the day UKOG would be compared to Tesla 😀 That’s made my day thanks Martin! I needed a laugh.

    • Happy to oblige, IW.

      You mean the bit about borrowing large slugs of money? Yes, I do realise that UKOG are infants in respect of that.

      I could have added the bit about not making a profit for many years, and therefore not paying a dividend.

      Or, I could have pointed out that Tesla was actually stopped from developing in Germany as it was damaging the natural environment. Don’t believe UKOG have yet met that one. Not sure, either, that UKOG have yet been warned by a foreign country around the poor standard of their product or have even had their product spontaneously combusting-which is rather ironic when you consider the nature of the two products!

      But you did avoid any fake news within your comment, so well done.

      • “Or, I could have pointed out that Tesla was actually stopped from developing in Germany as it was damaging the natural environment.” Just like Exxon Mobil, presenting half truths or fictions as facts is the classic, and unfortunately successful, tool of denial and deflection. Tesla are developing in Germany despite a ban over a year ago. (

        This is the reason we are where we are and the reason why the planet is beginning to burn. Denial and deflection will only work for a few, and that only for a short time. (Note that Exxon Mobil yesterday almost apologised for their abuse of facts: not quite though).Practitioners of these tactics have revealed themselves in their true colours. The share price is what matters: that is the extent of their argument, otherwise devoid of rational content. Moral, whenever you see the word “fake”, ask yourself, Is it? Or is this another attempt to cloud the issues, sow doubt, deflect attention? Who, after all, is responsible for this widespread use of the expression “fake news”?

        “But you did avoid any fake news within your comment, so well done.” Condescension is yet another device to persuade your interlocutor that you are the embodiment of all knowledge on this subject. I hope not too many of us are prepared to worship at this particular hollow shrine.

        • The “we” is back. Uncertainty signal to all who have had any training in negotiation/sales.

          You could always point out 1720 where the errors are in what I post. Anything there about Tesla which is not factual, or do you not know so just try to deflect? Perhaps avoiding posting false information may prevent it being identified? Looking at the volume which is posted I am kept quite busy but I know it will continue because that appears to be the way many operate, even when the correct information can be acquired very quickly and easily. Whilst it continues it demonstrates something interesting to the wider audience, and the fact that IW was not tempted is laudable. When there are those who proclaim they are advising a political party and then post a rebuttal of what was correct information that was available to check at the press of a button, “we” have to ask-why bother? It really is rather insulting, in my opinion, towards those who do expect to read something which is at least factual, even if they may disagree with the sentiment. (And, Brent Crude is still the price that it is, and can be checked very easily, and will be expected to be around what it is by all who note what they are paying at the pumps and bother to check why.)

          Spotting fake news is now taught in many schools to pretty young children, so your attempt to dismiss as a Trumpian connection is what? Oh yes-deflecting attention attempt. What irony? No, not irony, it is a tired and lazy mechanism.

          If you want to argue with pT why he raised the share price as a subject, I am sure he will be only too happy to oblige, or you could raise the issue with DoD where share price is frequently weaponized. However, you may just find someone points out that the movement of share price happens elsewhere as well, and often for very similar reasons.

          My wife had become confused with the way activists are plonked on TV to spout their opinions. She asked for a long time, “who are they?”, and “what are they talking about?” and “who are “we”?” Now, she just switches channels, in search of news or entertainment.

        • “The “we” is back. Uncertainty signal to all who have had any training in negotiation/sales.” How would those who have had such training refer to all humans on the planet? Is there a special word for “we” or “us” which the rest of English-speaking humanity is supposed to know? Do we have to put up with your ridiculous comments indulged in for the sake of making a comment which you cannot afford not to make? Do you have to be kept busy defending the indefensible?
          Did you understand that your statement was factually incorrect as it was a half truth designed to create a particular narrative? I did point this out and included a link. Do you know how to use a link? Who cares about Brent Crude in this discussion? Stop attempting to deflect. You have been rumbled. Let it be said once and for all, you do not know everything about everything any more than I do. Admit it.
          The ability to spot fake news is a useful attribute to teach children as a result of Trump’s behaviour. So what? Heaven forbid you are imparting your ‘knowledge’ to children. I don’t need you to point out that anything you may disagree with for whatever reason must be ‘fake news’. Trump did and does. Let the reader beware!
          I understand your wife’s confusion. If I who read DoD were not bombarded with your considered opinions on everything under the sun, I might ask the same question concerning your postings. As it is, I just give up every so often trying to disentangle common sense from the inchoate mass of words going nowhere – useful perhaps in the negotiations for the sale of vacuum cleaners but not in a serious discussion on matters of planetary importance that tries to be rational.

          • Ahh, you speak for all the humans on the planet,1720! Now, that is about the most extreme fake news that is possible. Trump even avoided that one.

            Well done, all that text ruined.

            Actually and factually you don’t. Sorry to have to point that out, but even if you hear voices they are not from all of humanity.

            Indeed, on several occasions, there has not been a single soul even on DoD to risk their integrity and back you up, for example with your nonsense to try and contradict that local sourcing is better for the environment, for oil as well as other products. Obviously you are keen to take part, but I am not sure that trashing the credibility of the antis is helping, even if you add some “we’s”, when the real ones have kept their distance.

            Your posts are your opinion. If you are not comfortable with that perhaps it says something about the post and does not require embellishing with imaginary friends?

            And, no, my point was correct. You attempted to add another point to deflect, but it did not do anything to change the accuracy of my post.

            My point was about the way Tesla tried to fast track and did not respect the environment, nothing to do with whether or not they eventually got the green (!!) light, by which time the animals that correct procedure would have protected, had already been disturbed.

            • My sole use of the word “we”. – “This is the reason we are where we are..”

              Your interpretation: “Ahh, you speak for all the humans on the planet,1720! Now, that is about the most extreme fake news that is possible. Trump even avoided that one.”
              Do you really think this is a sensible gloss on my use of the word “we”? I guess you do!

              Again, further comment would be superfluous. Dig away. Pop off to the courgettes rather than attempting a sensible rejoinder. Bye. Sleep tight..

              • “refer to all humans on the planet” was the actual phrase you used, 1720.

                If you don’t expect your posts to be read, that is fine. But if you do, please accept that your “superb” use of English will be observed and you will be the one considered responsible for what you post. Now, I know you have a record of having to back track on what you have posted and modify-and still end up incorrect, but less so-but to help you out: Right First Time prevents Costs of Non Conformance. You can DYOR on that.

                In answer to your question about “who cares about cost of Brent Crude in this discussion?” I would have thought the answer was obvious.

                Anyone who reads information cares that the information is correct, for starters. (Remember HMG Gate?)

                UKOG care about the price of Brent Crude quite a lot, too.

                And most who are impacted care as well, with headlines of “Petrol prices at an 8 year high, and heading higher” with data supplied by RAC Fuel Watch. If you read the reasons, then you may calculate that with high oil prices then taxation on local production is higher and thus the benefits to the location are increased, so the NHS may care too. Except, with every delay that the antis create then tax liability is deferred! But, can’t mention that the activities of the antis not only cost the locals (£400k at Wressle) but the wider community too by delaying tax revenues, because someone who picks up that bill may care. Oops, I just did.

                Must away to harvest courgettes, before the rain turns them into marrows. Fortunately, mine will not rise in price but others will due to higher fuel prices impacting those brought from over the horizon. Ever thus. Security comes from local production, and environment improved by reducing transport emissions.

                • If I want to talk about the effect on all humans on the planet, undeniably true of global heating, then I have to use “us” if I want to be included – I do. This “us” becomes “we” if it’s the subject of the sentence, as in ” “This is the reason we are where we are..”

                  Sometimes I wonder if I am communicating, or perhaps failing to communicate, with a real person, capable of thought!

                  Similarly – my question “Who cares about Brent Crude in this discussion?”, did not say “Who in this discussion cares about Brent Crude” (Clearly you do, together with the rest of the shares you go on about – a noble preoccupation if ever there was one.) In other words Martin, I was trying my hardest to point out the irrelevance of share prices in what we were discussing, which, if memory serves, was whether Tesla had been definitively stopped from developing in Germany and the false narrative you were spinning, all part of your attempts to deflect discussion from the wisdom of exploiting fossil fuels – even home-grown fossil fuels. We should talk about anything other than what really matters: people might think; minds might be changed. Exxon Mobil stopped that all right – until now.

                  Enough! No doubt much to the relief of any who can be bothered to read “us”. Have your last word; dig away, I shall not be responding. But please, do indulge yourself in some thought from time to time. Not everything on DoD demands your considered opinion.

                • Brent Crude is not a share price, 1720! And your memory doesn’t serve-you can check the text! (And, neither did it “serve” with regard to HMG gate either.)

                  So, apart from wriggling and trying to change facts and history, 1720, I can see you have little to offer. If you really feel that something like climate change will be addressed by that approach, I would suggest you are, at the best, naive.

                  However, the comment section is for people to make THEIR comments, and I shall continue to do so. Whilst I do, I shall continue to make every effort to make sure my comments are factually correct. If others (see my first two sentences) think it is an opportunity to provide false information, now called fake news, then I will continue to identify it, as it is a lazy method of communicating-and only communicates that someone either has not bothered to become acquainted with the subject, or has a very dim view of others that they might not. But, probably, both. And then, try and produce a smoke screen that others may be creating a false narrative! Especially, when they plonk queries about “capable of thought” and then counter their own point with “considered opinion”. Wriggling, with no semblance of coherence, so my mind map will still reference bananas.

                  I think you might find that a false narrative is not created by facts, but is created by false information. Maybe not too clever that there is a lot of that supplied on this site within the comment section.

  7. OMG!

    You could not resist proving my point, could you pT!

    Try Giggling Tesla share price. Over last year 200ish low, 700ish current, 900ish high(rounded). BUT, not in that order! So, no the share price is not rising, but has been dropping since the start of 2021. (I could tell you why, but I already have and have no intention of repeating.)

    And, Tesla has been built on borrowing-masses of it, and nearly didn’t make it. Not my blind spot, but a comment from Mr. Musk himself.

    (I am glad they did make it-sweating for a while- as I have some investment there-but not in UKOG!)

    The derisory share price for UKOG may just have something to do with the number of shares now in circulation, as well. Not nice for share holders but why invest in mineral exploration companies if you don’t expect that?

    Your blind spot matches that of others who have just plonked fake news out there when others could type in a few words and find how fake the news is. I wonder whether you really believe others will not bother to check, or do not care?

    A diverse and interesting bunch! But saving the planet needs a bit more knowledge, so maybe start at the start and get the facts that can be checked, correct?

Add a comment

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

You are commenting using your 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