UK 15:42 Monday, 26 October 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
This morning’s “Clarification of Press Comment” from UK Oil & Gas (UKOG), and the other companies participating in Horse Hill, heaps shame on all involved in last Thursday’s monumental ramp. At ShareProphets, we were the first to criticise the BBC, ITV, Sky News and all the other broadcasters, who leapt so obediently onto this propaganda bandwagon, for their deeply misleading coverage. Hundreds, if not thousands, of private investors bought stocks in the Horse Hill nags, thanks to the appalling laziness of too many journalists. Within 24 hours, most of these ordinary people were facing losses of upwards of 35% on their “investments”. This disgraceful episode illustrates once again why AIM is in such desperate need of comprehensive reform.
Already a member? Sign in
• All premium articles
• Tom Winnifrith’s Bearcast
• Access to all the entire nearly 13 year archive
• ShareProphets Daily Newsletter
Cancel any time
This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.
Comments
wildrides
The warning :-“The oil in place hydrocarbon volumes estimated should not be considered as either contingent or prospective resources or reserves.”
was actually stated in the first RNS ………. right at the end ………….. so anyone thinking of legal action forget it . It should have been printed ,not at the end, but next to the statements about Barrels of oil per square mile .
I dont think you can blame the reporting in the news papers or televison . They used what they were fed and they were mislead good and proper by the PR from the companies concerned . Mr Del boy Lemongas obviously has some questions to answer regarding selective over promoting of the report …….. the lack of appropriate warnings whilst verbally briefing ….the lack of verbal briefings about :- exploration drilling needed to prove up the extraction theory and as to the extent of the field and as to the likelyhood of and timings of, any likely future production . Also the lack of inclusive COS ratings . When you set Hares running they take a bit of stopping . In this case you do need to shoot the message composer and not the messenger . It is not clear there was intent to deceive on a grand scale or just a naivety as to the extent the media would bite and cover the story . Once released these types of things take on a life of their own and become unstoppable . Was that the intention? ……….. we may never know .
Ben Turney
@wildrides – I don’t agree about the role of the media in this. It was incredibly irresponsible reporting. I agree this is a case the authorities should look at closely, but it is surely the role of the reporting media to apply at least a modicum of critical thinking to what it publishes. This was almost universally absent in last Thursday and Friday’s feeding frenzy.
There was perhaps more I should have said about today’s clarification and the fact it didn’t clarify enough. If the FCA or AIM Regulation has acted behind the scenes, forcing this mornings RNS announcements, I am surprised they didn’t demand that more was retracted from last week’s statements.
Whatever happens next, a host of private investors have been well and truly spiked courtesy of this event.
Ben Turney
@Dave – You raise some really good points. I have heard the argument that getting caught out by something like this is the price of admission to playing the AIM game. I don’t accept that. AIM should be a market we can trust in. Over regulation might not be the answer, but the total absence of policing, while pretending safeguards are in place, is a deadly combination.
I am looking forward to getting hold of this report the LSE publicised yesterday claiming AIM was so fantastic for the British economy
DUCK AND DIVE
The Telegraph seeks redemption tonight:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/11540605/A-little-digging-would-have-uncovered-the-facts-about-Sussex-oil-boom.html
Maybe Jimmy Quinn should be invited along to the LSE AGM to add his awkward questions?
Ben Turney
@Duck and Dive – Hard to argue with what most of the Telegraph has said there, though this sentence is wrong “In other words, although Horse Hill might contain 100bn recoverable barrels of oil, it equally might contain zero.” We know there was a small discovery there last October. We just don’t know whether or not it is commercial.
@Dave Jay – To be fair to The Times I don’t remember seeing any of its journalists jump on the ramping bandwagon. I could be wrong, but I think their response was cynical from the start. As for the BBC that is an excellent point. Its coverage was remarkably swift, pre-market open. As I said in my original piece, who knew it was such a willing and unquestioning tool for corporate propaganda…
As for the “suck it up with a sponge” comment, I’ve not yet seen that, though it has been widely reported.