Member Info for Avi8r

Boffer- do you realise how immature you appear?

If you cannot add anything constructive, then don't comment. For a grown man in charge of a group investment I wouldn't trust you to invest in a pub for alcoholics.

Grow up

Boffer: There will be jam tomorrow.

You keep saying, but you never say where or when, you little tease.

Heyood said there is “quite a lot coming together on CCS” and that there is “stuff I can’t talk about right now”, but investors should expect CCS updates in the “not so distant future”, which he defines as within the next month or two.

Repeatedly says Georgian legislation needs to “catch up”. CCS legislation already exists in Europe, but Georgia needs the right legal framework to govern CCS properly and allow the project to move forward at the required speed. The geology/pilot may be encouraging, but the commercial project still needs a regulatory basis.

Third parties are showing “deep interest” & there are partners showing deep interest in the CCS. These partners would help with the feasibility work, and government to shape/adjust relevant legislation.

That is significant; it suggests the next CCS announcement may involve a partner, feasibility structure, or regulatory pathway.

Heywood also links CCS to European export pressure/carbon costs stating the downstream petrochemical company in licence area exports around 70–80% of its product into Europe. Because of that, it is exposed to European decarbonisation pressure and potential carbon-related tax consequences, which means it needs to decarbonise operations. Transcript appears to render this as “seed ban regulation”, I understand that as reference to CBAM (EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism)

Should know soon enough, according to his comments.

Perhaps those 18 are comfortable with their investments. The presentation appears to be designed to reframe the company from a small underpriced producer into a partner-backed, multi-catalyst growth story, while reassuring investors it has a credible route to rerate, even if the market has not yet accepted it.

In simple terms; Look at what partners are willing to fund, not just where the market is pricing it today.

ABM - I agree with most of that.

The partner point is the strongest evidence Block has. Aspect and Sanning with their willingness to commit serious capital validates the technical quality of the assets far more than retail speculation could.

My point on “hard evidence” is narrower. Partner validation creates a credible route to a rerate, but markets usually waits for the next step, that being signed final documents, committed work programmes, mobilisation, drilling and flow results. Haywood cannot force that into the share price by presenting better. He can only keep closing deals and then convert those deals into operations.

I think he has potentially done a better job commercially than he gets credit for. The weakness is not necessarily deal-making. Its that the market still wants delivery proof before pricing in the full Project III/Gabon/Project IV upside.

Project III

Transaction documents around Q4 2026 or before; operations target Q1 2027; possible first gas by end-2027

Project IV - 3D seismic, results, decision to drill late 2026 or possibly Q1 2027

Gabon - 6 month accelerated technical plan; discovered volumes and development plan; farm-out discussions

CCS - 3rd-party involvement in feasibility study; legislation needs to catch up

Dilution - No further dilution envisaged “as we stand today”

Share price - Market has not caught up; partner validation should matter

All positive, but not transformational. Yet.

Project III delivery window: documents in late 2026, operational start targeted for early 2027, 90–120 day programme, and possible first gas by end-2027. Sanning completion, Project IV seismic/drill decision, Gabon development planning, CCS legislation, and no further dilution. These need converting into formal RNS to move the price.

Heywood has given credibility for a rerate, but not yet the hard evidence needed to force one, although now more likely and to satisfy boffer, a definitive date , Q4 2026.

Boffer - so you keep saying, but seems you are never right.

Heywood is only scheduled for 1hr. Not enough time to address all legitimate questions. Lets see if he can manage to focus on real matters at hand:

CCS commercialisation/strategic value

Project III/Sanning farm-out

First appraisal well and operational timeline

Capital discipline after the Gabon move

Pathway to cash flow, not just resource scale

If he cannot address these, then he's just another east end barrow boy.

company is holding an investor presentation this friday. perhaps haywood will give some insighrs into whether krt-39st materially improved production or only proved the drilling method. if the ccs pilot can move from promising science to bankable feasibility. if/when sanning farm-out converts into binding, funded execution. why/how gabon is a serious value-accretive move or a distraction before georgia is proven.

good to see the rise tofday, the tr-1 a good sign shares moving to new owners, and thats positive. it is still base-building rather than confirmation of a rerate, but with news of the above a re-rate could evolve. god knows its overdue/needed, but haywood is **** poor at pr and thats the bottom line.

If anyone is going some suggested questions:

“What are the next 3 RNS-worthy milestones investors should expect, in what order, and approximate what timing should shareholders expect for each?”

"The Gabon entry offers exposure to the Ndjila and Mpari PSCs and a potential 76.5% economic interest, but it is also being funded through a new equity raise. How will the board ensure Gabon does not dilute management focus or shareholder capital away from Georgia, Project III, CCS, and near-term production delivery?"

"What is the next concrete CCS milestone? Independent certification, regulatory approval, partner funding, pilot expansion, carbon-credit pathway, or commercial storage agreement? Also, how does the Board intend to prevent CCS from remaining a technically interesting side-project rather than a financial-growth asset?"

"How does the company intend to increase PR exposure and promote itself around the markets?"

Feel free to add more, but if anyone is going answers to these would be great.

Some interesting comments there, with typical heywood vagueness. Clear numbers; $75m carry, Aspect @ $95m, gabons 20-40m barrels with additional potential, 3500 bopd, $20m–$25m free cash flow and the 2.77tcf fgas.

These aer exciting prospects but the company needs to turn them into deliverables. I'm sure they're doing that but pursuing new opportunities before proving delivery on existing is whats holding the price down. Proving at least one of the existing will drive value up, obviously, and I am confident that will happen, whether Sanning farm-out, Proj3 flow rates, or of course the CCS which has such potential. I suggest people also google oeklers latest research on that too (reduced water requirement).

Block will not re-rate because heywood says the market will wake up. That will only happen when one of the big claims becomes difficult for the market to ignore: signed Sanning completion, funded drilling, confirmed gas flows, Gabon CPR, or partner-funded development activity.

Expect the sanning farm-out agreement H2 2026.

Bottom line, heywood needs to move from progression statements to commitments, timing and funded programs. Block has serious value claims, but market will only re-rate when at least one becomes a funded, dated, contractual or operational deliverable. Pursuing new opportunities before proving delivery on existing ones is partly what is holding the share price back.

"My name is Paul Heywood and I'm the CEO of Block Energy."

Well, you wouldn't f'n know it!

Given all the news and developments recently, many deserving of market announcements and high profile exposure, he's doing a useless job. Go back to selling on a market stall and let someone with credibility take over and manage the company properly and start promoting the company properly rather than silly posts on x.com, linkedIn and other domains. 🤦

https://vimeo.com/940357149?fl=pl&fe=sh

There is no publicly confirmed direct link between ZhenHua Oil and Block Energy at this point, so anyone stating otherwise is getting ahead of the evidence. There is no disclosed JV, no named agreement, no shared directors, no known shareholding crossover, and no public Block document that identifies ZhenHua. The Chinese counterparty currently disclosed by Block on Project III is Zhijiang Sanning Energy, not ZhenHua. That is the factual position as it stands.

That said, the indirect overlap is real and should not be dismissed. ZhenHua has now been reported as being in discussions with the Georgian authorities regarding oil and gas opportunities in Georgia. Block has been operating in that same arena for years and has repeatedly pointed to its relationships with the Georgian state, regulators and wider energy framework. So while there is no proven company-to-company connection, both are clearly moving within the same strategic and political energy space.

That is not insignificant. Georgia is not some vast market where these things happen in isolation. If a large Chinese state-backed energy company is actively assessing oil and gas opportunities there, then companies already on the ground with licences, operational history, infrastructure proximity and a live gas commercialisation case become far more relevant. Block is one of the most obvious names in that category. So the overlap is commercially relevant even if it has not yet translated into anything formal.

It is also worth remembering that Block previously referred to a non-exclusive MoU with a leading international trading company in relation to potential gas offtake and marketing. ZhenHua would fit that type of profile in principle, but there is no evidence at this stage that it was the unnamed party. That distinction matters. Possible is not the same as proven, and too often people present speculation as if it were established fact.

So the sensible reading is this: there is no confirmed direct connection today, but there is a clear strategic intersection developing in Georgia. If Chinese energy interest in the country continues to build, and if Block progresses Project III and wider gas commercialisation, then the scope for future relevance or alignment increases. At this stage it is not a case of pretending a deal exists, but nor is it accurate to suggest there is no significance at all.

Time for lunch!

Shyte Minger: 'When is revenue expected from the gas project?"

Around the time you do one.

Shyte Minger: "Looks like another red day for Bloe "& "And red it is"

You know what shyteforbrains? Had you invested at the beginning of this year you'd still be 73% UP. Just think, you could have clawed back some of your losses from all your other pathetic investments rather than bleating falsehoods here.

You dont post analysis, just smug, low-effort cynicism.

You confuse delayed revenue with no value, used a vague fantasy about “the energy problem being resolved,” and ended with the tired “penny stock” cliché as though today’s share price is a valuation method.

No numbers. No framework. No insight. Just lazy negativity.

Shyte Minger: Yawnnnnn....

This is not analysis. It is just smug, low-effort cynicism.

You’ve confused delayed revenue with no value, used a vague fantasy about “the energy problem being resolved,” and ended with the tired “penny stock” cliché as though today’s share price is a valuation method.

No numbers. No framework. No insight. Just lazy negativity. Oxygen thief you.

🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡

While we wait, for those of you following CCS technology there are some further developments related to prof Oelkers who was heavily involved in the early stages of our CCS and potentially adds a novel angle.

A recent item (March 2026) in a nature-linked research announcement from University of Iceland states Oelkers is the lead author on a paper showing that CO₂ can now be captured in reactive rock without using external water, presented as an advance for carbon mineralisation and CCS deployment.

Oelkers’ newer work actually strengthens Blocks CCS case. This is highly relevant to Block’s zeolite-rich Middle Eocene CCS giving Block a chance to position XIB not as generic CCS, but as a higher-value mineralisation-led system with faster lock-up, stronger permanence and potentially better economics. If they package the next phase properly around water efficiency, mineralisation speed and premium MRV/certification, CCS could become the real strategic differentiator.

Another 2025 paper “Rapid CO₂ mineralization by zeolite via cation exchange” in Scientific Reports where Oelkers is a co-author, where the paper is directly relevant to fast mineral trapping of CO₂

Consequently, Prof Oelkers is genuinely important to the CCS. His more recent work points in exactly the direction Block needs to go next as his 2025/26 research focusses on faster mineral trapping, zeolite-driven CO₂ fixation, reducing dependence on external water in carbon mineralisation systems. That maps directly onto Block’s Patardzeuli-Samgori concept, where the Middle Eocene volcaniclastics and zeolite-rich reservoir are already central to the investment case.

In other words, the science is not drifting away from our project, it is moving toward it. Rapid carbon mineralisation and CCS deployment coupled with the scale of the reservoir makes an extremely valuable and attractive option.



Looking forward to CCS update.

Shyte Minger getting it wrong again with its inaccurate and alarmist claim.

Truth is that Georgia boasts strong economic growth, a low-tax open economy, and a functional banking sector. Characterising it as a place where investors routinely "lose everything" is not supported by any data or research. Like any emerging market, it rewards careful, informed investment rather than blanket avoidance.

Had it invested just this year alone it would be 86% up, but no, it wants to cry over its 15p average which its clearly failing to refute.

What a 🤡

Correct Shedulike. To understand the investment Sanning are making, you must understand the Chinese psyche.

SM talking its usual bolllocks still.

You really do talk out of your rear end don't you Shytey? "Another day with news when global energy demands are at all time high... What the f is PH doing or not doing..."

Global energy demands are not at an all time high. Unlike your pathetic attempts to talk this company down. As for PH, why don't you go ask him yourself? His contact details are easy enough to find so when you get a reply why not come back and tell us some truths.

No wonder everyone here see's you as an complete loser and absolute moron.