Member Info for bigguboi

I'm with RS5. Normal price action on lower than average liquidity after a huge run up. Well analysis updates and eventually CPR and financing after that should return investors to their senses and resume interest in buying.

I was pretty happy to buy at 23p and above when the sp was moving higher, it's totally an emotional response to feel bad about buying at 21p when the share price is moving down right now.

Hi Fernan, interesting thoughts. Seems prudent to me. Higher gas prices, greater annual production profile, higher CAPEX and longer asset life will affect the $/mcf NPV in addition to the reserve size. Higher production & gas prices will obviously affect the $/mcf positively but a longer asset life and CAPEX (due to bigger processing infrastructure that needs to be built) will affect it negatively. I think on a net basis the $/mcf should rise, agreed

Stock is consolidating pretty steadily here albeit on low volume it seems. Could sink back down to 21.6 but right now definitely doesn't seem a bad time to buy either considering the RSI is low. Pattern kind of looks like what I think they call an atomic wedgie so looking good there. Well analysis news would probably give us another kick.

I've been happy to increase my position this week. It's not much for the guys with bigger pockets but I'm now a proud owner of 100k shares!

No, not confused. Short term movements

Looked like a technical break-up to me. But yeah I think it's pretty clear we're still far away from fair value both in terms of share price and time. Patience

Good DD Fernan nice job. I would like to add however that Morocco intends to increase natgas demand to 3bcm (approx 105bcf) by 2040, and Chariot already has a 40mmscf/d (14.6bcf) MOU in place with a Moroccan client. The increase in demand should be taken into account, but I agree that a substantial portion of the production could and should be diverted to Europe. Maybe 60-40 or 50-50

End of H1 I think

There is financing risk but I don't think Chariot needs to raise any money other than for project development purposes

Good points Simon.

1) and 2) would take a long time to come to fruition so we can expect continued 'status quo' in the natural gas market I think. As SHC pointed out China probably won't be able to significantly increase domestic production in the near term. Hydrogen projects will also take years to come online. I will add though that uranium or coal especially may see greater demand which could maybe offset some of the natural gas demand but that's a small percentage

3) and 5) are good points. A global recession is potentially in the books so it's an all-encompassing macro risk which could affect demand significantly. That said there is no viable alternative for natural gas in many ways so we can at least expect some baseline demand to be kept. Long term prices in Morocco are $8-11/mmbtu and probably $20 or so in Europe even if a sustained recession comes about.

4) is something I disagree entirely. Not that natgas production cannot increase globally but getting that production to Europe or Morocco so that it can be used is the issue. There are no other pipelines that can be leveraged so they would need to rely on LNG, but there are not enough regasification plants in Central Europe to offset a whopping 155bcm of annual Russian pipeline gas. There is better capacity in Spain but pipeline infrastructure to the rest of Europe would need to be improved in order to leverage it. In short we are talking about years of investment and development, not anything that can be done in weeks or months with a flick of a wrist. Anchois will come online before even half of Russian supply can be replaced.

Personally I think the biggest risk is related to financing. If AP and co. make a bad financing deal (too high interest rate, too much dilution, etc.) or if credit runs dry and no financing is available due to a global recession shareholders could suffer. The political side seems less risky but there are always political risks and there can be some awful regulatory curveballs. Operational risks are also always present but those become more relevant once the financing is done and all the permits are in hand.

That said I believe Chariot has things in control and will deliver its projects successfully

Hi Jimmy, was just about to post that myself. The project seems comparable to Chariot's Nour.

From Rigzone:
"The engineering package will include up to 10 GW of installed wind capacity, coupled with up to 8 GW of electrolysis capacity, a desalination plant, an ammonia plant, power transmission and backup, and port facilities to transport the green ammonia to national and international markets."

Ah, I see pardon for the misunderstanding Nordell. I don't really know much about the UK domestic coal market so I can't really say anything about that myself. Generally mothballed mines can be brought online relatively quickly and cheaply but I'm not sure whether there are any significant shovel ready deposits in the UK, or how quick/expensive it would be to increase coal power generation. It's an idea worth exploring in the face of high energy prices and renewed interest in self-sufficiency though, and an interesting topic on its own. Let's not head too far down that path though since we are here for Chariot and natgas :)

And to get a little nosy... Metallurgical or coking coal is necessary in steelmaking so that's not going anywhere :)

Sorry to say Nordell but you are wrong about coal. Coal will be necessary for a long time yet especially in such massive economies like India and China, but also ironically enough Europe which has increased its coal usage and pushed back plans to close coal power plants recently. To use your analogy, a bit silly to buy an expensive tesla when you can get a fully functional diesel car for a much lower price. But perceptions like yours is exactly why coal can be such a great investment: due to underinvestment in the sector there is low supply and tightness in the market, and I would argue the price is set to incease or stay high due to supply going down more than demand.

Of course in fifty years we may use less coal than today of course. But certainly not a dead resource, not by a longshot

Johnny, first gas is expected two years from FID. So in 2024, or if there are some natural delays then 2025

Yep agreed with the farm out. Those are riskier prospects so derisking by partnering up in the South is the most logical thing to do. Chariot should keep its focus on Anchois & Lixus

Oh and the final slide does show the ~7Tcf gas potential too

Jimmy, on the topic of the Southern blocks inside Rissana that are covered by the seismic: Rabat Deep 1 well had targeted the JP-1 prospect which had 768 million barrels of oil prospectivity, and all in all the blocks had prospectivity for 12.5B barrels apparently (Sep 2017 presentation says: that there was potential to derisk 1.25B barrels net mean prospective resources and at the time Chariot had 10% interest in that play). They didn't find any hydrocarbons in the well though. Oil shows indicated migration from another source rock which they hadn't recognized before.

https://www.chariotenergygroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2nd-Morocco-OG-Summit_-Chariot_Feb2019-1.pdf
According to this presentation they had ~2.3B barrels of oil prospective resources at Mohammedia & Kenitra prospects. But none of these were ever drilled in the end because Anchois took priority.

for 6bcf at Anchois, easily over £3