Member Info for Blubay

No Triple that is completely false information. The helium discovery was made last year at Itumbula, with an extended well test (EWT). That was the basis for the competent person’s report (CPR), which validated the existence of ‘contingent resources’ (i.e. contingent on developing an economic method of extraction). The purpose of the ESP test was to establish ‘proven reserves’ by showing that larger quantities of fluid could be pumped from basement with improved gas water ratio and helium concentration. As they weren’t able to prove all of this (likely due to dilution from the intermediate aquifer) they are now making a new plan to try again, possibly targeting fracture at another location. The discovery still stands, there is a working helium system, there are contingent resources. The next phase remains what it was before. They first need to proven reserves before progressing into development of a pilot plant.

At one point a few years back Spreadbet were the largest shareholder in the company

On the actual reported flow rates from the seven wells you would be looking at approximately 40-60 Mscf helium per day (depending on flow rate optimisation), and 100-150 tons CO2. At $400-500 that’s grossing $25,000 a day helium and up to $50,000 a day CO2. Minus land owner royalty, opex $13 per Mscf raw gas. Very conservatively, that’s a minimum $10m pretax, split two ways.

You have the helium versus CO2 concentrations for each well, and the range of flow rates. You have the maximum input and output for the processing plant. Do the maths.

I think the 2024 economic modelling (independent assessment) was based on an illustrative $450 mid price for an average 3% helium concentration from the initial wells (using the State 16 discovery as typical). Plus a CO2 bonus of 50%. That was before drilling any other wells. State 16 increased flow on retesting as field repressurised. The production wells flowed both above and below predicted helium average (all set out in the BNL presentation), but with considerably better CO2 (also tabulated). It’s fairly easy to see that they’re broadly on target for helium and way up on CO2 (which is also high grade).

Kread - “ Is there a more upto date figure for galactica revenues from board since December agm.”

Yes, if you’re able and willing to read, which you seem hell bent of refusing to do. Read BNL’s “Corporate Presentation - First Production Update”

Tinger - " will likely speed up their decision making process to ensure a reliable supply even if things get back to some sort of normality"

If they had proven a reliable supply they wouldn't need a partner! They're looking for a partner to help them share the risk of trying to prove this.

As they said when they released the ESP test results, they now need to work on a new plan for Rukwa, drilling in new locations etc, so I'd guess there will be plenty of PR activity once they have that plan and are looking to promote it to the market, hopefully with an investment partner. Like most AIM companies they pay for PR when they need it and when there's a positive to report.

Kread - at the time of the acquisition, before drilling any wells, the projection was for an annual accrual to HE1 of c. $2m from the phase one helium plus perhaps $1m from the CO2. After drilling and testing the performance is increased, and notably so in the quantity and quality of the CO2. That looks like it’s worth as much as the helium if not more. So let’s start from a baseline of $4m net accrual. Then look at the maximum output of the Pinon plant (more than $20m gross at mid price with a low overhead on opex). They’re probably looking at more than half of that performance by mid 2026. Then consider the likelihood of gaining output on well compression and infill wells to get closer to that capacity (full capacity 24/7 won’t be practical of course). There’s taxes of course but the current scenario looks more bullish now so cause for optimism there I think. You’re being overly pessimistic.

Toffers, you make assumptions that are completely unfounded. I’m optimistic about the company’s long term prospects as you know. I think they’ve done incredibly well to bring a new commercial helium production project to market in a couple of years with zero debt in the company. I’d be keen to see them build that project out and make further near to market (low risk) project acquisitions if opportunities arise. Rukwa is a longer term and large capex project which remains to be proven but could have significant potential to disrupt the global industry if it works (high risk-reward). Hopefully that proves a balanced risk portfolio overall. From all the facts available to the market, test results, flow data, CPRs etc I remain bullish about Galactica and cautious about Rukwa. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable position. Circumstances could change with new information, totally open to all possibilities once they become probabilities.

Toffers - how is anyone supposed to base sound investment decisions on speculation that is simply possible let alone “not inconceivable”. It needs to be at least probable and ideally in the bag. You need to filter all the different hypotheses through a reality lens. You seem to be not really looking at the wood for all the trees that your ChatGPT is planting.

NHM21 posts similarly unsubstantiated claims on most of the shares s/he comments on. I think it was in context of Colorado, maybe anticipating first sales confirmation?

But that’s not true is it? At least not according to the independent competent persons reports.

All I’m suggesting is that you try to post balanced information because it helps no-one to swamp the discussion with pages of biased input. Just ask your Chat GPT to take a more balanced view instead of reinforcing a one sided view.

Honestly Toffers, you know as well as anyone what the objective of the ESP test was and you know what the results were. It wasn’t a disaster but it didn’t achieve the main appraisal objectives so now they need to drill and test again, probably at a different fault location. I don’t understand why you keep posting partial and misleading information on repeat. As they’ve said consistently for the past 18 months, they need to raise the gas ratio and/or helium concentration to make this work.

Prices go up or down. If you believe the price is going up then bet long. If you believe it’s going down then bet short. If you’re right then why would anyone else’s position worry you? Why would you block someone for holding a different opinion? The whole point of these boards is to see the balance of opinions.

As Pete says, every indication given to the market by the Board points to the search for a partner to hep them deliver the remainder of the appraisal phase, to the extent hopefully of increasing the gas ratio and helium concentration far enough to establish proven reserves (which is what the ESP test at Itumbula was funded to try but did not quite achieve). If they were looking for a partner for commercial development they would have informed the market accordingly. Bullish speculation beyond the facts is always fun but you have to acknowledge that's what it is.

"...We now need to increase our understanding of the Basement fault and fracture play, where we believe there is the potential to increase GWRs and helium concentrations. In order to do this, a further work programme will be required, and we will commence a strategic farmout process to seek an industry partner to help us deliver this."

I'd go for a farm in partnership with a buyout option at the point of achieving proven reserves.

I don't think it's helpful to keep repeating the claim about a 9.2% helium at Itumbula just waiting for a partner to pump it, ship it and sell it. It's false and misleading information. What they have is a very large licence area, with proof of concept that there is a deep working helium system, and proof that large quantities of water can be brought to surface without reducing the average helium concentration in gas liberated from it at surface (5.5% at Itumbula). They do have independent validation of 'contingent resources' from the CPR. There's a lot of helium lurking in their licence area. The 'contingency' is that they don't yet have a proven way of extracting it commercially, although they do have a good working hypothesis about how to do that, plus lots of data and knowledge gained. Until they can establish 'proven reserves' the project is at the appraisal stage. They will drill more wells and do more tests, for which they need more capital and are looking for a partner to help them. If those test result in proven reserves then they can move on to plan development of production wells and plants. It's a long term and large scale project that has potential to disrupt the industry with innovative technologies. They're looking for a partner prepared to take a punt on that potential and their sub surface modelling to resolve the contingencies. I would have thought they'd look for some kind of phased investment deal, with future options for the partner, which might get them as far as the next stage for a moderate amount of capital raised with the least equity release possible.

We really do not know the price of the Galactica helium is above $600. The target price was the mid range $475. They're selling low grade helium to a liquefaction plant for refinement (or alternatively raw to the local balloon industry). The transfer range for those tube trailers is not much more than 500 miles so local spot price really depends whether the local liquefier is short of local suppliers or whether the local lift market is experiencing any shortage. No doubt the liquefier will be hiking their sale prices if they're exporting but whether they also hike their purchase price from small suppliers is more about local markets and capacity.