Member Info for BouncyDeadCat

2024 for onshore & 2025 for offshore.

Very difficult to unseat the incumbents though invstrat. Unless a an active investor with a huge stake comes along and demands the required changes be made.

Board member Amanda Blanc is CEO of the largest UK pension group Aviva (mucho passive voting rights), that particular turkey isn't going to want to vote for Christmas.

I suppose the good news is, if BP becomes mega-cheap compared to its peers then a competitor is going to want to come along and take it over and with a p/e of just 4.27, BP stock isn't too far away from being 'mega-cheap'.

The longer the BoDs remain rudderless, the more they'll invite hostility upon themselves.

If you want to understand the issues surrounding BP and why it's such a 'confused' company/organisation and why the market doesn't value it anywhere near its competitors - Just take look at the Board of Directors. Have you ever seen such a group of individuals with differing and unaligned interests, all wanting to pull the company in a different direction.

TotalEnergies have just signed an agreement with TexGen, a U.S.-based company to acquire three gas-fired power plants in Texas for $635 million with a total capacity of 1.5 gigawatt (GW). The three plants are connected to ERCOT, the second-largest power market in the United States.

TotalEnergies' acquisition of 1.5 GW of additional flexible production capacity will fortify its trading capabilities in the gas and power markets.

Chariot currently have a partnership with Total on their renewables business and are currently working on creating a gas to power market in Morocco, including trading capabilities therein.

Makes you wonder whether they see the same opportunity with regards Chariot??

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/totalenergies-tte-signs-deal-to-buy-gas-power-plants-in-texas

Https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/1031501/chariot-has-very-exciting-weeks-ahead-after-gaining-anchois-eia-approval-1031501.html

Pete,

I get the impression that as a small team, they are all incredibly busy and don't wish to inform the market of much until it's officially signed off and because there's quite a few things to be signed off, newsflow will drive the SP as it should. As much as we may like to think of these people as lazy fat cats, I do actually get the impression that they're working very hard to deliver this project.

Looking at my notes from the AGM I wrote down the following comments under 'Timing'

Not giving dates, but;

EIA. Almost complete.

Partnering. In final stages with hope to announce something very soon (clarified, very close).

GSAs with Moroccan & European offtakers now in advanced stages.

Project Financing. Consortium of banks lined up ready to provide debt finance.

Pete,

I remember seeing it on the timeline, right after awarding of new gas venture. But I can't remember which presentation it was and they remove them from their website after a certain amount of time aka https://chariotenergygroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Presentation_October-2021_Chariot-Ltd-1.pdf

Anyway, it was discussed as one of the milestones that needed to be crossed prior to FID at the AGM.

50p is very much on the low end, other brokers have 60p, 65p and 68p as targets.

It all depends on how much of Anchois they get to keep and at what price (mcf) the GSA gets set at - Once we know, we can work out NAV (and thus our own SP target).

10 year tax holiday on Moroccan gas too.

It's on the roadmap Pete and if you went to the AGM or read the H2 report, then you'd know it was one of the next imminent milestones.

All milestones are being worked on simultaneously (GSA, FID, Debt Finance). Expect more to drop in the coming weeks & months.

Choo choo and chill 🚆😊

...and chill 🚆

People aren't paying attention (yet). To most retail investors an EIA approval doesn't mean anything to them, so it's a nothing RNS.

BUT... if you know what it means & why it's been given (now) then you have a remarkable opportunity to top up (or chill if you have enough) knowing what's coming next 😊

News flow coming down the tracks in Q4 🚆

This is the puff of smoke you can see coming round the mountain.

She'll be coming round the mountain when she comes...

She'll be coming round the mountain when she comes....

She'll be coming round the mountain, coming round the mountain, she'll be coming round the mountain when she comes 🎵🎵🎶

Surfit,

Users can get posts deleted by clicking the Report Post button, even their own posts.

It's quite difficult to have a discussion in good faith when such posts get deleted. For anyone reading this board would have had to be keeping a very close eye on it to have read the now-deleted posts.

When kingbilly got caught out the other day, the post increminating him quickly got deleted (as did the proof of him being a fraud).

The LSE site is pretty unsophisticated and if people want to have several pseudonym accounts (like we know some have), then it's pretty easy for them to do.

As several posts have been deleted, it's impossible for us to continue this discussion in good faith so I'll leave it here.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

I'm not the one trying to cover my tracks by deleting posts.

Just answer the question, is it a) or b) now?

Surfit,

Isn't it funny that some of the most important posts relating to this discussion have been deleted?

I wonder who has been deleting them and why?

The obfuscation on display here is incredible.

You have gone from accusing the BoD of raising cash on false pretences i.e. solely for working capital and nothing else (from which your post has mysteriously disappeared), to quoting part of the RNS in which onshore drilling and development of 3 wells was stated as the primary reason for the raise.

So which is it?

a) you still believe the company is lying about raising capital for drilling the new onshore licence and that was just a ruse to get the $19 million cash.

or

b) you were previously mistaken and now you do actually believe they raised the capital to drill the onshore wells as well as new ventures and working capital.

Instead of answering in none answers, just stating whether it's a) or b) is fine.

I'm not the one making baseless accusations that money was raised under false pretences.

Read the H2 report, follow the timeline of events. If you think the company are lying about all of it, then you really should sell out and leave.

Funny how I never got an answer to the question don't you think?

Harsh how?

I asked a genuine question of which I'm yet to receive an answer.

If someone makes an accusation (like he has), surely it's not unreasonable to ask him to explain his logic or why he remains invested (if that's what he really believes) ?

Look at the timeline of events.

10th July

Fundraise announcement to drill a new onshore Moroccan Licence.

11th July

Shareholders approve fundraise.

1st August

Chariot acquire a 75% stake in the Loukos Onshore Licence in partnership with ONHYM.

Licence was only issued to Chariot after they acquired the funds to drill it.

Ianfer,

Let's not confuse this any further by bringing Rishi Sunak into it. Politicians are held to & operate on far lower compliance standards than public companies.

Timelines slipping a bit is also a completely different thing to committing outright fraud “the reason why CHAR needed more cash to keep operational, put under the umbrella of the onshore exploration cash raise” this is an accusational statement without proof or merit.

I very much doubt Chariot would have been awarded the onshore Loukos licence without the commitment to drill it. And they've committed to drilling it.

Yes, the BoD have to keep shareholders informed once decisions have been made. That doesn't mean they should livestream all meetings and negotiations, nor would any serious investor want that.

Surfit,

Your assumption that Chariot have raised cash based on a false pretext (i.e. declaring the cash raised would be used for one thing and then using that as an excuse to fund something else) would be illegal. It's as simple as that.

It's always good to have an element of skepticism when it comes to AIM BoDs and what they say, but what you're actually doing in this case is calling them outright liars.

Maybe you could answer the following question:

If your stated position is that you don't believe the information the company put out regarding the raised funds and that you don't believe they're close to partering (as stated in Chariots H2 report) Why would you even want to work out how many years or months the company could keep going for? For surely your due diligence is concluded at that point (you simply don't believe them - strong sell). For continuing to work out how long a $19 Million pile of cash will last to pay a bunch of lying fraudsters for is completely irrational.

I think some people say they are doing 'due diligence' to either sound informed (when they're really not) or to spread a bit of fud.

Pipe down kingbilly. Nobody cares for your tedious relentless gossiping on here. Either post some useful information/observation/view about Chariot or FO outta here. And stop posting under pseudonyms, we can all tell it's you.