Member Info for BouncyDeadCat

Bubble,

A lot of people like to gamble on hunches and if their hunch doesn't pay off they sell up and move onto the next trade(s). Trading on hunches means you need to take the price the market if offering you, even if it's not ideal and they may not all get out on the same day, they may leave over the course of a week or two. If you look at the price action, it has been post-AGM when we've seen the real dip (on very low volume).

Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with MMs hunting for stops.

I think there was a small group of investors/traders who thought (wrongly) that news would come before/at the date of the AGM and when it didn't come - sold. This group was small in number, but when volumes are low, they can have a outsized effect on the SP (short-term).

Had nothing to do with that smyth.

I replied to his opinion with hard facts that contradicted what he was saying.

He literally had no answer to reply with. Lol.

Padfoot,

Lol. Couldn't even answer that simple question could you.

AJ,

Is that Graham10k you're addressing?

Best put that doomsday clown on ignore. Only ever posts falsehoods or about the 'terrible feelings' he's having.

Of course, if they had made up all of this progression of the asset, ONHYM, Vivo, ONEE & Soc Gen would all have to be in on the scam 😏😏😏

Padfoot,

“we do not know if the company (post the last 2 raises at 18p then 14p), is anywhere nearer toward 'monetisation' of its assets (monetisation cannot happen until gas is out the ground)”.

As a shareholder, I find it incredible that you believe this.

And if you do truly believe it, then it seriously begs the question – Why are you even a shareholder? Because to assume your statement is true, the company has been lying about the following...

*Anchois 2 drill results (proving reserves that make the asset viable for extraction).

*The ongoing negotiations with interested potential partners.

*Carrying out expensive environmental impact assessments.

*Completing an expensive Front-End Engineering and Design (FEED) for the project.

*Signing a pipeline tie-in Agreement with ONHYM.

*Signing a gas sale principle agreement with ONHYM for 60 mmscf per day on a take or pay basis for a minimum of 10 years (0.6 BCM per year).

*Appointing Soc Gen as Project Finance Advisor to arrange debt finance of the project.

*Signing a MOU for gas sales to ONEE.

*Partnering with Vivo Energy to sell this gas to the industry market in Morocco.

The truth of the matter is; all of these actions have been officially RNS'd.

Without such actions taking place, Chariot wouldn't be any closer to monetisation i.e. getting the gas out of the ground. But they have, and they are.

I suppose there is a very small chance that the BoD are involved in an elaborate scam whereby they haven't really carried out any of these actions and have made all these things up.

All a share price is, is sentiment. Sentiment financialized.

What's the future growth potential, future value, future revenue, future profit etc etc...

As I said; Since they acquired the Anchois licence, Chariot has been a bet on whether they (the BoD) could monetise this giant asset (that includes trust and credibility in the CEO & BoD).

Forget the SP for a minute. Is the company closer or further away to monetising their giant gas asset than they were a year ago?

...is with the SP.

If the SP was 30p whilst you were waiting for news on a partner, then I imagine you'd be relatively content with proceedings

But because the SP is languishing, you're concerned, fearful, lacking trust etc...

Since they acquired the Anchois licence; Chariot has been a bet on whether they (the BoD) could monetise this giant asset. They are closer now than they ever have been. So what, if anything has changed? SP sentiment!? Pfttt.

The O&G industry works at a glacial pace. 'Imminent'could be 2-3 months ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

For whatever reason, our potential farm-in partner(s) weren't ready to sign off on a deal by H1 as Chariot had expected/hoped for.

Had Chariot signed with a farm-in partner by H1 then they would be due substantial back-costs and I'm not sure if additional funds would have been required to drill Loukos. The timing of that last raise was unfortunate and disappointing for shareholders.

However, the reason for the delay in partnering on Anchois is still somewhat unclear. At the AGM, AP talked about minor stuff causing the delays in partnering i.e. changing project costs, and difficulties with securing certain equipment and supplies which, yes, I suppose could cause some delays, especially with regards to our potential financing partner(s). He certainly gave the impression that this was all that was really holding up the signing of potential partner(s) and that deals are close to being announced.

Which caused me to re-examine why Chariot chose to raise funds for Loukos when they did (putting aside ~ working capital & admin expenses due to delays in partnering).

I initially thought it could be due to more favourable (Anchois) partnering terms if Chariot could prove up a new gas play in Loukos that had read-through to Anchois, but after the AGM, I'm starting to think that it's genuinely because they didn't want to lose the opportunity of acquiring Loukos and the potential that area holds.

Duncan Wallace is very credible and also very confident that Loukos has lots of gas.

Onshore drilling is also dirt cheap.

They got the Loukos licence for free – providing they carry out certain commitments (Credit to their relationshion with ONHYM).

If Loukos has the gas that Duncan thinks it has, then these are the starting economics for Loukos...

Well 1: Gaufrette. 26 bcf

Well cost: $3 Million

Wholesale industrial gas prices in Morocco = $11-$12 mmbtu

Unlocks $300 Million in revenue

Well 2: Eclair. 30 bcf

Well cost: $3 Million

Wholesale industrial gas prices in Morocco = $11-$12 mmbtu

Unlocks $350 Million in revenue

Well 3: Dartois. 13 bcf

Well cost: $3 Million

Wholesale industrial gas prices in Morocco = $11-$12 mmbtu

Unlocks $150 Million in revenue

"We have been provided with no salient information from the AGM, to provide PI's with some level of confidence, to ward off any future need/threat for more shareholder dilution."

We kinda have, although granted, it does require an element of trust in AP and the BoD.

He has repeated they are close to partnering. He said it again at the AGM.

There'll be no pelting of the BoD by pitchfork wielding PI's. The ones here rattling pitchforks are just keyboard critics who have no intention of going to the AGM.

I wish they all would go and voice themselves in front of the BoD. But they won't.

It's not paranoid to notice that you always post within minutes of each other. Almost on a daily basis.

Anyway, back to my very simple question that you don't seem to want to answer...

Are you going to go to the AGM to put your concerns directly to the BoDs or not?

Not paranoid, just wondering, as a long-suffering shareholder that you claim to be; Why don't you go to the AGM and moan and vent your frustrations directly at the BoDs?

It would seem strange if you don't go there, when you're here everyday, moaning and complaining about what they are doing and how they are doing it.

Outside of a few billionaire investors (who have done the work and have taken a decent chunk of the company), hardly anyone else has crunched the numbers, because hardly anyone has heard of Chariot.

Wider market recognition of the asset and its value, probably won't come until a much bigger company partners with Chariot and starts talking about the huge Moroccan gas asset it has farmed into.

$9 billion revenue over 10 years is based on the value of gas they have already found (0.65 Tcf) and that revenue needs to be split 3 ways (Chariot, ONHYM and farmin partner). However, Anchois is likely to be much bigger than 0.65 Tcf and with a farmin partner, there likely comes a new drill program. There are other sizeable low risk prospects within the wider Anchois/Rissana Licence that have high COS.

Kingbily/smyth (same person as always post within minutes of each other),

Why don't you go to the AGM and moan and vent directly at the BoDs?

Each broker will give a different allocation of 'additionally applied for shares' to their customers depending on how many of their customers opted to purchase additional shares above their set allocation.

This is because all individual customers shares will be treated as one block/pool of shares under each broker (allocation).

So if Halifax had less customers applying for additional shares, the customers who did apply would receive (proportionally) a bigger allocation than a customer who is with a broker who had more customers applying for additional shares.

N.B. The probability of success for the targeted Loukos prospects are higher than they were for the Anchois 2 drill.

Whingers are always gonna whinge ¯\_(ツ)_/¯