RE: Phase 2 of SL5 Jan 2026 00:12
Hi alma,
Didn't say it was needed as the totality of all financing measures for rkh has been structured so that it isnt needed, but I could make an argument for why its wanted.
Time cost of money.. as shareholders of, including the directors and employees of, rkh we can get to the promised land (take your pick on sp number, everyone has their own) quickly or slowly.
Quicker will have a lower high point, but need more funding than we have, and slower will allow us to keep more of the jam tomorrow but we have the capital to do it over a longer timeframe (production, or financing from production, to pay for development).
Who would be interested..?.. at the right price, probably quite a few., same applies for Navitas.
None of us (including all board members) are getting any younger, and navitas have new projects to fund so would likely be interested in a faster financial timeline.
Development of known assets seems more their bag than exploration, so I would hazard a guess that they will want another player on board to share the risk of build out of what is a basin rather than a field.
Just an opinion as I said.
Thanks for the info re. production well completion speeds for CNS.. 60 days is now my new number on this front.
BB3