Member Info for Crazych38

This was the reason that the shereprice was not up after the merger.

I think that this placment is a good one and ita after 4.5 years after the last one = fair enough for a company without any income.

now i hope with a 3 -2 drills ahead on pel 83 with good chance of finding more hidrocarbons we will see 60-80c and if pel90 will be success we can move much bigger.

its a game of santiment and until the eod i think we will see 2-4 drills.

You're right, I invested in Sintana in early '22 when no one was looking at it, at ridiculous prices. Later, I sold my entire large position for a significant profit before the Mopane drilling.

Following the results and prior to the option conversions, the public was foolish enough to drive the price down to 0.38, so I re-entered with a smaller position and rode it back up to $1+. After selling that, I bought Challenger in 2024 following the massive drop after the Chevron deal with Area 1; the downside at that point was limited as it was trading at the cash value it was expected to receive from Chevron, while the upside could have been astronomical if the merger hadn't happened.

I invested there because I believe in the region and think Challenger secured an incredible position in an area where no other investable company offers prices anywhere near that level. It turns out Charlestown shared my view, entering first as an investment and later through the merger between Sintana and Challenger.

Due to the merger and the low valuation of Sintana with Challenger, I became an investor there again and even increased my position in Sintana this year. I believe Sintana is undervalued based solely on its position in Mopane—an asset on the path to FID with TotalEnergies as the operator. The market isn't pricing in any upside for the potential in the rest of that block, its other licenses in the Orange or Walvis Basins, or the potentially dramatic developments in Uruguay given the large percentages they hold there.

Ultimately, I believe in Sintana. I think what’s missing is for small institutional bodies, hedge funds, or an anchor investor to take a position; that would change the entire picture. In my opinion, it is trading at a discount and fails to price in its potential, which is rare for a company with multiple positions in one of the world's hottest basins (the Orange Basin) and exposure to the Mopane discovery, which could be larger than Venus.

At the current stage of the Orange Basin in Namibia, I’m less interested in speculative bets and more focused on a proper risk–reward balance—meaning limited downside risk with solid upside potential.

In Sintana, because of Mopane, that balance makes sense to me. Total is expected to drill there already this year, which could increase the current valuation of the asset.

In addition, BW Energy holds 95% of the Kudu block, which is adjacent to the Mopane discovery. They have a lot of “meat on the bone” for a farm-out, and in my opinion, they are trading below the value of their expected activity by 2028, which targets production of 90,000 barrels per day.

I also think that if the story in their Namibia block develops beyond what is currently known—1.3 Tcf of dry gas at Kudu—it could become very interesting. After all, this is the closest block to Mopane, and we don’t yet know whether there are additional leads there connected to Mopane.

It’s embarrassing that investors are getting worked up over 600k options. It’s absolutely nothing in terms of money... If the stock drops because of this, it just means there are still 'weak hands' to shake out. That’s fine, I’ve got patience.

What’s happening with Eco compared to Sintana simply makes no sense; to me, it’s a glaring market failure.

With all due respect to Eco, Sintana has a much healthier risk/reward ratio, and I believe its licenses in the Orange Basin are far more mature. I’ve noticed that Sintana’s Canadian investors are still upset about the merger, and the sentiment is poor. It reminds me a bit of how, back in '22, they thought the focus should be on Colombia, while management wisely navigated the company toward Namibia.

This is excellent management that transformed the company from a near-zero valuation into a serious exploration firm with exposure to the Mopane discovery and partner-carried funding all the way to production. This is extraordinary in this industry, and the penny hasn't dropped for investors yet.

It’s not make sense that Eco has a higher valuation than Sintana, no sense at all.

From gemini it will give u the idea why they do it:

The Namibian Stock Exchange (**NSX**) is one of the smaller exchanges in Africa in terms of purely local companies, but it is unique for its high number of dual listings, particularly large corporations from South Africa.

Here are the updated figures for 2026:

### **How many stocks are traded on the exchange?**

As of early 2026, there are approximately **59 companies and securities** listed, categorized as follows:

* **Local Board:** There are **12 "pure" Namibian companies** (such as Namibia Breweries, Mobile Telecommunications - MTC, and the Capricorn banking group).

* **Dual Listings (Overall Index):** Approximately **47 additional companies** are dually listed, the vast majority of which also trade on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). These include giants like Anglo American, Shoprite, and Old Mutual.

* **Additional Instruments:** The exchange also hosts 11 Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and 10 Exchange Traded Notes (ETNs), providing exposure to gold, platinum, and international indices.

### **Investment Entities and Market Volume**

The Namibian market is clearly dominated by **institutional investors**, whose influence on volume and liquidity is decisive.

#### **1. Main Investment Entities:**

* **Pension Funds (primarily GIPF):** The Government Institutions Pension Fund of Namibia is the largest player. It holds billions of dollars in assets and serves as the backbone of the local market.

* **Insurance and Asset Management Firms:** Entities like **Sanlam Namibia**, **Old Mutual**, and **Namibia Asset Management** manage a significant portion of local capital.

* **Banks and Financial Groups:** **Capricorn Group**, **FirstRand Namibia**, and **Standard Bank Namibia** act as both issuers and active investors through their wealth management divisions.

#### **2. Percentage of Market Turnover:**

* **Institutional Dominance:** Institutional investors (pension funds and insurance companies) account for approximately **70% to 80% of shareholdings** on the local board.

* **Trading Turnover:** Because most Namibian institutions follow a "Buy and Hold" strategy to comply with local Regulation 28 (Domestic Asset Requirements), daily liquidity is relatively low.

* **Retail Investors:** The share of private retail investors in the total turnover is considered very low, typically **less than 10%**, despite efforts to increase participation through public offerings like MTC.

### **Key Investment Insight for Namibia**

While the NSX is often characterized as a "quiet market," it is highly sensitive to developments in the energy (oil and gas) and mining (uranium) sectors. Many investors monitor companies like **Reconnaissance Energy Africa** or **Bannerman Energy**, which are listed there, due to the massive potential of recent offshore oil discoveries.

Average cost of drilling in the offshore is 100 million usd.

So sintana need just half from 40 million usd ..

But i think that after the sesmic results they will sell 10-30% for carry ...

Look about that: (This is very new update and dramtic for urguay offshore exploration)

On 25 March 2026, ANCAP, the Uruguayan state-owned oil company and industry regulator, advised that QatarEnergy has farmed-in to Uruguay offshore blocks AREA OFF-2 (30%) and AREA OFF-7 (30%) (both operated by Shell), and Chevron has farmed-in to AREA OFF-7 (30%) - in each case, as non-operating partners. AREA OFF-2 is the block immediately adjacent to Sintana's AREA OFF-3, and AREA OFF-7 is the block immediately outboard of AREA OFF-3.

This farm-in activity expands Chevron's presence in Uruguay to two blocks including Sintana's AREA OFF-1 block, where Chevron holds a 60% interest and is operator following a farm-in in 2025. It also represents a new country entry for QatarEnergy, increasing the roster of major global oil and gas businesses now present in Uruguay to Chevron, Shell, APA, YPF, ENI and QatarEnergy. Sintana is the only junior company with exposure to this rapidly emerging exploration hotspot.

As announced by the Company on 3 March 2026, 3D seismic acquisition on AREA OFF-1 is underway. As of 25 March 2026, approximately 564km2 of seismic data has been acquired, which represents 22% of planned acquisition for the first season ending April 2026. Most acquisition relevant to the key prospects identified on AREA OFF-1 is expected to be completed in the first season, with fast-track results expected in Q4 2026, and full PSDM results from the first season expected in Q2 2027. The Company is carried for the costs of this seismic acquisition program by Chevron.

And Sintana have there (pel 87) 7.4%...

Pcl have the option to buy 1% (0.5-0.4% less for sintana)

from custos.

Lets see what will be the announcement...

You can copy paste my post and just give a credit to crazych :)

I think Sintana is the most interesting exploration company in the world at this stage. Why?

Usually, exploration companies offer enormous upside, but they also carry a huge downside: if a key well fails, the company can lose most of its value and approach a near-zero valuation.

With Sintana Energy, the situation is somewhat unique.

After the Mopane discovery, and with expectations for a Final Investment Decision by around 2028, plus the entry of TotalEnergies into the license, the company in which Sintana holds its stake benefits from a full carry through to production.

As a result, Sintana is currently trading below what I consider the fair value of Mopane alone, even without assuming any increase in recoverable resources.

In other words, my investment thesis for Sintana starts with the idea that the company is already undervalued based solely on Mopane.

Now let’s talk about the upside.

PEL 83

The area where Mopane was discovered still contains additional prospects. Any further discoveries there would add meaningful upside.

PEL 90

Here Sintana does not have a carry. They will probably need to think creatively about how to finance additional drilling by Chevron. However, because Sintana’s working interest is relatively small, the capital required to fund their share of a well should not be excessive.

PEL 87

This is a higher-risk block, but recent developments — including the results from the Kharas‑1 well near Kudu Gas Field, and the entry of TotalEnergies and Petrobras into the neighboring block — have increased interest in the area.

PEL 79

A very interesting and highly prospective block.

In the Walvis Basin, Sintana has two licenses, one of which is operated by Chevron, which may potentially drill there.

In addition, the company holds two onshore licenses in Namibia and Angola.

And then there is the crown jewel: two offshore licenses in Uruguay.

Sintana is essentially the only sub-$1 billion company with meaningful exposure to Uruguay’s offshore exploration.

If something significant is discovered there, it could be transformational for the company.

At the moment, 3D seismic surveys have begun in Area 1, where Chevron is the operator.

In Area 3, the partners are still waiting for a farm-in partner.

So what do we have with Sintana?

A company with limited downside (assuming oil prices remain supportive), combined with enormous upside from high-quality assets in Namibia’s Orange Basin and Walvis Basin, unique exploration exposure in Uruguay, and additional diversification through onshore licenses in Namibia, Angola, and Colombia.

In my view, this combination creates an unusually attractive risk-reward profile for an exploration company.

Area 3 used to be a block that belonged to BP. It would be strange and surprising if they came back.

On the other hand, it’s quite clear that this is the last block left for a meaningful farm-out, so it’s reasonable to assume they will manage to bring in a major player.

It’s also quite surprising that Exxon isn’t present in this area at all.

Yes in my country and i stuck with cad sheres again with much more expansive fees if i whould sell. (i dont want to sell)

Jmhoooooooo why you came here after me? stay it sintana..

jmho! ;)

It doesn’t make sense — it’s just a speculative idea.

If you want to go speculative, there are better options:

1. Chevron could farm into Area 3

2. They could make a combined deal with Chevron, keeping 10% across all assets (Area 1, Area 3, PEL 90, PEL 82) with carry until production.

For investors, that would basically make them an option on Chevron’s assets in the Namibia–Uruguay Atlantic margin.

Right now, they don’t have any carry in PEL 90.

Its not manipulation its take the merger price via sintana value that in downtrend becouse the dispointed investors of sintana and it will take time to clear them off...

You can organize and do whatever you want — it’s your right as Sintana investors not to want this merger.

But let me remind you of a few things: while you’re complaining about a 25% dilution, we’re not complaining about a dilution that’s three times larger in value.

From Challenger investors’ perspective — if the merger goes through, that’s great; if it doesn’t, that’s also great.

Challenger has much more speculative upside than Sintana, whose valuation is already quite high — and if PL-83 doesn’t progress, Sintana will be in trouble.

There are pros and cons to such a merger:

Cons: dilution by a factor of three… Overall, our market cap had much greater upside potential on its own.

There were three major upcoming value-driving events expected over the next 18 months:

1. Farm-out of Area 3

2. Start and publication of 3D surveys in Area 1

3. Drilling decision in Area 1

On the other hand, the advantages include: risk diversification with a company that holds several interesting licenses, one of which is already at an advanced stage;

easier access to capital, allowing us to maintain higher ownership in Uruguay;

and greater investor interest.

The similarities between Sintana and Challenger:

1. Both underwent a major transformation and managed to secure some of the best deals of the year.

Sintana acquired 49% of Inter Oil, gaining exposure to Namibia at a very attractive price.

Challenger took advantage of the COVID crisis and became the only junior company to secure two blocks with high working interests.

2. Uruguay and Namibia share a similar geological structure.

3. Charlestown is an investor in both Sintana and Challenger.

4. Sintana holds two blocks in partnership with Chevron, while Challenger has one block and another in a farm-out process — together providing significant exposure to Chevron’s activity in the Atlantic.

5. Both have carry agreements in some of their licenses.

6. Both are in advanced farm-out negotiations that are highly significant for each company.