Member Info for CrustyPete

But Intowin12 aren't Peel holding it down?! 😆

That last, after hours, trade will take some soaking up; SCLP back on many Trading Websites and Apps as a "Sell".... that won't help short term sp. We need some material news to get out of this trading range.

Though if it takes a little tumble it will offer opportunities to buy a few more in the dip.

Well I fully expect the current Govt to be extremely keen to be seen to get the Gas "on tap" before mid year, not least because they have made it clear to the country that this is their ambition and there will be a General Election in November. Failure to deliver on such an important milestone will be detrimental to their re-election hopes.

Now that is not to say that it will be totally within their gift but I expect them to move mountains to make it happen... and they will not let a EISA get in the way methinks.

1.31 - 1.33 quickly ticks up to 1.32 -1.36p on the Bell..... so just avoided a Red day. What a surprise!

Yes that is encouraging and would solve a potential problem on that particular asset.

Regarding the CPR, I would agree, at the AGM we were told that the TPDC were able to get sufficient comfort from independent corroboration of ARA's 3D analysis and hence the CPR was no longer a requirement. And, it seems , that ARA are very much penny pinchers! Everything they can do to save cost they will do.

I firmly believe that the EISA will be complete in plenty of time but maybe at the cost of implementing suitable "mitigants". If you get my drift....😉

Yes we have high concentrations BUT our "competitors", have gas captured in traditional basins, under pressure and hence providing high flow rates, with reserves that are easy to assess and evaluate. They may have only 1/10th of the concentration levels but their gas might flow 20 times faster! They may have a limited, fixed resource, whereas ours might go on for eternity - assuming it is not otherwise compromised.

The point being that our resource is "unique" - it is NOT directly comparable to "traditional" plays and so the metrics are not so easily transferable...

CH1? Yes I think it is doable, NT1 less likely but possible. Both depend upon timing of access to the drill. Q3 access both are doable. Will that happen? Three drills and a workover in 12 months, in Tanzania, with the same piece of kit?

That also presupposes that M&P (if that is who it is?) choose to drill both wells Back 2 Back - one might be enough to provide the comfort that TPDC needs? . It is possible that they drill one well before we get use of it? That would foreshorten the timelines but hey, who knows? I certainly don't.

No Rojo, that is not right. I expect the pipeline to be started in H1 2025 but not complete until some time in Q2 (probably latter half); once the pipeline build commences I would expect to see NT2 workover beginning too, with the idea being that by the time the Pipeline is complete ARA/AEX will supply it with Gas from NT2. Hence I am expecting production around end Q2 / early Q3.

The issue with CH1 drill and NT1 workover is that both require the use of the same drill and that drill, currently, has yet to be seen. If you accept the received wisdom that we will be drill sharing with M&P, who will get first use of that drill? M&P have license obligations to drill two wells before middle 2025 and they are leading the discussions regarding the drill and delivery. I am not expecting the drill to be in country until the turn of the year and (perhaps somewhat cynically) am expecting M&P to demand first use of it. The positive is that if they get first use of it, they will have to pay for the set up and inspection, hence reducing subsequent costs for ARA/AEX. Will ARA demand first use of it themselves? I think not - now that Production and CH1 drill are de-coupled and they reduce costs for allowing M&P to have first use of it, why pick a fight that you may well mean that you have to go and find your own rig at far greater expense and possibly an even greater loss of time?

The AEX BoD, and Charles Santos particularly, were very keen to stress that CH1 timing is no longer a major issue as production is no longer contingent on it.

Well Mattluc the implications of the alternatives are considerable....

"He1 now own 50% of this".... Not quite Mattluc; they own 50% of the Galactica-Pegasus project - just one of the projects within the Blue Star portfolio.

Yes confluence, indeed, NHE really struggled, so it seems the climate for small explorers for Cap raise is not great in AUS. So you are right to be sceptical.

Au contraire Mamma, see below:

https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02847995-6A1223670&v=fc9bdb61fe50ea61f8225e24ce041a0e155a9400

"pending the release of an announcement regarding a capital raising."

But I see that as a positive - as it provides Blue Star with additional capital to complete their froward work programme.

Perhaps Daven because no-one was wiling to pay a premium on those shares? The MM's having to drop the price to get them off their books....?

Actually, I am fully expecting the pipeline initiation and NT2 workover, together, to be timed to facilitate "production" by the end of Q2. However I have very little confidence that we will have seen a rig in country and prepped in time to enable us to complete a CH1 drill and NT1 workover until Q3 at the earliest. It is not without significance that the BoD were very keen to make clear that "production" is no longer contingent on CH1 drill - both production and CH1 drill are now "de-coupled" to use their own word. Therefore there is no longer any great significance in the timing of CH1 and with the speculation around the "rig sharing" and who get's first claim on its use that is just as well as M&P have far more urgent license obligations than ARA does. Moreover not using it first has some considerable cost savings for the more "patient" or less demanding party.

Oh and where is that CPR...?! Oh yes, no longer needed.

The TR1 rule is an regulatory requirement of ALL companies that choose to become listed on the LSE; they commit to operate under the rules of the exchange they elect list on - their place of residence is of absolutely no consequence.

Do remember though that the 17th is the "deadline" it could well be earlier...

I understand the logic and the sentiment Konar but I am not sure that the BoD can exercise such discretion at will; as a listed company they have an obligation and requirement to issue price sensitive information to the market as it becomes available. I would strongly suggest that clinical trial information would be considered as "price sensitive" and hence would have to be aired as it becomes available.

Keepaddingmore, please remember that, as the BoD have stated, the previous conversations regarding a JV were for a JV on building a production facility NOT drilling. There has never been any suggestion that they will JV for future exploration and appraisal, only production sharing.... and in my view even that is unlikely to occur until after the Mining License is granted; albeit "Heads of Terms" might quite likely have been out in place in advance of that.

Furthermore on that cringeworthy recent interview Graham Jacobs clearly states that they would prefer to go it alone without a JV and retain the assets/incomes for shareholders..... That, in my view, is the principle justification and strategy behind the BlueStar Farm-in. It will allow the BoD to borrow money for future drilling and operations and mean that we do not have to Dilute through a Capital raise, Farm-Out or JV.... But if we have to wait 12 months for the income what happens in the meantime?

The spread at 15.53 was 1.40 - 1.50p so if it went through at 1.425 I suggest it was a sell; the sp dropped back immediately afterwards too. That said, it is of little consequence, it is all in the closing sp now.