Member Info for CrustyPete

And they re not going to be able to adjudge the potential profitability until they have drilled CH1 Rojo!! And nor will the TPDC build a feckin' pipeline until the well and field is proven - they won't even know if or, if so, where to position it.... moreover at the AGM it was conceded that the timing of the conclusion of such things as the GSA, and the responsibility of for the pipeline build were difficult to predict but that these would be discussed in parallel with and resolved (mid 2023) after the seismic programme (late 2022) and drill completion (early 2023). Now as it happens the responsibility for the pipeline build has already been agreed but the seismic results not yet concluded (or maybe just not announced).

Did AEX need a GSA, pipeline, profits porecast, to drill NT1 and NT2?! No, and do you think that they would now have a GSA, pipeline etc if they had not drilled them?

I will not argue the fact that we may be a long way from a drill (that would fly in the face of all precedent) but if so it will not be for the reasons that you suggest. No, I will stick to my original assertion - drilling contract and rig availability is/are the prime movers here....

What about them Rojo? Since when has the drill of CH1 ever been contingent on pipeline, contracts (other than drill contract), price agreement, potential profits forecast? Indeed you could argue that it is more likely that there will be no pipeline, price agreement, GSA, contracts etc until the outcome of the drill is known!

Yes timing may be delayed or affected by the seismic results potentially requiring a new drill pad location but that in itself will not affect drill timing materially in my view and I have no reason to think that seismic results for the drill location will not be available soon if not already. Whereas (at least as far as I am aware) we have no transparency, yet, of the progress of any rig or drilling contract. So that is the biggest uncertainty for me.

fwiw I too believe that He1 is good buy right now, particularly now that the fund raise is out of the way. I will be adding as cashflow allows in the hope that the projected drill dates are hit... but that is always a bit hit and miss, as many of us will have experienced in the past with ALL things Tanzania.

Personally I do not believe for one moment that the CH1 drill date is contingent on the SCIR deal completing; I believe that the only dependency is the availability of a suitable drill.

"There is a good probability that APT will encourage Orca to take on the task as the operator of KNDL." I really doubt it prosciutto, APT invested $24m in buying their 29% stake in AEX for a reason and that was to use AEX as a "surrogate" entity for their expansion into a portfolio of East African Exploration and Development activity; for AEX and its shareholders to shoulder the risk and cost of that expansion just for APT to take control once it was heavily "de-risked" (just look at Ntorya!).

If AEX were to completely give up its position as operator for any existing or future licences that "change of control" could no longer happen - AEX would have no "control" to transfer! And hence APT's original strategy and reason for taking that initial 29% stake disappears.

So, no, in my opinion that is unlikely to happen, AEX will retain control of the License and status as Operator (if they can) until they require a large capital injection and, at that time they will do the same with Kiliwani as they did with Ntorya - which is, of course, to farm it out to APT.....

And then the same with any and all subsequent License acquisitions - or at least those that occur in East Africa; only in this way will AEX remain APT's East African Oil and Gas EXploration vehicle - the original purpose of their purchase.

All in my opinion of course. ;0)

Prosciutto you say "Back in 2007, EastCoast ( Orca) wanted to do much more than a farm in. At minimum, Orca will insist on obtaining the operator status... jmho."

15 years have passed under the bridge in the intervening period - ORCA are in no position to "insist" on anthing prosciutto, certainly not whilst APT have a 29% stake in AEX....

AEX may well farm it out (in part) Al BUT at the AGM they provided a major steer that they would wish to remain then Operator of the License if at all possible. This primarily depends upon their being able to satisfy their annual reporting requirements to the TPDC between now and the time when Ruvuma income allows them to fund the development of the Nyuni "license" themselves. If they are required to "invest" in Kiliwani before income comes in from Ruvuma they will have to "partner" with a third party, which may or may not be a "farm-out", it could be an income "share" for example. The alternative is that AEX go to the "market" to raise capital to bridge the gap which, post a CH1 drill could be eminently feasible.

Moreover Ufufuo 99% of WEN holders have been into WEN far longer than the very recent interest in Ruvuma via the SCIR bid and even those that did buy in on the back of the SCIR announcement very quickly jumped ship after the TPDC and APT reversal, hence the short lived WEN spike. There will be no transfer of funds from WEN to AEX that hadn't already happened long ago... :0(

I would disagree - the profile of those that believed that WEN were a good investment are not the same investors that invest in AEXI would suggest - most of those in wentworth saw production, dividends and, perhaps, new exploration activity in that order.... not the other way round.

Worryingly cheap....

Those two 40m "buys" that you referred to were in fact one "back 2 back" transaction.

Those 40m "buys" were a back 2 back transaction.

Just to point out that AEX gas prices will not be the same as WEN or ORCA pricesbecause WEN and ORCA receive a price for gas that compensates them for the building of the infrastructure. Had APT been building the pipeline then they would have comparable gas price to WEN and ORCA but they are not.

"Doubled up"? Laughing maybe ;0)

Looks like someone establishing a CGT loss to me.... a "back to back".

A very good point GL - hoping for a window seat today :0)

Oh and GL, apologies I see you included the "license extension" but that was in 2021 not since January 2022 - that aside the first of your selected events, seismic mobilisation, was not revealed until February by which time the sp was already circa 1p ( the actual seismic programme was not even started by the time the AGM in May) - so since the first of your selected events the sp has actually fallen.

Which only goes to show that you can use any selective time frame to prove a point....

Must dash ;0)

And your point is?

So you could have chosen to extend it further back to include such things as Payment of KN1 receivables, awarding the seismic acquisition contract, extension of Ruvuma License etc, etc but didn't. So, yet again GL totally arbitrary and very convenient. Moreover it doesn't look like 53% anymore....

Anyway, I will leave you to it; off on my commute to Marylebone now ;0)

The LNG project that you refer to is aimed at exploiting the huge reserves on Natural Gas that have been found and are being further explored both onshore and offshore in Tanzania and not the possible Helium reserves - though I can see that maybe Helium may be able to piggyback on this. However to suggest that the LNG project is the forerunner to anticipated Helium discoveries is a bit of a stretch.

Hi Al, actually I do think that the current global demand and price of Gas may have had an influence on the outcome of the LNG negotiations, yes, but actually, from a practical perspective I do not think it will have made any difference to AEX timescales - there is no LNG infrastructure in place today and won't be until well after production begins at Ntorya, with or without the 12 month acceleration in forecast production date. Another point would be (and I accept that things change) that it was always the Tanzanian Authorities stated strategy that onshore, CHEAP, gas would be used to stimulate and support domestic industrial growth and domestic use as it is far more affordable and immediately accessible. LNG was always anticipated being supplied from the more expensive and less accessible offshore supply. Now of course the current global price of gas may have changed their outlook but as LNG is still so far away who knows what the situation will be by the time it is in place and LNG is a reality.

On the point of "progress"? Yes, I agree and I believe we will continue to progress (that is why I still hold and am continuing to add) but am not naive enough to believe that it will be all plain sailing. And no it is not "all doom and gloom" and despite what the naysayers will have you believe (since the Farm-Out which is now dim and distant history) I have never said is is "doom and gloom" I have simply tried to offer a counterpoint to the ridiculously over optimistic assertions of the "rose tinted spectacle brigade" and the self interested hyperbole of the "rampers" and "pumpers and dumpers". And, if past performance is anything to go by, justifiably so.

If I had ever thought it to be all doom and gloom I certainly would not still be here.

That may be true BG but equally it would be ill-advised to assume that some of those historic problems and issues have magically disappeared, as has been proven by this most recent delay. I remember the clamour that surrounded the change of President and the excitement of those who were suggesting that this would bring about dramatic and immediate change which, in turn, would accelerate the progress on all things AEX (including KN1 remediation!!). Well here we are over 18 months later and whilst the atmosphere for investors is more positive it would be difficult to point to how and where this has made a material and practical difference to AEX's fortunes (we still got screwed on KN invoices); acceleration of production maybe? But it would be difficult to identify anything else methinks? Are we convinced that the Tanzanian authorities can be relied upon to deliver the "pipeline" on time? Maybe, yes, but then again....