Member Info for CrustyPete

Hi CP, yes and I get your point, we are all in it together and looking for the same outcome but even someone with PoC's vast knowledge of the Oil and Gas industry will surely agree that until the seismics and the CH1 drill have been completed nothing is set in stone. Anyone that was a shareholder in AEX at the time of the NT2 drill will attest to that. And yes, a lot has changed since then (not all of it for the better) and with 3D seismics and an experienced drill team any risks are dramatically reduced. So whilst I do not expect anything more than modifications to the outlined "plan" it is certainly not set in stone and a lot could change. There is also a lot to negotiate on the GSA - pipeline?

Anyway good night all and good luck.

If pedantry is your game we don't yet have a definituve plan or GSA in pkace to extract the gas from CH1.... and nor will we until it is drilled. But then of course that wouldn't suit your narrative would it?

A projecy MAY be set up by ARA to exploit the Oil PoC, that is prexisely the point and until it is, the assets in the hround have little value. That is the whole point of socialising the article.

And based on your oosts PoC a damn site more than you havem and certainly a lot more experience of Oil and Gas in Tanzania as the last 12 months has more than demonstrated...

Just to be clear, I do mot have an anti AEX agenda; I am a fairly large shareholder.

Your assertiony that it is lost on me that they will not produce Oil at CH1 is patently absurd!! I am highlighting the report and commentary to suggest that whatever the CH1 drill results it may (I stress may) never happen.

You suggest that in doing so I am talking AEX down and yet claim the Oil possibilities are an irrelevance! Who is talking it down?

If you didnt have the concentration span of a Goldfish you would see that in my earlier post I stated that, in my view, the investment case in is the gas; something you conveniently chose to ignore. You seem to want to pick an argument where, in reality thete isn't one. You are more dismissive of the Oil agenda than I am, so who is tslking it down?

Keep railing PoC, it realy is fotally pathetic.

Let me remind you of your own words PoC:

"The importance of the 3D seismic moving straight to the CH-1 drill site will help improve the wells target definition and size, particularly seeing as CH-1 has been specifically chosen to test the deeper Jurassic oil target. It will be a major development if the 3D indicates an oil target, or an increased gas target."

Two faced bs.

Yes another deflection and gross oversimplification to suit your vapid agenda PoC. You are now stating that there is no Oil agenda with CH1.... until of course it suits you to say otherwise. Pathetic.

Extrapolation a bit beyond you then PoC? You don't think that some of the comments and questions made in that article in relation to Uganda's Oil development and infrastructure might be equally relevant and applicable to any Oil found at CH1, no? Both on the positive and negative side of the argument in. If you can't then it would be totally pointless my pointing them out to you unless they poke you in your one functioning eye that is. Thankfully, most readers here are more than capable.

That would certainly be true for many of your devoted followers PoC; thankfully some more independent readers still have 20:20 vision.... or at lest close to it ;0)

"Run the company down"?! You certainly have a vivid imagination PoC - please show me where I run the company down - I simply posted an article. And, by the way pointed out that the "Ugandan's convinced of economic value.".

Cannot even take a bity of "balance" posting POC - even that contravenes your one eyed sensibilities?

"Doubting Jonah's", "backing two horses", Tanzania? - don't blame the messenger Tanz, it is a BBC report and I cannot help it if it doesn't suit your personal agenda. Are you suggesting that we ought to only post those reports and articles that support a "rampers" agenda - press censorship?

Oh and by the way Tanzania just for your information at the time that The Zubair's bought into Aminex there was no expectation of an Oil play in Ntorya. I would suggest that for them (and for me, as it happens) the Gas asset is more than sufficient justification for their investment - a commercial Oil find may well be the icing on the cake but, equally, they may have no intention of exploiting it. Time will tell.

Sorry one and all - the URL below:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-60301755

Topical article and very interesting - commerciality and appropriateness of Oil exploration and development in Uganda being questioned though Ugandan's convinced of economic value. Not difficult to extrapolate from this for CH1.

I would agree SQ and that "first phase" is primarily to accurately identify the most appropriate location for the CH1 drill. To make an overall GIIPS revision for the basin will require them to complete the whole survey and, as you suggest 338km2 of survey is quite a large area - between 18 & 19 sq km..... so it won't be done overnight! ;0)

Goodnight and good luck one and all.

Agreed CP, but then I do not need to remind you of the reasons we find ourselves in such a pickle.... moreover I am not convinced that KN1 is "recoverable", something of a lost cause perhaps; I remember JB saying that had it not been for the insistence of the TPDC and after the failure of the "compression" strategy they would probably have "plugged" the well - there was only marginal commercial justification for completion of the remediation work, had the cheap and cheerful "foam" option not worked. Since then of course we have had new people at the helm who may take a different view and who think that the "perforation" approach might work - I sincerely hope they are right and that we can get a JV partner to execute the work programme. However we have been waiting a very long time for this without success and with no great surprise on my part - if KN1 remediation was only marginal for AEX to go it alone, it is likely to be even less of a viable option for a JV partner and I fail to see how AEX BoD could expect to get a JV partner without a "dilution" as was their stated intention. I would not be at all surprised to see any JV arrangement looking at going straight to a KNS drill and ignoring KN1...

I would not argue too much with your analysis CP but one or two observations; I think the relative positions of KN1 then and now is worth more than 1p to the sp not least because the BoD was still telling us that they fully expected remediation to take place imminently (that overly used word yet again!) when we still had an operational team to do so. Furthermore at that time we still had cash in the bank, expectation of full payment on the outstanding invoices and no expectation of a large CGT bill..... so our balance sheet and cash position, though not great, was far more healthy than it is now - we still had the money to remediate KN1, for example and without the need to dilute the asset to bring in a JV partner.

Well PoC you have been predicting it now for about a year now so I guess it depends on your definition of "soon"...

I have always suggested that out time will come, we differ in our expectations of the timing of events, share price movements and the certainty of the same. I will leave others to draw their own conclusions on whose view has proven to be the most accurate over the last 12 months.

But then I would be the first to admit that past performance is no guarantee..... time will tell. I hope you are right. I have my own opinion and I will keep it to myself, other than to point out that I have been buying and still have BUY "opinion" on my posts - I have been and will continue to accumulate...

Yes and if they had bought in recent days expecting that the next RNS would confirm having completed the Phase 1 & 2 Seismic programme or a move to 1.3 or 1.4p on the back of it they would be similarly disappointed.

Which only goes to show that adopting an overstated position rarely proves prudent.

It simply gives the MM's control of the price in either direction if a sizeable order is received. It gives them "protection" when, as now, they are unsure about the direction of travel....

It also proves that you cannot trust "the charts"; news trumps charts - anyone told Zak Mir that yet?

As I said yesterday, I hope that the recent sp rise is not purely based on the (false) expectation of imminent seismic news because let's be frank, that is not the news that many had been anticipating - they were predicting/ expecting "results", not simply the announcement of the kick off date.

So when a stock gets ramped for all the wrong reasons it will hardly be a surprise if the sp falls as expectations prove totally unfounded.

No doubt we will be urged to buy more on the dip!! Well actually yes, that may well be a good idea, if it falls far enough.