Member Info for CrustyPete

Well the company is not in the habit of issuing an RNS every time the BoD has a bowel movement. Yes of course there are lots of questions, to many of which the answers are probably not yet known and the remainder are down to individual management decisions which typically do NOT get discussed on a week by week basis; that is what they hold an AGM is for.....

Well P0werplay you state "Our last secret tryst provided no new information...." Well no sh&t sherlock, as "new information" was not the objective, it was never likely to. Or were you not aware of that?

And returned.

Afternoon Drewky. Please check your mail.

I too am out of action for the remainder of today... bye for now.

I haven't BG, in the same way that you haven't seen, officially, that Development license approval is dependent on C1 drill. The point I am making being that whilst officially any two events may not be technically or officially connected, the politics behind the scenes it may mean that the reality is totally different.....

Maybe in your head BG..... but no matter, life's too short.

So what was the point of your question BG? I presume that you have taken this statement to conclude that, because of this tweet, NT3 will be drilled before the Development license is issued? When in fact there is nothing in that tweet to justify such a supposition.

BG, you ask, so what to make of the tweet? "Ntorya 3 is not dependent on a 25 year development license" So what?! So NT3 is not dependent on the Development License (Officially)? Can you not see that NT3 absolutely IS absolutely dependent on funding....? And funding is dependent on the development license if, by funding, we mean "farm-out". So if you are right we can look forward to a placing and open offer at the AGM then; and that only if we have had the License Extensions by then which, by the way, I do think is a good prospect. Even if not through farm out, do you think that someone is going to loan AEX $20 million without the Development License? A lender will want to know that AEX can repay it and without significant KN1 incomes and no guarantee a route to market for Ntorya that is not a certainty; AEX would then be even more beholden to the Zubairs.... Even a placing would be made an awful lot easier with a Development license in place and a consequently far higher sp.

Change the bloody record for goodness sake BG; how many times have you repeated this same post? Just repeating it endlessly does NOT make it any more true now than it was the first time. And as I have illustrated previously those same quotes that you roll out continually do NOT necessarily lead to your personal conclusion. Shall I now repeat my rebuttal? Farm-out requires Development License approval etc. You will look a bloody idiot if it proves to be pure fantasy.

Dunder you state; "but will also seek to 'recoup' the impact of their 'indirect' ownership in the assets and the 'dilution' thereof.". I understand the theory BUT do bear in mind that at the time of buying 29.9% of AEX the principle "asset" was an income producing KN1 and NOT Ruvuma; they hadn't even drilled NT2 at the time. Consequently valuing ARA's previous contribution to Ntorya development in order to recoup it would be virtually impossible. Moreover they still have a 29.9% "holding" in both Nyuni and Kiliwani so distinguishing what was a Ntorya cost from what was a Kiliwani or Nyuni cost would be tricky. It could be argued that their initial investment bought "fair value" of the assets as they stood at the time of purchase and any increase in value from that point onwards is no more theirs than it is any other shareholder's. I do agree though as I have previously pointed out that any Farm-Out of Ruvuma is highly likely to be on a similar basis to the BLVN transaction ( through the separate "partners" agreement) and, hence, include Solo pro rata in any arrangement.

Drewky - check your blog email address. My questions will come over later.

I will forward Dunder's list to you - though I did not realise that I was expected to pass it on, I had assumed he would resend it to the intended recipient! I will also send you my two (maybe three) questions; though not until later today or maybe tomorrow morning as I have to go out for the remainder of today.

Or just and excuse for procrastination GL? Buying time for the License sign-off? Even if you are correct GL the "third party" might well be the TPDC and the complication being their back-in? In my view "complex" refers to the Mexican Standoff between AEX and Zubairs on the one side and the Tanzanian Govt on the other and the chicken and egg position of the Development License and the Farm-In; and perhaps, as referenced above, complications caused by the strong possibility of a subsequent TPDC back-in.....

Supposition I know but simply because the sp was not stable enough to raise at that price? They didn;t know when the CPR was likely to be issued? They didn't know whether it would be positively received? Because the Zubairs did not want a dilution? Maybe because the "discussions" with Zubairs had already begun and that this spiked BoD's guns? Actually I cannot claim to know and a similar question regarding fundraising is one of my two questions; something along the lines of what other options have they looked at as an alternative to the Zubair Farm-In? Dilution, (placing or rights issue) or Loan, and if they are looking at a Farm-Out have they investigated other Farm-Out options? Why would you take the first offer that comes along? I would want to create some sort of bid war.... However on your specific question: probably because a Fund raise in the market takes several months of planning and that the date and outcome of the CPR release and the market reaction to it could not be guaranteed; because their ability to raise significant capital via a dilution was questionable and it was always going to require a further fund raise at a later date anyway (for Kiliwani South, Nyuni seismics, Ntorya seismics, ex-Tanzanian acquisitons) so why go to the market twice in quick succession..... All of these are however simply excuses to my mind as I still believe that a dilution could be preferable to the Zubairs farm in. Not because of the obvious commercial and shareholder value merits but more about the long term implications. If this deal is struck I firmly believe it will take AEX firmly "off limits" for any other third party to consider a future farm-in or buy-out.... And therefore there is a strong risk that shareholders will never extract full value from their assets.

Apologies in advance but what was the conclusion regarding a strategy for compiling AGM questions for submission to Camarco ahead of the AGM? Are we doing this or are we all doing our own thing? If we are compiling a list who is compiling these? I am sure there will be many who want questions regarding KN1, NT3 spud, drill rig, Development License etc so I will not repeat these but I do have two very specific questions that I would like to put on the "list". Who or where do I send these? Or shall I simply send them to Camarco myself? I do think that a list from the "group" would have a far greater chance of getting a response.

Okay understood but the fact that we were meant to be commenting on only the Cretaceous targets was not clear, you stated: "I accept there is an element of exploration in the oil target but for the sake of argument can answers be given on the basis that we are drilling only for gas." Well as far as I am concerned and as I was trying to point out the Triassic and Jurassic targets (the exploration targets) are Gas targets.

Drewky I am slowly losing the will to live here. So despite my attempting to make this very clear it seems you have missed the point. You say "from your point of view Pete "Appraisal" that's all I wanted thank you". I don;t know what you are reading, Have another go. Your question: "Would our drilling for gas at CH1 be classed as a development drill or an exploration?" My response: "Drewky the fact that we are drilling into previously un-drilled deeper rock formations (Triassic and Jurassic) makes this an Exploration well" How can that be any clearer? It is an Exploration well. Whether it be for Gas or Oi is an irrelevance. And just to explain that: "To clarify that even further - the NT3 Well was an Appraisal Well until the BoD officially announced that they were going to drill deeper into these "virgin" rock formations." When it became an Exploration Well.

Drewky, you also need to appreciate that my original response was not purely an answer to your particular question but actually meant to address a number of comments and questions that had been raised by others under the same thread.... With that now clear you may wish to reconsider your comments about " the crap and condemnation that goes with it".... if there was any of that (it was not intended) it may well have been aimed elsewhere.

To clarify that even further - the NT3 Well was an Appraisal Well until the BoD officially announced that they were going to drill deeper into these "virgin" rock formations. And NO Drewky we do NOT know that there is gas there and won't do until we have sunk a drill into it. Until then we only think there is......