Member Info for dsaf

"Please explain why they didn't pay for the leases and royalties if I am mistaken"

I have no idea, and no one else can answer that on here as i'm sure your well aware. Might be worth emailing Mr Spinks and asking if you wish to know from company.

No dealer, just dealing with truthful facts rather than personal insults and baby like behaviour.

"No cash to pay the royalties and leases because Evans/Lennigas paid themselves first!"

Look through the accounts, you are mistaken. Only one payment to Tom after he left for expenses owed.

@dealer55 , "I never get notifications to vote with PPP on Halifax. How can I vote."

Login to the portal, use the live chat and ask to be added to company updates.

"Doesn't thr $5 million loan they put or or cancelled mean they are not funding anything for this project!"

Historical now, petroquest deeply involved in a court case now also, money was injected to PQ years ago, and has long gone. Even when Lunn took over, he declared in a RNS that it might not be solvent any longer.

Petroquest (Lunn) has only been able to wipe the debt off, because he hasn't cost Lunn a penny to do so as it wasn't his money! The original person who stumped up the money is now going through legal channels. Petroquest never has the capital in the first place, it was a loan agreement which then funds were paid to PPP.

Genuine question I will be asking at the AGM in person, will petroquest be funding alongside PPP for their share of the profits.

"Isnt the one at 2.2p to service the shares owed to J.White??"

No, as of the latest members list, JW is there in his own entity as a direct member and the 6m shares that were listed to "PennPetro Energy LTD" have been removed from the list for the same amount.

Zag, sorry to burst your bubble, but there is zero action from the TG group, and if you call civilised discussion (but its abusive as you dont agree with it) "abusive", I think the internet is the wrong place for you.

They've had two years to make something stick Leddach, nothing has come of it.

Tom has attended all previous AGM's and GMs in person, if anyone of you had the inclination to attend rather then hide behind a username you could of said your bit. None of you from here have done other then M22C.

0.022p - let that sink in.

Doing the maths, 53% dilution if approved.

Spinks said "what dilution" at the AGM.

Notice of the Annual General Meeting

The formal notice of AGM is set out on pages 6 to 11 of this document.

This letter also explains why the Directors recommend that shareholders of the Company (the “Shareholders”) vote in

favour of the resolutions being proposed at the AGM (the “Resolutions”).

Resolutions 1 to 9 - Ordinary Resolutions (routine business)

Resolution 1 is a resolution to receive the Company's annual accounts and reports for the financial year ended

31 March 2025, as required by section 437(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (the "Act").

Resolution 2 is an advisory vote to approve the Directors’ Remuneration Report for the financial year ended 31 March

2025, as required by section 439(1) of the Act.

Resolution 3 is a binding vote to approve the Directors’ Remuneration Policy, as required by section 439A(1) of the

Act. The remuneration policy is set out on pages 25 and 26 of the Company’s annual accounts.

Resolution 4 proposes the re-appointment of Crowe U.K. LLP as auditors of the Company to hold office until the

conclusion of the next general meeting at which audited financial statements are laid before the Company.

Resolution 5 authorises the Directors to fix the auditors’ remuneration.

Resolutions 6 to 9 propose the re-election of, respectively, Richard Spinks, Mavriky Kalugin, Olof Nils Rapp and

Sergiy Lesyk as directors of the Company, in accordance with the Company’s articles of association.

Resolution 10 – Authority to allot shares for cash (ordinary resolution)

Resolution 10 grants the Directors authority under section 551 of the Act to allot shares for cash consideration (within

the meaning of section 583 of the Act) up to an aggregate nominal amount of £657,738.64. This includes shares that

may be allotted in consideration of the release of a liquidated liability of the Company, which is treated as cash under

section 583(3)(c) of the Act.

The purpose of this authority is to enable the Company to allot shares in respect of the following:

• up to 25,000,000 ordinary shares to provide headroom for the Company to raise further working capital by way of placing or similar offering;

• up to 26,136,364 ordinary shares in respect of convertible loan notes entered into by the Company and RMD

Group, being 12,500,000 shares to cover the principal on each of the two existing £250,000 tranches (6,250,000 shares per tranche) and up to 13,636,364 shares in respect of a proposed third convertible loan note of £300,000 (at a conversion price of £0.022 per share);

• 9,237,500 ordinary shares to be allotted in settlement of directors’ fees for 2025; and

• 5,400,000 ordinary shares to be allotted in settlement of directors’ fees for 2025/26 pursuant to the service agreements of Messrs Kalugi

Sorry my good friend, have not ventured over to CDL today as yet.

"Thing is DSAF if the CLNs were at 4p and Jesse raised at 12p and we had two raises at 4p there's no way they can disregard the raises above the 4p because all this happened during suspension."

They can, and the most likely will. I think you need to accept that in the nicest possible way to explain, there's no set rule that the SP should be X on relisting. It doesn't follow on from where it left off, unless it was a super short suspension. With the change of BoD, the market makers will be forming thier own assessment of risk, and a price to relist at.

The 4p CLN's are death spiral finance. Do some research, take a look at other stocks over the years that took CLN's, it's not pretty and that will be forefront of any market makers vision on relisting.

Wish you the best, but I think your expectations are far far far too high for relisting.

Zag, it's a tough cookie, its not so bad is Lunn puts in 50% of the money needed, but if he just walks away with 50% profit its not a good deal at all.

NU, if you want to look at it that way, I guess your right, but i won't be bragging about the latter.

There's a lot of people here with money trapped, doesn't matter what your view is on the company, how much your hate is against or for.. it's peoples livelihoods and no amount of bragging should come into that.

"So 12p is nailed on and confirrmed is nobody happy about it? "

Absolutely not, this just highlights your nieviety to the whole situation. The CLN's are at 4p, and have followed since those raises/sales happened. The fact they have given away half the profits to Lunn, zero credible data for Ukraine (funny it's gone quiet) and now Texas is a clutch they are desperately trying to work.

An opening of 3-4p is more realistic, but again, not a single one of us here can predict, or give a firm answer as its soley down to the market markers and what they have for breakfast on the morning of eventual, if it happens, relist.

NU,

Yes I was, you all saw my letters as they were posted here by other posters. Whilst most will disagree, I was calling for simple corporate governance to be followed, something which sadly is still far from present in current day proceedings. Those who genuinely know in-depth about marking listing rules, the companies act and the FCA handbook will understand and probably not disagree.

Regardless of anyone's comments, our action did nothing to hold back PPP, as the account still hadn't been produced and here we still are today, suspended.

NU, just to bring your head back into the clouds, I have zero legal action against PPP, nor have I submitted anything to the FCA since November last year.

As i said before, it will be, what it will be now.

LeddachJack, you really are desperate. It's frankly embarrassing.