focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
Micky,
You will be also find that from subsequent presentations that after the acquisition of Cuda that the Gross 2P increased to $492m NPV10.
Also there are other interesting tidbits in those presentations:
"COPL will also own 100% of key infrastructure assets via Pipeco (owner of the pipelines). U.S. producers with strong
infrastructure assets trade at a premium valuation (additional unrealized value of $10 million)"
Moreover they suggested that the GGS (now upgraded and the injectant were worth circa $100m)
None of that included the CCU Frontier 1 and Frontier 3.
Its all out there in their presentations.
Then take this for example:
"Natural Gas injection with a Condensate and LPG (Propane) bullet commenced December 2019 at a maximum rate of 3.4MMCF/d. Currently c. 750 MMCF has been injected"
"BFU Simulated plateau production is c. 5,000 bbl./d (page 16) as per the Ryder Scott Report (October 1, 2020)"
"COPL re-simulated BFU plateau production (January 2021): 7,000 bbl./d at 10 MMCF/d gas injection rate (page 17)"
The GGS upgrade was to enable them to inject up to 8.5mmcfd with further upgrades to that that to 12mmcfd, kinda begs the question as to why they didn't do this when reading what they knew from 2019 right through to July 2023.
Another interesting point, there are certain "realistic" posters on here, or pretend holders should we say that seemed to be aware that the high pressure separators (portaloos) wouldn't make a difference even before they were installed. Where were they getting this information from? Did they know in advance there wouldn't be a material increase in gas injection, a function of oil production no less.
Regards,
Ed.
OFF TOPIC
SteveE60,
I guess its me you are referring to as there isn't an Edwin posting here that I'm aware of? Yes I'm currently down thousands on COPL as are hundreds and potentially thousands of other investors. Its the first company that I've seen that BOD were more closely aligned with bondholders than shareholders. They did pretty much the exact opposite of what they said in July 2023 where they laid out exactly what they had to do to increase production at the BFU. Injectant volumes being a function of oil production, more gas injected increased the oil production. Before the miscible flood started it was at circa 220bopd and peaked at 2000+ bopd. Even though they were fully funded and their oil production was unhedged they were really slow to restart the gas injection strategy after the gas gathering upgrade and then injection volumes went down between October and December '23. This was the exact opposite of what the company had said. Also they said they would give a production guidance and a strategy update before the end of 2023. Of course those didn't materialize either.
All of that has facilitated the repricing of the bonds down to a fraction of a penny, moreover, the JV talks with the "industry leader" which had been running for 15 months also terminated without explanation once the bondholders had made their appointments to the BOD. That has allowed them to build a material position in the company at the expense of shareholders. I've not see the like of it before, its thankfully a rare event that anything like this occurs. But its currently being investigated by the authorities and that will have to run its course. But its not all over just yet.
Thankfully this has nothing to do with CRCL as the two companies are like chalk and cheese. The BOD here are fully aligned with shareholders interests imo.
Regards,
Ed.
Lloyd,
Rather than one person making many complaints it would be best for many to submit that have valid email addresses though. The more genuine complainants the better at the time. Again lets see how the CAG get on first with their digging. I'll let everyone know when I throw my first grenade at the Ad doc. The more activity at the time the better at the right time.
Regards,
Ed.
Lloyd,
Make this your first port of call when the time comes, scroll down to the bottom and make your case (contact us). Just summarize what has gone on operationally and how these shares to be issued in the new admission document have come about and why you don't think the new shares should be admitted. It would be better for this to come from as many sources as possible rather than just a standard cut and paste letter. By all means let your feelings be known. You could also copy in the FCA at this point too.
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/resources/equities-trading-resources?tab=rules-and-regulations&accordionId=8-5c38892b-07bf-4ad4-8da4-85afc5eb31f1
I would say not to act just yet though, there will be a scramble to get that admission doc in, but it'll take time to pass, weeks. It was late feb/early march last year. So I'll give the various parties time to achieve something first before going after that Ad doc.
Regards,
Ed.
Stas,
All these shares placed in the last 12 months need admitted to the LSE via an admission document. That's what I'll be targeting next month through the proper channels and I'll be suggesting others do the same. We'll know after that if it makes a difference.
Regards,
Ed.
Leww,
As others have pointed ount on here already. The irony of this all is that if they had injected the gas into the miscible flood and got the production up to a level to sustain the business and drill those appraisal wells all parties would have made a lot more money. They're not chasing this one so hard because the assets are crap that's for sure. Previous presentations highlighted the value of these assets (without the CCU), now the new puppets tells us otherwise.
Even if there is a wind back on some of the activities I cannot see everyone just letting it go. But lets see how it all unwinds first.
Regards,
Ed.
Eddyc,
Thanks to the company at an operation level, their sources of funding and their alignment with social media its really unpredictable as there are now several groups set up trying to get justice for the illegal activities. But its all being looked at. I'm not willing to say at this stage what I'm prepared to do before the 29th of Feb and the next admission document, but that will be a last resort. I'm just waiting to see what others achieve in the mean time before I throw a box of hand grenades into this mix. The outcome even then I cannot predict.
Regards,
Ed.
Stas,
You are likely 100% correct. There was a large placing around the time of the Cuda acquisition, but yet none of that or the bridge loan at the time was used for the Cuda acquisition, just all those bonds. Then the two confidential status wells appeared on that Wyoming website. It probably wasn't coincidence that the company strategy changed to what we have seen since. Why didn't they have an oven ready injection strategy good to go from July commissioning? They didn't seem to really want to take advantage of the unhedged production, when the SL had backed off with the hedge. Also if they had implemented their injection strategy as set out in July 2023 its unlikely that the SL nor the hedge would have been a problem. Also during all this time did they approach their NOP, CNOOC to ask if they wanted to participate for a large interest in the BFU and BFDU to increase their share in production? That's what a genuine struggling operator may do. So yeah you're analysis of the situation is likely very close to the truth.
Regards,
Ed.
Stas,
Shocking to see the actual drop in injection volumes over the period when the company had stated their injection strategy would be implemented, was that their injection strategy to decrease injectant? It was bad enough that they took 2 years to fix the plumbing issue and then an additional 4 months after GGS commissioned to come up with an injection strategy; they then didn't bother to increase the injection volumes even though they new that was a function of the oil production. Shocking. That's almost as bad as the naked shorting and media manipulation of the share price. Its going to come home to roost imo.
Regards,
Ed.
Hi Nige,
The July '23 presentation on Page 13 does show that seismic is planned from Q1 24 through to Q3 24 and drilling from Q4 '24 into 2025. That is for KON-12. For KON-16 seismic is to start in Q2 this year and continue into 2025 without mention of drilling.
So my take on that is that the short seismic campaign on KON-12 and closely followed by drilling late this year is highly likely to be Galinda. That's probably the pre-drill definition of Galinda. They did mention somewhere about the preparatory work they did on Tobias before the two wells. My guess is this is the similar situation for the Galinda redevelopment. This may change when we get our next updated presentation, which I would imagine will come after the flow rates and the forward plan for Tobias is known. So fingers crossed drilling Galinda around Q4 this year, hopefully by then Tobias will be in production. Two field developments ongoing would make CRCL busy bees and to think these assets were picked up for a snip.
Regards,
Ed.
Nige,
We sure do have an experienced team for both the financing and the technical side. The new MD for Angola has a lot of experience with the large oil companies too. She'll hopefully have her hands full with Tobias and Galinda soon and perhaps some more Angolan consolidation, base to build on etc. Yeah certainly they gave hints at what they're planning in the recent financial results, acquisitions, building on their position in Angola, succeed where others have failed etc. Makes interesting reading, especially for the newer holders.
Agreed, our cornerstone investors are all still there, the only TR1's we've been seeing are from Align. So very supportive cornerstone investors that seem to be as keen to see the events progress as we are. Yeah its exciting to imagine what could come from Tobias given the info to date and what lies beyond that. Even Canegrass may have something commercial and that would be big news considering how hot lithium is in Australia.
Hopefully get some more progress reports in the near term.
Regards,
Ed.
Stas,
Well they were the comments made by the former CEO as to what was required. The GGS upgrade enabled them to return to past injection volumes and beyond as specified in that RNS. As a result that was to enable them, not only to return to previous peak flow rates, but in addition " an increasing production profile." These turned out to be completely misleading in that the gas injections which are proportional to oil production were not increased to anywhere close to the required level even though the company was funded and unhedged to do so during that time. The goal of the restructuring of the company should be aiming to maximize the gas injection rate therefore maximizing the oil production rate beyond previous peaks.
That ops update did cause many including myself to increase our shareholdings.
Regards,
Ed.
Personally I would have amended point three of the CAG demands
"Sufficient working capital sourced to restart gas injections at the BFSU."
Should have read maximize gas injections back to previous peak levels as set out in the July operations update. It clearly stated the relationship between oil production and gas injection rates. Something that was completely ignored from July 23 to December 23.
"The Company reduced miscible injection volumes and miscible concentration in March 2022 to manage the field's operating pressures at certain facilities and well sites. Oil production from the BFSU is a function of injection volumes. It is the Company's intention to resume injection volumes to a level to return to its previous oil production peak in late 2021/early 2022 before injection volume reduction."
"With the required upgrades to our field gas gathering system nearing completion, we are focusing our attention on a revised injection strategy to return the field to its designed depletion strategy which should result in a return to the previous production peak and an increasing production profile."
They were funded during this time of low US gas prices to get the injection rates back up and yet failed to do so, that was a complete operational failure by those responsible when they knew exactly what they had to do. Money needs to be raised not just to restart gas injection, but return it to previous peak levels as laid out by the company in July.
Regards,
Ed.
Nige,
Hard question, it depends on how he intends to fund the future acquisitions and their scale. Now that they know there is no spending commitment for KON-15 as they're not a winning bidder. That means our currently only spending commitment is Tobias (perhaps 25% seismic and Galinda well costs later in the year). Spend in Australia is likely to be marginal. Incoming would be funds from Australia and we're most of those £10m convertible notes yet undrawn. My guess is that the loan notes will be used for the EPS. So pretty uniquely funded at the moment for a £16m cap company.
If a new asset came with 2P reserves that opens the possibility of RBL, as would establishing a 2P on Tobias. They may also wait for the EPS and buy from cash flow, as that may yet turn out to be substantial. Although that could also lead to multiple sidetrack or horizontal wells (We've yet to get EPS rates let alone full development plan for Tobias). So further acquisitions could be linked to the scale of Tobias, they could hopefully, fingers crossed, have their hands full developing Tobias over the next two years (AET even mentioned the redevelopment in their recent onshore bid round RNS). Acquisitions are planned according to CRCL but it will be interesting to see their quantum and timing as CRCL has already a lot going on.
Joe,
Look at other rivals and what they're valued at, AXL, ZPHR, EDR (it may have been bought out now), etc etc. None of those companies that I mention there have assets on the scale of Tobias, its a large field, 3400 acres. So on strong flow rates I'd expect us to perhaps go to £30-50m. If Tobias turns out as large as we hope it will (11.7mmbbls+ net) then we may move towards mid cap (we could be looking at net 20mmbbls+ for the two fields). Tobias and Galinda with modern drilling could get us well on our way, look at AET's cap for example they're now within touching distance of £100m. Tobias and Galinda and perhaps one more discovery, who knows, lets wait and see just how big Tobias is.
Regards,
Ed.
Good morning Nige,
Good man, yeah it sure has been windy! MY garden had a few branches down, next door's fence has seen better days though! It sure was the worst storm in quite a while.
I would imagine so, all these expected news items are still pending from Tobias, sale of assets and Australian assays.
Duys and gals.
Interesting that it was Align again holding us back in early Jan, hopefully they'll get shifted soon as we head towards fair value.
Regards,
Ed.
Hi Nige,
I'm good, hope you are too!
BMA have 45 days from the GM on the 8th of December, that would now appear to be working days rather than calendar days. So I guess they've up to around the 8th or 9th of Feb or something like that to legally pre-empt the offer from IBM.
Regards,
Ed.
Guys,
I agree its looking like very thin volumes of profit takers still remain. Total volume of mixed trading is still only 1.7m, that's pretty light and the mm's aren't getting many in off the back of that. News will come when its ready and that should set us off on the next leg, market cap is currently around £16m. Tobias won't need to be very big to justify that, but drilling indications so far suggests there's much more to come when you read the results of TO-13 and TO-14 to date.
Regards,
Ed.
Morning Nige,
I sure did have a good one, hope you did too!
Not 100% sure it depends on what the below statement means:
"being available to interested companies and that have been qualified as Associates of the National Concessionaire"
If CRCL have been qualified as Associates of the National Concessionaire, who knows. Winning an interest in the block would have been nice but hopefully it'll not become a distraction to what is currently going on. Art's post shows what has been going on and its a lot more important that winning a small interest in another exploration block.
Regards,
Ed.