Member Info for Fernan10

On one side of the spectrum we have dear Harry and his doom and gloom predictions, and on the opposite side we have Oiltdr and his "business connections in the industry" asking us to "don´t worry, everything is going according to plan."

which one right? or wrong??

i dont´have any idea.

We dont know if next press release will be about a fully funded testing of Loukos and a seismic campaign in Lixus, or just another equity raise to keep the lights on, with heavy dillution and catastrophic results for shareholders.

ENOG firstly capitalized their subsidiary with about US$ 10.9 million. That is the amount of the initial US$ 10 million payment to CHAR, plus some expenses at the subsidiary level.

Next, they capitalized another US$ 56 million (that they probably had previously injected into the subsidiary as a loan from the parent company, that doesn´t matter now). I agree with most posters here that the drilling of A3, plus post well analysis, etc, could not be higher than US$ 35-40 million. Then, the subsidiary should have around US$ 15-20 million in cash now, that goes to CHAR´s coffins. It´s all speculation on my part

IF CHAR is going to receive any money from ENOG (who knows?) their first priority should be testing the Loukos onshore well, once and for all.

CHAR is being transferred a fully owned ENOG moroccan subsidiary. What are the assets (and obligations, if any) in the balance sheet of that subsidiary? What is the "embarrasment" of informing the market about the eventual aplication of an "early contract termination fee", according to what was (supossedly) agreed in the farm in contract?

Management keeps leaving shareholders in total obscurity, and some posters here are doing great efforts trying to justify that.

Ok. thanks for your clarification.

But even in that case, management should have informed the (eventual) material fact of receiving a few million from ENOG (if that´s the case, I´m not sure about that yet).

Why are we left trying to guess how much money CHAR will receive from ENOG, if any?? is that because they don´t want to "embarrass" ENOG? this is ridicolous!!!!

We know CHAR is in a precarious cash position. Absent any injection of cash from third parties, there is a high risk of a very heavy dillution in the near term, that will be catastrophic for the share price.

In that context, agreeing to receive a few million from ENOG as compensation for non performing their obligations under the farm in contract will be a material event, that should be duly and promptly informed to shareholders.

But there is nothing about that eventual cash compensation in today´s news release.

Is it because we will receive nothing from ENOG? do we have to endure another equity raise in the next few weeks, at around 1p per share?

Some posters here wrote that CHAR´s management is not informing the market about that payment in order "not to embarrass ENOG". I have found this statement ridiculous.

Other posters here are talking about the cash injection in an ENOG´s subsidiary that will be subsequently transfer to us. How do you know that this cash injection was not to be invested in other projects in the country?

how do you know that ENOG will "transfer its subsidiary" to CHAR? could it not be that the subsidiary "transfer the equity interest in Anchois" to CHAR, and conserve the injected cash for other projects?

I found the intents of some posters here to dissimulate the lack of clarity in today´s news pathetic.

CHAR´s management continue keeping their shareholders in obscurity about material facts to the company´s near term survival.

All seems very sad for me.

Surety:

you wrote:

"i) in the latest proactive interview with JMW (March), he is clearly stating that they beleive in the long term value of offshore Morocco, which will be covered by an update in the near future"

How many shares has JMW bought since he made that "bold" statement???

Harrycarter sometimes makes me laugh....sometimes makes me think....

Most of his "predictions" are based on the lack of clarity from management, We don´t know anything about the T&C of the farm in contract signed with ENOG, the status of the negociation of the (eventual) Energean´s departure, the farm out process in Loukos, current cash position, etc, etc.

In that context of total obscurity, it´s very easy for HC (or whoever else that wants to make a prediction) to forecast CHAR´s iminent decease.

It´s not HC´s fault, but management´s.

CHAR never published the CPF on Anchois neither.

Maybe there were more risks associated with A3 drilling than what was informed to the market.

It seems lack of transparency is a feature of CHAR´s management

CHAR´s management should have informed tht market the T&C of the farm in contract by now, to clarify some issues as:

*has ENOG the option to leave the project without paying a penalty after the unsuccessfull well?

*can ENOG indefinitely postponed the compromised investments ?

I remember that, back in April 2010, after the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the market has doubts about who was responsible to pay for the enviromental damage remedy cost.

Transocean (the owner of the oil drilling rig) published the full contract with BP (the owner of the well) to make clear to everyone in the market that BP was the responsible party to pay for that.

Now we have an obscure negociation behind closed doors, where we have no idea what could be the result of.

Regards

You also wrote:

"The Moroccan government’s new pipeline does overlap with and likely replaces key components of what Chariot would otherwise have needed to build. This is not just supportive—it materially improves the economics, lowers execution risk, and signals strong governmental alignment with the commercialization of Anchois."

I´m sorry, I can´t see any overlap in the map with CHAR´s planned infraestructure for Anchois.

And the government is right about non planning any infraestructure for a gas project that has not been comercially flow tested yet.

Wigly:

You wrote:

"The creation of state-backed infrastructure removes the need for Chariot to fund large-scale midstream assets alone. This leads to materially lower CAPEX, reducing the breakeven threshold for Anchois and improving the commercial case for future exploration at Rissana."

"It improves the economics of the Anchois development, strengthens the investment case for exploring Rissana, and increases the likelihood of near- and long-term monetization. This significantly enhances the overall value proposition and makes Anchois + the stock materially more attractive."

Are you sure about all of that?

in the original plan, CHAR needed to build:

-a 40km offshore pipeline to connect the field to an onshore CPF

- a 40 km onshore pipeline to connect the CPF to the main GME pipeline

Now, CHAR will have to build:

- a 40km offshore pipeline to connect the field to an onshore CPF (that doesn´t change)

- an onshore pipeline to connect the CPF to the GME-Mohamedia pipeline. have you calculated the lenght of this new pipeline? looking at the map, it seems that the connection to the GME pipeline is still the best option.

This infraestructure is being planned to distribute imported gas to local demand centers. Anchois is still out of the picture for the authorities that are planning this. They are just giving Anchois the option to connect to this new infraestructure, in case the project goes ahead and the developers find this new optiont economically sound for the project

If Europe reinitiate importing substantial quantities of gas from Russia, it will reduce both the european natural gas market price and the economic valuie of Anchois.

Even local gas prices in Morocco (that is currently importing gas from Spain) will be affected.

Regards

"Hints that German and French energy firms might resume Russian gas imports mark more than just economic desperation—they signal Europe's quiet recalibration of strategic autonomy. With U.S.-EU ties fraying under Trump-era foreign policy shifts and Qatar LNG talks going nowhere, some EU players see Russian gas as a necessary evil to preserve industrial competitiveness. While publicly committed to decoupling from Moscow, Berlin and Paris may be preparing for a "cold peace" in Ukraine that allows for limited energy re-engagement without political reconciliation. If flows resume—especially via Nord Stream 2—it could fracture EU unity on sanctions and expose the bloc’s Achilles' heel: energy security still trumping geopolitical resolve."

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Europes-Energy-Dilemma-Russian-Gas-vs-Geopolitical-Resolve.html

"That’s not how it works Fernan- it’s between Enog and the government who approved the license. Enog will pay its share of costs until a transfer is made."

If CHAR and ENOG can find a suitable replacement for ENOG (for example, the government-backed mining company that I mencioned in my previous email) THEN they can ask the government to aprove the new consortium structure, and not the opposite way.

"There isn’t really a negotiation between Enog and chariot save for professional courtesy and respect. Enog will obtain approval to relinquish and there will already be terms dictating split of costs"

I can´t agree with you. CHAR and ENOG signed a farm in agreement, that sets the rights and obligations of both parties. If ENOG now wants to walk away, the specific contract clause relating to the right of each party to leave the license (if that clause exists) will apply.

But even in that case, there is a chance ENOG and CHAR will have to negotiate some kind of compensation to CHAR due to ENOG not fulfilling their disbursement obligations in the farm in contract. Maybe ENOG can avoid paying that compensation by finding a suitable new partner to CHAR. Who knows.

You are implying that, If ENOG suddenly decided to leave the license, it will simply transfer their equity interest to the government, and nothing more, without any involvement from CHAR. I don´t think that´s right.

I suspect (or hope) thar Enog (and CHAR) are currently negociating the "transfer" of Enog's equity interest in the licenses to a new farm in partner (maybe the same government-backed mining company that farmed into Sound Energy's gas exploration/development licenses in the east of the country last year

I´m sorry pal. Anchois was previously mentioned in the $6bln tender launched by the moroccan government for natural gas infrastructure.

See here:

https://www.zawya.com/en/projects/oil-and-gas/morocco-to-launch-6bln-tender-for-natural-gas-infrastructure-wq7bg3z7

And now, no mention at all.

I can't see any mencion of Anchois in the energy strategy.

Is it because, after the failure of A3, the government decided to prioritize the investment in LNG import terminals?

The exact words of the document are:

"...the European Investment Bank (EIB)and Mauritania have signed a declaration in June 2022 to co-operate and support the country’s green hydrogen investment plans."

There is no compromise from the European Investment Bank to fund this project yet.