Member Info for Fishysaurus

I agree that the ALGOs are 'trading; this - but they are only interested in minute movements in either direction to make their money.

I think we are all interested in the fundamental value of the share, we all agree much much higher with drilling success, but they key for me is the value if the drill program fails.

What does L2 look like ?

I think we urgently need JP to give us a valuation range on what he COULD sell us for based on the existing situation.

That way if it is 45p-50p then people can more easily sit and wait for the drill to see if there are any upsides, knowing what the potential worst case could be.

Without this the downside is ……. unknown and the risk reward ratio looks increasingly unattractive.

Apart from the possibility of Palaeozoic success, the key for the TAGI is porosity (or lack of it).

As seismic do not give any clue to this, there are few other geophysical methods that are likely to detect subtle changes on a formation at depth. Grav checks might but it would be hard to assign differences to the TAGI alone.

The key appears to be the deposition and life cycle of the TAGI which should be in the model they have created. This is what needs to be revisited. We were told that if we had drilled TE8 5KM away we would have hit the sweet spot.

On what basis did they know that ? Was that comment made in a public forum ? Does anyone remember where it came from If there is a check (AVO )? that they used to see that, then why did this not work for TE9? We should know.

Or did they not use this on TE9 ?

Or worse were the comments about the 5Km away from TE8 complete BS ? just to keep us engaged ?

I have no 'relationship' with BM/JP but if anyone wants to ask the question about the 5KM and TE8 I wonder what sort of response might be forthcoming.

Having a degree in Geophysics and Geology (though not worked in the Oil industry), I asked a series of detailed seismic (and related geophysical survey questions) none got answered.

Te10 feels like not even a stab in the dark - we know now in 2 locations that the TAGI is too tight to be a reservoir.
The palaezoic looks initially to be tight (mudstone being very tight).

I know that the BOD will not change plan but I would focus on TE5/6/7 get us a few £ rather than the mythical £10 or what is likely diddley squat.

We all get the risks and hoped for a better outcome what we all want to ensure is the TE10 is a success.

My concern from the FSC is this:

We knew that Porosity was our biggest risk.

Brian states that we used "Fast Track " seismics and that "Additional processing" may help.

Either they knew this before drilling TE9 and failed to do this additional work - unforgivable gamble

or That "additional processing" makes no difference and he is throwing us false hopes at the FSC.

OK now I have just seen his final answer which is after a board meeting this morning additional processing is NOT going to help (a bit of a contradiction from earlier)

Fundamentally he is now saying there is nothing we can do to predict porosity - so plough on with everything crossed, not exactly reassuring.

For me if (when) TE10 fails we need to prove up more of TE5 horst to maximise any value we have.

I have asked a question about the use of "Fast Track" seismics, as Brian is saying that additional processing may help.

Did they know this before drilling TE9 ? If not why not ? and if so why didn't they do it prior to drilling TE9 ?

If they do the additional work prior to Te10 and it shows the same will they NOT drill there ?

Bet this does not get answered !

If additional processing does not help, then basically the sesimics add little.

Yamashiro - totally agree, its exactly what I said on Monday.

Unfortunately I think we will just go ahead with TE10 as to stop now would be to admit mistakes on TE9, also the BOD have less to loose and more to gain with that strategy. We will get little from the FSC apart from platitudes I think.

I want to know whatJP could get for the company now pre Te10. My concerns about TE9 was not that we had a failure, but the nature and size of the failure and the seismic read across and the TAGI porosity read across.

If the TAGI is non porous across most of our area (in the worst case) it would be prudent to expand the drills around TE6/7 to increase our value (and SP). With a higher SP a small raise would then be less painful if other areas then want to be drilled.

At least it would give us a downside that be more acceptable.

I am not expecting anything much from the FSC today.

As I posted yesterday, I believe that the issues highlighted in seismic interpretation for TE9 means that we need to put a hold on TE10.

They clearly have miss interpreted the tagi layer from the seismics as they found the TAGI much higher than they thought. Though the Palaeozoic being deeper would have been harder to interpret from the seismics, they clearly got the underlying structures wrong.

My worry is that the team will just plough ahead regardless. I understand the risks of an exploration company but TE9 was such a complete miss that I as an owner of this company want to know the value we could realise NOW (and after a TE10 failure) so that we can make a call on whether to salvage what value we currently have. Another TAGI failure undermines what we have in TE6 &7.

I believe we need to understand what JP could get for the company NOW. My worry is that we will just go ahead.

Ask yourself if Te10 is drilled and at TD you see a 500K sell - do you assume that there is a leak and sell up - then only to find that its a hit and you miss out on everything. Or assume its a game being played and get stuffed as the insider sell out.

Hence my wish to understand current value and re-evaluate forward plans.

I agree you cannot exactly know the porosity, however the gravity and AVO does give you some data.

Likewise the basin model about the laydown of the layers in the TAGI, ie major river, maritime, or flood plain is exactly what you use to interpret the potential porosity. Sediment laid down in a active environment is likely to be coarser and more porous than a slow moving environment i.e. mud.

It this interpretation is one of my issues -I get you can not exactly tell the porosity but you can interpret. Otherwise there is little point with all the work that has been done -you may as well just poke the TAGI almost anywhere

We all knew that the results of TE9 were not certain and so it proved.

Haing been supportive of JP and the team (though not liking the rampy comments which I thought were unwise), my greatest concern is now the Seismics and the ability to interpret from them.

They appears to have been surprised about the depths they encountered each stratigraphic layer - thats fairly basic from Seismics.

The Palaeozoic "apparently on the down side on an incline" - so again the seismics have been wrongly interpreted.

The AVO and Gravity analysis suggested that the TAGI porosity was more akin to TE6/7 -not so.

I believe there is little point in moving forward to TE10 when the basis of the Seismic interpretation has proved to be poor.

I feel that JP should give the shareholders a view of what he thinks he could get for the company at this moment in time - I imagine that if he could get 50p(or more) the view might now be, take it.

Another similar failure at Tagi TE10 for porosity would damage our value even more.

I think we need to understand what our current walk away price is - we the shareholders can then make a call on the way forward.

I thought that I would look at the read across to Algeria to see what could be inferred (if anything) from the Upper Carboniferous mudstones.
Firstly (though you will all know this) the sequence from youngest (higher) to oldest (deeper) is: Permian, Carboniferous, Devonian, Silurian, Ordovician and finally Cambrian.

The Palaeozoic source rocks appears to be mainly Silurian and Devonian for the gas in Algeria, though there is some in the Carboniferous. Why did they not drill deeper ? or had they found good enough results to prove the upper Palaeozoic ? ie good gas accumulations from deeper rocks ?

I found an interesting paper on the RKF field in Algeria which is producing from both TAGI and Carboniferous and its not too technical.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313351145_Carboniferous_Petroleum_System_in_the_RKF_field_Berkine_Basin_Algeria (sorry don't know how to hyperlink)

It suggests this may also be gas and 'light' oil in the Carboniferous.

As to the Mudstones, I don't know if that is good or bad - it suggests that there could be a highish level of Organic material, but as to the pososity of the mustone I can find nothing, those these can be low. I would have thought that though it may have originally been deposited as a mustone, it would now be some form of shale (is this where the stimulation could play a part, though there is no mention of it in the RKF paper.

All in all only time will tell.

Just about 10:10 the price jumped briefly over 25p at that time a trade of 84371 is posted suddenly the price drops back below 25p -of course now that trade shows as a 'sell'

Actually the very lack of significant sell volume is in itself positive (at the moment)

The last thing Morocco wants is another announcement suggesting a gas find, only for later this to be announced as not commercial.

I suspect that they have insisted on NO positivity unless absolutely certain results that they have checked. I think that the Moroccan authorities have 48hrs to approve all announcements prior to release in the Petroleum Agreement.

Still got everything crossed !

They mention doing this over both TAGI and Paleozoic so it suggests that they have found results worth checking in both !

I quite like all these ever so knowledgeable people who have suddenly appeared on the site, telling all the LTH who have no clue at all about the company, that it is worthless and going to 25p 20p 15p … etc and how often that they all appear on a day the SP drops and suddenly there is an increase in volume on the sudden drops.

Clearly someone want to buy in !! just a shame about their low morals about how they go about it.

The more time they try and knock it down to buy in cheap, they are just confirming the potential future we hope we have.

Ignore the price, we are worth more than this with what we have discovered so far.

Let alone seiemics

Or any drill discoveries

I agree about drilling all 3 - I have been saying for a long time, that the key to us getting the 'mythical' 4 figures rests on the success (or not) of the Palaeozoic drills.

Genuine question - does anybody knows what happens to any outstanding warrants, if the shares get suspended and then a sale is agreed ?

Do we lose the right to exercise them ?

I have exercised most of my 24p ones - just have a few 'paper ones' that TD Waterhouse removed from my ISA that I have not exercised and thought I have a lot of shares and am wondering what to do.

If we can exercise them post any good results then it is obviously the best thing to wait until TE9 results are in but is there a scenario that might preclude us having this option ?

Over to the BB !