Member Info for Fronteracheckin

Bottom line first

This was a solid, credibility-building presentation.

Not a hype event, not a “mic drop”, but it materially reduced uncertainty around production, cash flow, the farm-in process, and SunSteppe. Importantly, nothing said contradicts the recent RNS. In fact, most of it strengthened it.

If someone came away disappointed, it’s likely because they were expecting new headline news, not because the fundamentals deteriorated.

1. Oil operations – stronger than the board chatter suggests

Heron-1

This is quietly becoming the company’s backbone.

135–145 bopd, stable

~70,000 barrels produced

No free water, lab water cut ~3%

Electrified, diesel eliminated

Performing in line with better Block XIX wells

That last point matters. They are benchmarking against PetroChina’s producing analogue fields, not hand-waving.

Key takeaway: Heron-1 is behaving like a proper development well, not a fragile test well.

Gazelle-1

The market narrative around Gazelle has been unfairly negative.

What we learned:

Initial test rates up to ~400 bopd, equipment-limited

Production achieved in ~30–45 days from mobilisation

Oil quality similar to Heron (same source rock)

Some water seen, but this is down-dip positioning, not failure

Actively optimising drawdown to avoid water encroachment

This sounded like a normal early-life optimisation phase, not a disappointment.

Key takeaway: Gazelle is real production, not a “lucky pocket”.

Heron-2

This remains unresolved, but crucially:

They did not describe it as a duster

Oil is present

The issue is likely fluid banking / near-wellbore effects

Shut-in is operational (cold + temporary kit), not geological

They intend to return with additional techniques

This is frustrating, but it is not a write-off.

2. Cash flow and PetroChina – a real near-term de-risker

This was one of the most important clarifications of the entire session.

Withheld amount: ~US$850,000

PetroChina has accepted the core contractual position

Remaining issue is tax treatment on processing fees

Realistic receipt timing: January–February

They were honest about PetroChina being slow payers, which paradoxically increases credibility.

Key takeaway: This is no longer “if”, it’s “when”.

3. Farm-in – this is genuinely advanced

This is where the presentation quietly exceeded expectations.

What we now know:

Three parties active

One has submitted a formal proposal

That party has completed a December field visit

Proposal is non-operated, likely

Without spending a single penny. AP is paying himself £2 million pounds.

Something doesn’t sit right with this RTO – worth looking at the numbers

A few points that shareholders should really pause and think about.

VAST currently has roughly 5bn shares in issue and a market cap around £7m.

Under the proposed RTO, Gulf shareholders will receive 80% of the enlarged company, leaving existing VAST shareholders with just 20%.

Even assuming a very conservative post-deal valuation of ~£14.5m (current £7m equity plus the proposed £7.5m placing), this implies:

• Existing shareholders go from owning 100% of £7m

• To owning 20% of ~£14.5m = ~£2.9m

That is a material dilution and value transfer.

What’s more concerning is the related-party angle.

Andrew Prelea is disclosed as owning 17.08% of Bay Square, which owns 100% of Gulf. After the RTO, Bay Square shareholders collectively own 80% of VAST, meaning Andrew effectively ends up with:

~13.7% of VAST plc post-RTO

On conservative numbers, that equates to ~£2m of equity on paper, potentially more if the market re-rates the enlarged group.

All of this follows:

• Repeated ambiguity around the diamond parcel

• Shifting narratives on gem quality and carat splits

• Multiple placings

• A sudden 35% price spike on heavy volume days before suspension

• An RNS that appears timestamped for 07:30 but only suspended the market at midday

Now shareholders are suspended, massively diluted, and asked to fund a £7.5m raise to acquire a company in which the CEO already has a significant economic interest.

No accusations here, but the optics, timing, and value transfer are at the very least uncomfortable.

Merry Christmas all, absolutely massive news for the Prelea family today congratulations to them for all their hard work to get them where they are today. Company has never in history turned a single profit once. 100 million + in share equity raises, zero profitable mines, ever. Amazing times ahead 👏👏👏

5. The CPR / resource section, looks impressive but read carefully

Yes, the Tajik assets look big on paper.

But:

No JORC-compliant resources

Heavy reliance on historical Soviet-era data

CPR explicitly says:

“cannot be considered to be reported in alignment with any of the CRIRSCO family of reporting codes”

So valuation here is aspirational, not bankable yet.

That’s fine for exploration, but not fine as justification for:

suspending trading

issuing 80% of the company away

and raising another £7.5m

6. Strategic contradiction (this matters)

Ask yourself this:

If Vast was:

weeks away from diamond cash

sitting on transformational value

close to clearing debt

Why is it:

suspending the stock

doing a reverse takeover

massively diluting shareholders

deferring debt again

and raising £7.5m now?

The actions contradict the historic narrative.

Markets always believe actions over words.

7. What this means for shareholders (brutally honest)

Best case:

Gulf assets are real

CPR converts to JORC

Re-admission happens cleanly

New Vast becomes a different, larger company

Worst case:

Long suspension

More dilution

Asset complexity

Governance questions

Retail holders sidelined

Either way, this is no longer the diamond story you invested in.

Bottom line

This RNS confirms:

You were right to be concerned earlier

The company has pivoted because the original plan failed

Shareholders are paying for that failure via dilution and suspension

From a governance and disclosure perspective, regulators will be looking very closely at:

the related party nature of the deal

the valuation methodology

the timing relative to recent placings

and the repeated debt deferrals

Well here we go;

This announcement does four major things at once:

Triggers an AIM suspension immediately

Announces a reverse takeover (RTO) where existing shareholders are massively diluted

Introduces another large placing (£7.5m) before trading even resumes

Formally abandons the “diamonds will sort the balance sheet” narrative

Taken together, this is a hard reset of the equity story.

1. Immediate suspension, this is serious

Under AIM Rule 14, trading is suspended midday today and will likely remain suspended until early 2026.

That means:

No liquidity

No price discovery

No exit

Capital is locked for months

Suspensions are not neutral events, they are investor-hostile by default, even if technically compliant.

2. Reverse takeover mechanics, existing holders get crushed

This is the key line:

“…issue of new ordinary shares … representing 80% of the issued Ordinary Shares upon Completion”

That means current shareholders are diluted down to ~20% of the enlarged company before considering:

the £7.5m placing

the retail offer

any further financing

This is not incremental dilution.

This is ownership wipeout.

Even if Gulf is a “good asset”, you are no longer invested in the same company you bought.

3. Related party red flag (this matters)

Buried in the RNS:

“Andrew Prelea and Paul Fletcher are … 17.08% and 5.00% shareholders in Bay Square”

So:

The CEO is on both sides of the transaction

This is a related party transaction under AIM Rule 13

Shareholders must rely heavily on:

the NOMAD

the independent NED

and the fairness of the valuation

This massively raises the governance bar, and history says AIM investors should be cautious here.

4. The diamonds narrative is now officially dead

This is the most important strategic shift, even if it’s not shouted about.

Earlier story (for years):

Diamonds would clear debt

Diamonds were transformational

Diamonds bought time and optionality

Now, explicitly stated:

“…use revenue from upcoming diamond sales, together with proceeds from the Placing, and proceeds from new offtake finance agreements and/or wider funding arrangements, to repay the Creditors”

That is an admission that:

Diamond proceeds alone are not sufficient

Equity dilution is now structural, not temporary

Debt keeps being rolled forward (now to 30 Jan 2026)

This aligns exactly with what you were flagging earlier to the regulator.

Report them to the police for computer misuse act and harassment investors they may look into it 🤔 tell them you're fearful of your life (as you definitely certainly must be) due to the nature of their incessant and long standing stalking like behaviour, hopefully they'll act on it

StockMaiden looks like you didn't learn your lesson from Zaza did you lad?

I wonder how much you lost there.

And you feel like you can hand out advice here? Hahahah

You should have listened to the bashers on FRR shouldn't you.

Well I guess they told you so! Don't forget your Christmas presents from SaNta and Zaza. Every year you must be furious. 😂😂😂😂

I'm glad you lost your entire investment here StockMaiden, seeing the bitter little rat you are :)

(maybe change Matador Resources to Petro Matad - AI blunder ;)

Email to: admin@petromatadgroup.com

ir@petromatadgroup.com

Dear [Company Secretary / Investor Relations Team],

I am writing to formally raise a concern regarding the conduct of a long-standing user, “StockMaiden”, on the MATD (Matador Resources) LSE chatboard.

Over a sustained period, and particularly on 16 December, this individual posted an exceptionally high volume of messages which go well beyond legitimate criticism or bearish opinion. The content repeatedly includes:

Allegations of criminality and corruption presented as fact, without evidence

Personal attacks and abusive language directed at company officers and other shareholders

Implied threats of physical violence towards named individuals

Harassment and intimidation of other posters, including accusations of coordinated “boiler room” activity

Speculation framed as insider certainty, with potential to mislead less-experienced investors

By way of illustration (non-exhaustive), the posts include allegations of corruption and bribery, accusations of fraud and deception, repeated claims that other forum members are paid manipulators, and language suggesting individuals could be “dragged out of their home”.

The cumulative effect has been the degradation of the MATD board as a forum for genuine investor discussion and the creation of a hostile environment that discourages participation. As you will be aware, the issue of prolonged hostile and abusive online activity has already been referenced publicly, including during the recent shareholder presentation.

To be clear, criticism of management, strategy, or share price performance is entirely legitimate. However, the tone, volume, and content of these posts appear to cross into harassment, defamation, and threatening language, raising reputational, governance, and personal safety concerns.

I wish to make you aware that I have formally reported this matter to the LSE moderation team, including detailed quotations and timestamps, and have requested that they review the user’s conduct for compliance with forum rules.

Given the nature of some of the language used, including implied threats towards named individuals, I would also ask that you consider whether any of this content meets your own internal thresholds for escalation, including referral to the relevant authorities, should you consider that appropriate.

This email is sent in good faith as a shareholder concerned about the wellbeing of individuals, the integrity of shareholder communications, and the reputation of the company.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Kind regards,

Also if you wish to add your your email to info@lse.co.uk - If you want a strong but clean annex, you can introduce it like this:

“For ease of reference, below are verbatim quotations from posts made by the user ‘StockMaiden’ on 16 December, illustrating the nature of the conduct being raised.”

1. Implied threats / incitement to violence (very high severity)

“MB better be hiding in Mongolia.

If he was here, there be a lot of angry UK investors.

He'll most likely get dragged out of his own home and I'll let you imagine the rest.”

(16 Dec, 11:22)

This is the single most serious post. It contains:

Targeting of a named individual

Suggestion of mob violence

Implicit encouragement or normalisation of harm

This alone is normally sufficient for moderation action.

2. Direct accusations of criminality and corruption stated as fact

“MB the master of cheat and deception.”

(16 Dec, 07:34)

“Corruption.”

(16 Dec, 07:24)

“Basically a brown envelope”

(16 Dec, 07:57)

“That's exactly what corrupt officials would say.”

(16 Dec, 08:01)

“Cheating others wealth to make himself wealthy.”

(16 Dec, 11:22)

These are not framed as opinion or speculation. They are flat assertions of bribery, corruption, and fraud, which is classic defamatory risk.

3. Harassment and abusive language towards individuals

“Are you a cheat?

Are you a liar?

Are you incompetent?

Are you a fooking banker?”

(16 Dec, 11:17)

“MB has lied a few times too many.”

(16 Dec, 11:22)

“What leadership……”

(16 Dec, 11:15)

“This is getting really boring. He needs to up his story that he is selling.”

(16 Dec, 11:38)

This is personal abuse rather than critique of strategy or results.

4. Allegations of coordinated market manipulation by other posters

“The boiler room crew have caused people to lose money but they don't care, its their job to bait people with their lies.”

(16 Dec, 17:30)

“It's what WoS does, he goes around lying to trick people to invest.”

(16 Dec, 11:30)

“The boiler room crew are forgetting their scripts.”

(16 Dec, 11:35)

These posts accuse other forum members of criminal market abuse, without evidence, which breaches forum rules and chills discussion.

5. Misleading statements presented as insider certainty

“No need to wait for the next operational update.

I can tell you now.

It will be like this:”

(16 Dec, 15:29)

This presents speculative assumptions as near-certain future disclosures, which moderation teams are particularly sensitive to.

You can also add this to prompt whether LSE needs to involve the police;

Given the nature of some of the language used, including implied threats towards named individuals, I would ask that you consider whether any of this content meets your internal thresholds for escalation beyond routine moderation, in line with your responsibilities as the platform host.

Btw, this strange individuals posts on ONLY 16th December,

Total posts on 16 December

23 separate posts by the same user on the MATD board, all within a single calendar day.

Timestamps (as shown on the board)

Listed chronologically:

00:05

07:19

07:24

07:34

07:36

07:46

07:54

07:57

08:01

11:11

11:15

11:17

11:22

11:30

11:33

11:35

11:38

15:29

15:58

17:15

17:17

17:30

18:05

Afternoon all, I'm posting this for anyone who sees fit to email to info@lse.co.uk

Subject: Formal Complaint Regarding Repeated Abusive, Defamatory and Threatening Posts by User “StockMaiden” on MATD Chatboard

Dear LSE Moderation Team,

I am writing to formally raise a complaint regarding the conduct of a long-standing user, “StockMaiden”, on the MATD (Matador Resources) chatboard.

Over a sustained period, and particularly on 16 December, this user has posted an exceptionally high volume of messages which go well beyond legitimate criticism or bearish opinion. The posts repeatedly contain:

Allegations of criminality and corruption presented as fact, without evidence

Personal attacks and abuse directed at company officers and other forum members

Implied threats of physical violence against named individuals

Harassment and intimidation of other posters, including accusations of “boiler room” activity

Speculation framed as insider knowledge, which risks misleading less-experienced investors

By way of example (non-exhaustive):

Statements alleging corruption, cheating, deception, and misuse of funds by named individuals

Comments suggesting individuals should be “dragged out of their home”

Repeated accusations that other posters are paid rampers or liars

Assertions that senior management are criminals, cheats, or corrupt officials

Persistent posting designed to derail threads and provoke hostility rather than discussion

This behaviour has become so disruptive that it was explicitly referenced during a recent shareholder presentation, where management acknowledged prolonged hostile and abusive online activity originating from September onwards.

To be clear, criticism of management, strategy, or share price performance is entirely legitimate. However, the tone, frequency, and content of these posts appear to breach LSE forum rules relating to:

Defamation

Harassment and abuse

Threatening language

Market-misleading statements

Disruptive posting behaviour

The cumulative effect is the degradation of the MATD board as a forum for genuine investor discussion, and the creation of a hostile environment that discourages participation.

I respectfully request that the moderation team:

Review the user’s posting history, particularly the volume and content on 16 December

Assess compliance with LSE forum rules on abusive and defamatory conduct

Take appropriate moderation action, which may include warnings, post removal, or suspension if deemed necessary

I am happy to provide direct links, timestamps, or further examples if required.

Thank you for taking the time to review this matter. I appreciate the work involved in keeping LSE forums constructive and fair for all users.

Kind regards,

What did you warn people again Stock? I thought your precious time was to be used elsewhere?? 😂😂😂

I hope you're out when the farm in / out agreement is signed and that 7am rns catches you out good and proper.

Shut in over winter? You're saying this like it's some great unknown thing you've been bleating and prophesying on like jesus' seconds coming.

We're aware of how winter works clown.

Signing of the agreement can happen any time from 7am tomorrow onwards.

Next news around April? LOL!!

'wasting my precious time here'

HAHAHAHA this guy has spent weeks, no, MONTHS on this board every morning, afternoon and evening posting FUD. and now he decides hes wasting his time? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Btw im reporting your comments to the FCA and requesting your entire posting history be investigated, and I encourage all to do so.

Remember when you said the price 'Will' slide? thats stated as a fact, and I'm glad I listened to your financial advice.

Can we get a copy of your financial advisory status Stock?

They'll be asking for it :)

Tiny sales worth less than pocket change into an illiquid market, hardly cause for panic is it?

Not if you dont raise the issue. I raised the issue with another company, and they replied within a week.

Adw just report them to the FCA directly for attempting to affect SP as well as offering financial advice without a licence. they will investigate.

Trolls have very suddenly changed their tone havent they, lot less vicious comments and now trying to only make surface level comments.

FCA are coming for you little boys :)

Still ongoing, come and join

Good luck boys :)