Member Info for Gudin

Where the big fish are you will always find smaller fish. If Exxon are investing big sums it will bring increased interest to the area, no harm in highlighting this. Just think in a couple of years GRH will be proclaiming this as a master stroke and PG knew all about this before hand as did he 😉

IJWT

TXP also mentioned the Exxon deal as it opens the Cretaceous onshore as well which is under-explored, it is a similar play to Guyana which you will be familiar with from ECO. Errant nonsense is unwarranted in this case.

Not too interested in how CHAR are doing, footy not obsessed like you and your twitter friend because jimmy said some hurtful things.

PRD 12 month share price performance - 65%

CHAR 12 month share price performance - 80%

As you brought it up the comparison hardly paints a good job or playing it well, unless your criteria for doing a good job is performing slightly better than a basket case.

The share price is 3p, there is now 700m shares in issue and likely more to follow to fund Mou6. Posters and twitter rampers think he has played it well and is doing a great job. Would hate to see where we would be if he had played it poorly and not done a great job.

How long will it take to recover the $1m already paid? Another year perhaps, so two and a half years is not misleading as you claimed.

"Deal means PRD automatically book the 2P/2C unrisked Contingent and Prospective oil resources of 14.31M barrels of oil." This is Cory Moruga so this deal does not book this.

Good to see the liabilities have been sorted, 44 bpd potentially increasing to 61bpd in 24 months is a steady but unspectacular income stream, it is far from the millions a year some on here have been claiming.

Never said there is $2m outstanding. The total purchase price is $2m including $1m already paid plus the future payments of $1m. Total $2m which will take 2 and a half years to recover the outlay with revenue of $800k it's not difficult.

The company is expecting an "up to 40%" uplift from the workovers and they will receive 7.5% of the revenue from this uplift until the costs are recovered and then revert to 15%. 17 bpd if they hit 40%.

The total purchase price is $2m if the revenue is $800k pa then how long does it take to recover the $2m purchase price?

The next payment is $500k so from $800k revenue they will receive $300k profit, there is a further $250k due in December 2026 meaning the bulk of the $1m initial purchase price will not be recovered as posted. Not in the slightest misleading or"full of errors" as it will take two years to RECOVER the purchase price. Not pay for the future payments, recover the total $2m due including the $1m already paid.

There is still the $4m of liabilities issue to sort out due in 12 months also.

Net 44 bpd at $50 a barrel gives:

$66000 a month

$800000 a year.

For perspective at that rate it will take 2 and half years to recover the purchase price or 3 years to fund a well in Morocco.

A competent and professional CEO should be able to negotiate an AGM without breaching an NDA, it's a two hour session with share holders hardly akin to getting water boarded. Now why a CEO who is up for re-election in a company that is struggling both operationally and in delivering share holder returns is seemingly dodging the one time that they are required to face share holders is a mystery.

TXP have been in T & T for years spent the better part of $100m on new wells and equipment and are barely generating $1m a quarter in profit. 100 plus old wells that have been repeatedly worked over and are now in the hands of a man with a few months experience of EOR and having worked over two wells in two years of being an operator in T & T for the grand total of 16 bopd, suggesting that these are going to throw off millions in profit is pure fantasy. If new wells are barely profitable, then it's difficult to see how old wells requiring frequent costly reworks are going to fare much better.

The recent MOU 3 testing failed to flow, it does not matter who is working on it if the damage is too extensive to overcome. The recent raise was for testing of MOU 1 and MOU 4, something that was missing from PG interview update, dropped on the advice of Intafluid and SLB after what they saw at MOU 3?

Do not believe what has been posted on here regarding T & T, the figures are pure fantasy. CEG lost $50k on oil sales alone last year in T & T, add in admin costs for running the leases, depreciation etc it was much higher. Numerous companies over the years have entered the T & T leases with grand plans and CEG is the latest to fail. Maybe PRD will succeed, history suggests it's unlikely.

Probably because the speculation ( from the same rampers) has been going since at least 2023 and nothing has happened apart from millions more shares being issued. They had a MOU with the Moroccan prime ministers company which has seemingly since been replaced with an undisclosed party, so even the Moroccan elite seem to have lost interest.

They currently have four wells that multiple attempts to flow have failed and a Jurassic well that was unfortunately a duster. There is limited interest in Morocco from the oil and gas industry and PRD thus far has proven little to generate interest. Any bids based on the current resources estimates will be reflected in the failure to flow test, the vintage 2d seismic and the poor log results from the wells.

The May 6th rns highlights they are looking for a partner to explore the major fracture zones. Note the use of the words Major and fracture zones and not the fault in Mou 5. Another clue should have been the fact that they are not evaluating this fault further, it is uncommercial because it is in a fault which will contain hardly any volume of gas and may not even be trapped sufficiently, it is possible it is escaped gas from the fracture zone below. The major fracture zones may hold commercial helium but it will be at a significantly reduced amount to the pre drill forecast and they need to be drilled to confirm this. So yes the helium discovered to date in Mou 5 is uncommercial.

Oldslow keeps on mentioning the pre drill helium forecast this was when they were expecting the helium to be in the reservoirs with the natural gas. No helium was found in the reservoirs at Mou 5 and instead they are now focusing on the deeper fracture zones. Helium one had hundreds on bcf of helium resources when they were focusing on the reservoirs, these turned out to be no good and they like PRD switched to fault zones and the helium resources dropped dramatically. Their helium in the fractures project is perhaps unique as the vast majority if not all helium currently produced is in reservoirs with other gases. It is basic maths a reservoir is able to trap significantly larger volumes than a fracture zone.

They are no longer targeting helium in reservoirs, the plan now is for the faults so those figures no longer apply. As previously posted when helium one changed from reservoir to faults their resource estimates dropped dramatically. The figures for Mou 5 are uncommercial as has been pointed out numerous times and the reason for the switch in focus, so not sure why you keep referencing them.

The TG 4 sand was encountered at 1050m and will not be targeted in this well. The TG 2 sands were encountered at 1236 metres in Mou 1. A sands had a gross thickness of 11m and the Ma and Tg6 sands had a gross thickness of 11.5m so not sure where the 60m gross is coming from?

My estimate of 100bcf seems to have been generous, the January 2025 presentation page 17 has resources for Mou3 of 21bcf for the upper A sands and page 16 61bcf for the Ma and Tg6. As Mou 6 is drilling from the same pad can expect this to be targeting similar. As previously said pretty uninspiring and hardly the tcf from earlier in the year.

Yawn making stuff up again the troll on twitter, notice no explanation of why this is now relevant. Logs not of sufficient quality clearly stated, been caught out and trying to deflect. Very poor, a former banker who has never worked in the field knows better than what the company has stated. Oilyfred has his number imo, cryptic nonsense disguising twaddle.

"Post well evaluation studies have now been completed that included state-of-the art log analysis carried out by NuTech in Houston, Texas"

"Conventional well logs delivered at the end of the well did not have sufficient resolution to correctly characterise the reservoirs penetrated by MOU-1. Additional logs were not run"

RNS 15th December 2021

Not sure the value of logs without sufficient resolution have for Delineation, would GRH expand?

Struggling to understand the difference between independent resources and company estimates don? Mou 6 is testing 21bcf of independent resources as posted. The other zones have no independent resources allocated not difficult.

The upper sands have a company estimate of 20bcf and I have applied 60 bcf to the to Tg sands which have neither a company estimate or independent to arrive at an estimated 100bcf. Do some research instead of insipid sniping. Or maybe post some figures to counter as you seem to think they are incorrect.

He has said many things in presentation that turn out to be neither true or realistic. If he is getting to you to this extent maybe you are getting to emotional which is never good for investing.

I don’t think he is a very good CEO and will be voting against his reappointment, if he is reappointed I will probably accept my losses and move on because the risk reward while he is charge has been demonstrated to be skewed to far to the risk side. There has been no mention of a solution to the Mou fan which was the main target and holds the bulk of the resources. Mou6 targeting under 100bcf which is a company estimate is uninspiring. Revenue of £7m if successful which will be impacted by the partner taking a hefty cut for funding the plant and not coming on line provisional until 2027 is again nothing to get excited about. The Jurassic by the time the farmout is completed and the seismic will be late 2027 before the next drill. TXP highlighted in their presentation the need to be proactive to maintain production something that is not a strong suit of management. Ireland if we are being honest is unlikely to ever happen.

The share price is in the doldrums and for me the upside is getting further away with each failure and with each dilution. It’s all a learning experience and the lesson here seems to be don’t fall for the bluster of a man with an average cv in the industry.

Out of interest what do you feel he has achieved?

Agree that Ijwt has gone too far today, personal insults not justified.

There have been three placing's since he last bought any shares in which he could have taken shares with zero comeback. The rest of the board do not have significant holdings, do they not want to be much wealthier or is he restricted from telling them as well.

Two directors hold no shares and the other a few million, PG has not bought any for two years. That is more akin to a lack of faith rather than someone "quite certain" of a significant re rating.

First gas was planned for 2024 why on earth would a gas hungry Moroccan government place barriers that slows this down to the now planned 2027? There is no commercial flow, so what commercial barriers exist? There has been an ITR released for Morocco covering the four wells drilled and a resource estimate for the Mou fan based on these four wells. There have been numerous presentations, reservoir thickness has been estimated, areal extent estimated, porosity, darcies, pressures and the make up of the gas have all been released. The logs have been released, photos of the sands encountered and the commercial side has been modelled numerous times in detail. What is supposedly not being disclosed?

The only full disclosure share holders have not received is for the Mou 5 duster.