Member Info for Gudin

Watched the TXP investor presentation from yesterday and they mentioned that Exxon have taken large blocks offshore T & T and they feel it has similar potential to their block in Guyana where they have made numerous large scale discoveries. TXP highlighted that they are going to explore the onshore potential, Cory Moruga has one well into the Cretaceous which the ITR has down as a 400m thick zone. So there may be some extra potential to explore in T&T.

Also highlighted meetings with the new oil and gas officials who seem keen to expedite permits etc.

It’s not just questions Ijwt he is also up for re-election and we know from January he was receiving messages from unhappy shareholders. The share price is even weaker since then and add in failures at Mou 5 and Mou 3 testing and it may seem like he is dodging shareholders.

The reason these high pressure gas reservoirs are listed as resources and not reserves is because doubt to the viability of them still exists until testing proves otherwise. The independent report author must be wanting cheap shares. As for the comparison with CHAR and the £20 million this is not offshore and not comparable, Pxen have spent half of that in Italy and are generating cash flow in a similar timeframe.

Jimmy never said all the gas had leaked away, he is suggesting some seals may have been broken leading to some reservoirs failing to trap the gas. A perfectly valid point even if this not due to the inversion events, testing is required to prove these seals remain effective . The lower sands in Mou 5 did not have sufficient trapping so drilling has already proven effective seals have not formed or have been damaged in the basin. Reservoirs have initially flowed and/ or had high pressures but have then dropped off a cliff due to being residual oil or gas throughout the world, surprised someone working in the industry is so dismissive of this.

How many more shares in issue before you start to worry? Another accretive placing at a lower price than the last, what happened to the £20m plus raised in the last few years. When are share holders going to start seeing the business grow from all these funds invested. Some accountability for the directors is overdue.

Not bought for a couple of years much like the directors. I will also politely decline the trading advice of someone with an average of 10p.

Any link to the sand jet blocking the well? Can recall John Tingas saying it would flow and the company saying swabbing was needed which seems the opposite of what that implies. PG in January said the shallow sands were the "easiest" to flow and did not suffer the problems of the lower formations, it is a massive leap to state that the lower sands are "almost certainly be successful" when the easiest has not been successful. The recent interview confirmed this when PG states they are only drilling the new well to 950m to avoid the "unstable" deeper section that requires higher mud weight and therefore increases the likely formation damage.

The CEG assets made a loss of $50k in their last accounts and have been in effective limbo for six months with what will be likely minimum spend to keep it ticking over. There is zero chance of this producing millions anytime soon.

Keithoz is saying they are almost certain to work on the lower levels of Mou 3 the post was addressing that point not Mou 6. Sand jet has already attempted to perforate beyond the maximum extent of the perforating guns in Mou 3 and failed. An attempt with the perforating guns in Mou 3 lower levels is therefore unlikely to be successful based on the sand jet results.

The 27/8" perforating guns used on the shallows sands at Mou 3 were modelled to penetrate 25 - 28" into a formation, sand jet in phase 2 was modelled to achieved this as a minimum and we now know failed to penetrate beyond the formation damage. Single casing or double casing the perforating guns are not "almost certain to be successful", in the lower levels as perforating above the limit of their maximum extent has already been unsuccessful.

Why does it have to be black and white, the end result may be positive we do not know yet but that does not make the journey to that point immune from criticism.

$20m+ plus spent in Morocco not a single cubic foot of gas reserves proven after four years.

180% increase in shares in issue since pre Mou 1 diluting the impact of any find.

Share price of 3p.

The journey to any outcome is quite important and the posters you have listed are usually dismissive of this point. Most are here to make money, in the past four years dilution has taken a significant bite out of that. Four years ago a £100m marketcap would have given a share price of 42p, similar marketcap now would be 15p as an example. That's a lot of upside left on the table.

The ma sands have a net resources of 21bcf, the other zones have been given no resource figures, the upper sands due to no logging. At 950m depth the lower targets will not be reached where the bulk of the previous released resource are estimated. So donalb are you able to provide a different figure?

The well is targeting 20bcf of independently confirmed resources.

Sad to see Graham resorting to this hopefully it is desperation and not age related. Morocco is investing billions in infrastructure throughout the country. New highways, railways and ports etc there must be large undisclosed gas reserves in these areas too.

Mou 6 is attempting to prove 20bcf of gas resources.

Well unless I missed the part of the interview where he confirmed the recently planned testing of Mou 1 and 4 which thelast placing was for or the swabbing of Mou 3 is happening then they seem to me to be effectively abandoned. Three failed attempts to overcome the formation damage, fubar.

Is that the partner who is waiting like the rest of us for proof it flows before committing anything. If they know the gas is there why not start the production facilities now?

tmhsdx6 perhaps you could enlighten as to why you think it was not poor. Four wells fubar and no further forward than early 2023, zero acceptance of the poor performance, wasted money and time lost. Rambling on about establishing formation damage as though this was a positive. Very poor imo.

Very poor interview, failed to take any responsibility for the four wells that suffered formation damage on his watch that could have been prevented if they had tested the first. It was his stance that testing was not required, when it clearly was. Drilling four wells in a new basin on the assumption that they were similar to the Gharb is a very costly mistake in both money and time that shareholders have to endure. Add into that the backtracking on seismic which he has also stated was not required, but now it is. It's been a masterclass in how not to conduct an exploration campaign from Paul Griffiths.

Every time there is a setback someone comes up with holding back/ dark forces / Moroccans interfering rubbish. Simple truth is PG talks a good game but has yet to deliver.

The wells were based on the Gharb basin did his 40 years of experience not maybe think they should confirm that this theory was applicable to a whole different area before blundering on and drilling three more wells?

Defended PG when I first started posting on this board with regard to not testing, clearly an oversight on my behalf even though I have been investing in the O and G sector since GKP. The drill team in Morocco has been removed but the man with the overall responsibility is untouched. Who decided not to test is the question that should be asked at the forthcoming AGM.

Other companies such as Panr the directors have come out and faced share holders after a set back in an investors meet presentation, will PG front up and explain the last four years and why he should be trusted to get it right this time?

"Predator has put in 95% of the hard work - gaining the Guercif licence, carrying out the exploration through drilling, appraising the knowledge gained and lessons learned"

If testing had been carried out at Mou 1, then the knowledge gained would have led to using the drilling techniques going to be applied to Mou 6 used at Mou 2, 3 and 4. This decision not to test has cost millions in well costs, testing and reports from the likes of John "it will flow" Tingas plus the years of waiting. First gas will now be 2027 at the earliest if they get Mou 6 right. Posters seem to be just brushing off this failure by senior management and trusting them to get it right next time. There is not many jobs going where this level of failure would not have consequences.

Oily it was only a few days ago Keithoz was confidently stated that the A sands had no formation damage, GRH now blaming lonny who he has lavishly praised in the past. The pair of them have got nearly as much wrong as PG, they will both be back to ramp Mou 6 in a few months.

PG was insistent that testing was not required and now four years later millions of dollars spent we have four wells that are rendered useless because of the same formation damage and Mou 5 that is a duster. If Mou 1 had been tested then this would have been avoided, lonny and Moira paid for this with their jobs and now it’s time for the man at the top to accept responsibility. Failure after failure, delay after delay should have consequences for a very well paid executive who lets face it is now tarnished with failure. He has also failed to deliver the “safety net” in T & T. Share price likely to take a hit from the already low levels, it’s time for fresh blood.