Member Info for Gudin

Are we allowed to question the CEO's performance yet? It's not long ago he was targeting a £100m to £200m marketcap instead we are getting dragged down to on par with Char who many on this board(and the twitter guru) have lambasted.

Luckily the safety net of T & T is in place to prevent this, oh wait. Going into this drill with nothing to backstop it was naive.

IJWT is correct why are their no timelines for Mou 3 testing or the workovers in T&T similar things have been said by PG for nearly two years and neither is any further forward or even with a start date.

It’s all well and good complaining about MMs but if you allow uncertainty in your communications that allows them to manipulate then as CEO you have to take responsibility for the sp. As Keithoz pointed out he has no idea for timelines for Mou 5 analysis, should shareholders have to guess when these will completed?

Hi BlueGlow

Been on these boards and others for years, was on iii for the GKP ride so know how they work. GKP often had similar with the Kurds been in control been repeated with the Moroccans with posters from back then rolling out the old play book here it seems.

This is an investment and the gas is there it's time for the excuses to stop and questions asked of when the millions spent are going to see a return for investors.

No offence matt and this is not aimed at you, but the games, secret talks etc narrative is getting tedious. The share price is under 4p. The pre drill talk of biggest onshore drill of the year, lofty price targets, multiple tcf and independent reports did not have the now assumed veil of secrecy that is being applied. It's only been a couple of months since the last presentation and now we need 3d that was not mentioned, so something has changed.

Communication is poor and has been for a long time, it was clear the rns was going to have a negative impact as it was too vague so why release it? After years of Mou fan drilling and now the Jurassic when are shareholders going to see some value creation?

The rns contained all the enthusiasm of a Sunderland fan going to work in Newcastle today. The biggest onshore drill of the year, broker reports of £1 plus yet here we are at 4p. If it's a good result he has no done a good job of explaining it.

80m of reservoir seems good to me, the market does not agree.

There are around £10m in sunk costs for MOU 1, 2, 3 and 4 currently adding no value and with no plans for the foreseeable future. They have recently spent £1m on perforating MOU 3 only to announce that it will be plugged above this work to perforate the shallow sands. The discovery bonus is $1m.

Assuming the latest vague tweet is alluding to delaying a commercial discovery due to the bonus and exploitation concession it seems to go against the self claimed frugal approach to spend more than that on perforations only to plug the zone before flow testing. It is also incredibly daft to do two placings at 4p and 5p to "save" paying a bonus when a commercial discovery would have led to a significantly higher share price and reduced dilution.

Around 140m warrants and options.

Like the research on the presentation countering your fully funded for testing MOU 5 that you have ignored?

Like the research on the Bonasse field demonstrating that production was 10bpd for the field when others are claiming 100bpd per well.

That kind of thing?

Treasures

It's a discussion board people are allowed to ask questions of posters including keithoz. Recently I questioned keithoz tax theory and was met with hostility for daring to question him . Keith was dismissive of separate concessions or indeed separate reservoirs having their own concessions. Strangely since PG confirmed at the presentation that both were in the company's plans he has been silent on the subject. If you want to accept posts without question that's up to you, but as you do not own the board others are free to question him, it's not a swipe as you claim.

Why no answer footandmouth?

Why have you added my name as the title, the tweet does not mention it and it was posted before my post? If you are going to copy paste do it accurately and do not use someones profile to post your own views. Lowlife behaviour.

Tmh the rns clearly also states Mou 3 shallow sands 600k but the presentation on the Jan has changed this to funded by T&T who to believe indeed. Indeed the presentation mentions Mou 5 drilling fully funded, probably just an oversight not to confirm that testing is also fully funded. Unless it’s not fully funded, then that would probably stop them.

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2024.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2025/01/Corporate-Presentation-21-JANUARY-2025.pdf

Page 6 for shallow sands in Mou 3

Page 5,8 and 15 for drilling only fully funded.

Keithoz has claimed a £300k order for long lead items equates to a fully funded $3m drill best correct him for fitting his book.

Keithoz the presentation clearly states the shallow sands is funded by T&T page 6 for your reference. The allocation of funds have clearly changed and the rns you quoted are out of date. Maybe the two no cash acquisition costing cash and Mou 6 have changed this.

Do try to keep up, I know PG frequent flip flopping make this difficult.

The plan for shallow sands has been confirmed as changed in the presentation, so the whole rns spending plan is afforded the same degree of reliability.

The post can be construed as misleading.

"Cash has been raised and allocated for projects this year" then producing a list including projects that have not been allocated funding is misleading.

MOU 5 perforating and testing not funded.

MOU 3 shallow sands perforating not funded.

Drill & dewaxing treatment for 2 development wells not funded.

Drill Snowcap-3 not funded.

Workover & enhance production from Bonasse field not funded.

Workover & enhance production from ex-CEG fields after deal completion not funded.

The shallow sands are planned for Q2, always best to use the latest information and understand how quarters work. Two comes after one 🤔

Presentation 20th Jan page 6 perforate shallows sands subject to funding from T & T revenue. Always best to use the latest information and revenue ie the workovers have not begun.

Which part is not true? If you disagree with something why not add to the discussion.

Posts weighed heavily on the positive side do not seem to create similar comments from yourself,(or any of the other regulars) any reason why? Balance skewed to one side.

This is all about MOU 5, none of the other projects or MOU 3 testing will be in place before this result. Either MOU 5 is a success which will make the others look like chicken feed in comparison or if a negative result the sp will be hammered. There was a 20% fall on the delay announced in Jan, a duster will exceed this.

There is currently only funding in place for drilling MOU 6 and swabbing MOU 3 upper sands, none for testing the shallow sands. Funding is in place for two workovers in T & T. Success at MOU 5 and funding is no problem, a negative result and the sp is dependent on a well that has twice failed to flow and projected 300bpd from the workovers. There will be a billion plus shares in issue on a negative result and a sp in double figures will be a long time away imo.

It's all on MOU 5 you pays your money and take your chances.

Why would they need in grh view a great explorer if they knew what they had?

Why would the freeholders allow this great explorer to be removed from Tendrara something he is still bitter about?

Geologists in recent years have discovered billions of barrels of oil offshore in Guyana and the orange basin, a bold claim to put PG who has failed to flow gas onshore in Morocco yet above these. These geologists as far as I know used the correct mud when drilling these wells, which is a further boost to their status.

1400 bopd is Keithoz figure, not mine. Be happy with 750bpd including snowcap 3. There are tone deaf buskers generating more cash in a day than Bonasse, assuming this was done to get the oil storage tanks and will disappear soon. The issue with T & T is the decline rates and need for frequent workovers, it's why most including CEG have their own rig. The new fields also come with $4.25m of liabilities which has not been explained and how these need paying. CM has $1m that is going to be deducted from revenue for example.

By the time Snowcap 3 is drilled and with the workovers etc the figure will be closer to $6m, personally there is more bang for your buck in Morocco.