Member Info for Gudin

The acquisition of the CEG fields was completed 1st September and the production was 289bpd, five months later despite a work programme comprising of heavy work overs, swabbing etc production stands at 305bpd.

Bonasse in March 2025 was producing 16bpd, 11 months later despite a work programme that contains five new wells ( four currently producing) work overs etc is producing 38bpd.

1000bpd from the Nabi managed fields is unrealistic based on current performance.

Swabbing costs in T&T have limited information, but Trinity reported $10000 to $12000 in 2017, add in the downtime due to swabbing and it looks like PRD are experiencing the same issues that have plagued these fields for years. Costly work overs and high decline rates mean you are facing an uphill battle to increase production.

The October presentation clearly states the agreement is between Nabi and CEG Bonasse and not a direct contractual revenue entitlement to Predator. For some reason Keith who takes all other points in the presentations as gospel is ignoring this. Perhaps Keith can offer a rational explanation as to why WIEGL who hold a legal 49% stake in Bonasse and the three CEG fields are willing to waive their entitlement to their share of the revenue?

The presentation from October clearly states that the agreement is between Nabi and CEG bonasse. Keithoz starting point is that the agreement is between Nabi and Trex and this is incorrect. The rest of his assertions based on this flawed opening premise are therefore incorrect. Has Keithoz provided any facts to back up his claim that the deal is between Nabi and Trex or posters just taking this claim as fact?

The rns on the 1st September clearly states the company has executed an agreement that replicates the bonasse agreement, which is with a subsidiary. It is not an interpretation it is a statement from the company stating that the original agreement with Nabi and a subsidiary has been repeated. The interpretation is that an agreement is between Nabi and Trex and no evidence has been presented to verify this claim.

Page 20 of the October presentation refers to an agreement with the third party operator and CEG Bonasse, not with Trex as Keithoz is claiming. CEG Bonasse is split 51% / 49% with WIEGL, so if CEG Bonasse is receiving 30% of the revenue then it is logical to suggest that WIEGL is getting a 49% share of this revenue.

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2024.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2025/10/New-corporate-presentation-14-10-2025.pdf

"· The Company has executed a Production and Field Services Management Agreement ("PAFSMA") with NABI Construction (Trinidad and Tobago) Limited ("NABI") to replicate the arrangements for the Bonasse Field to cover the Goudron, Inniss-Trinity and Icacos Fields."

The rns do not state that an agreement is between Nabi and Trex, this is Keithoz interpretation with no references to back this up with. The 1st September rns does as copied above state the agreement replicates the bonasse agreement so the revenue sharing is with each individual subsidiary and the split will apply.

"SC-1 production decline has not been used as a model for SC-3, since it was poorly drilled & completed" what is the source for this please. The wax issue still has not been addressed and is unsuitable for Snowcap 1 as per recent rns. The company estimates for Snowcap 1 workover and Snowcap 4 are 275bpd.

You have missed the point of the decline rates for the wells after the heavy workovers and new drilling it will be significantly more than the 8% used for mature fields. Using the 35% from the itr for CM that means to get 500bpd every six months they will have to add 675bpd production plus any decline in the current levels has also to be replaced to maintain the production levels. That's an increase of 184% plus from current levels and with new wells on Bonasse coming in at 3.25bpd after the decline rate is applied seems a tad optimistic.

"Now what was the MONTHLY growth in December 2025, BEFORE the current ongoing campaign of new drills and heavy workovers began? Oh look, it was +19%."

"Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc (LSE: PRD), the Jersey based Oil and Gas Company with producing hydrocarbon operations focussed on Trinidad and Morocco, is pleased to announce a significant increase in Trinidad production following the completion of drilling and heavy workover operations ahead of schedule in the Bonasse and Goudron fields."

The company attributes the increase to new drilling and heavy workovers and gained a 19% increase.

What decline rate are you applying to those forecast figures Keith?. For example Snowcap 1 is forecast ip of 200bpd falling to around 75bpd in the next quarter. A similar read across your 500bpd every six months would be around 180bpd. For Nabi to add 500bpd every six months they will need to be adding the equivalent of 1200bpd of new production every six months which is on the optimistic side imo. For PRD to add 500bpd they will require similar which considering Snowcap 1 is forecast 75bpd after three months and Snowcap 4 is 200bpd is again optimistic.

Yes porters, accused of being a troll, fudin, no understanding of business and told to ring the company for daring to suggest 7.5% to 15% but keith states the same and not a peep in argument.

The biggest misconception is that PRD gets 30% from the Nabi deal. Bonasse and the CEG fields are held in a joint venture with WIEGL which is split 51% to PRD and 49% to WIEGL. PRD bought a 51% stake in Crex the holding company for Bonasse and transferred the CEG fields into this holding company and renamed it Steeldrum in exchange for WIEGL taking on the liabilities.

The split is 70% Nabi, 15.3% PRD and 14.7 % WIEGL if all costs have been recovered.

The Snowcap 1 extended well test of the #8 sand flowed between 150 - 200 bpd before being terminated early due to waxing. The CM licence has limited data from three wells which will result in a conservative itr.

Dickie,

Marceen has a personal grudge as they claimed I never posted anything positive despite only hours earlier having posted a target price of 6p to 10p. When this was pointed out only then did the jimmy claims appear, it appears I have upset Marceen and now have my very own stalker.

Hi Marceen / Josh

Instead of making things up and trolling other posters perhaps you can add to the discussion of the positive points over the last couple of years? The Mou 5 duster, numerous failed flow tests and frequent dilutions at ever decreasing prices have led to the sp today of under 3p, what positives have I missed to discuss?

I have never been jimmy23 you invented some flimsy rationale for this yet offered zero proof. I have the bold on ignore perhaps you could provide evidence to where I have interacted with my "sidekick"? I have never been on the Char board as I have little interest other than as a company operating in Morocco same as PRD.

Ijwt

Pg has gone from targeting 5tcf prospects next to an export pipeline and 435MM cf/d production, to a micro LNG and highlighting 8.7MM bbl of oil prospects and wells producing 5bpd in T&T in just over a year. It is quite the decline in prospects / targets.

Tucked at the bottom of the rns once again behind T&T is Morocco stake to be sold for a carry on a £2m well and the return of some of the £18m back costs. Hardly the sale for millions touted and definitely not “blowing any doors off”.

5bpd for a new Bonasse well is dreadful, Snowcap 3 forecast by the ITR at an average of 190 bpd production for the first year and at $32 netback will generate $2 m profit in the first year.

Going to be a long road to recovery and it is looking like that spike to 18p was a missed opportunity, as nothing like that is possible for the foreseeable future. Double figures going forward is a million miles away imo.

Due to the limited flow data any projections have to be conservative Matt. The extended well test at Snowcap 1 in Q3 2012 flowed 150 - 200bpd before being terminated early due to wax so there is little information to work with. It appears that the H#8 sands have the best initial flowrates of 1000bpd, the other sands ranged from H#6 at 16bpd to H#7 at 432bpd.

Keith posted recently about the high decline rates prevalent in T&T, which posters who usually hang on his every word have ignored for some reason in their production and revenue forecasts.

The January 2025 presentation page 18 has Snowcap 1 starting at 200bpd falling to 75bpd after one quarter. The estimated revenue at $68 wti for the first quarter at an initial 200bpd is $600k falling to $200k in the second quarter.

500bpd for Snowcap 3 using similar figures would give q1 at $1.5m and Q2 falling to $500k, a significant decrease in the figures some are using. PRD plan on using wax treatment, the performance in T&T is unknown and the cost of the system has not been released so it is difficult to produce estimates until these are determined.

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

PRD does not get 30%, that goes to Steeldrum which is split 51% PRD/ 49% WIEGL. The rns on January 21st 2025 clearly states they bought a 51% stake in CRL whose only asset was the bonasse field and there has been no further purchase of the remaining 49% released in an rns. The rns on 21st September 2025 clearly states the Goudron, Inniss trinity and Icacos holding companies would be transferred into CRL which was renamed Steeldrum. In exchange for this 49% of the three CEG fields the 49% partner in Steeldrum WIEGL have taken on the $4.25m of liabilities from the CEG fields.

PRD will be receiving 7.5% of production from bonasse, Goudron, Inniss trinity and Icacos fields until Nabi recover the costs , then they will revert to 15%. So if Nabi hit 1000bpd PRD will be receiving 7.5% of the 700 bpd increase which is 53bpd until costs are recovered and raising to 105 bpd when this had occurred. Just for comparison PRD paid £2m for 282bpd of production to CEG, so valuations of ten times this for lower production is a bold claim. Even if the full 1000bpd is split between the two holders of Steeldrum then PRD will have 510 bpd which is not quite twice the production they paid £2m for.

Marceen registered 24th May 2025 obsession with thebold and jimmy23.

Joshw7 registered 24th May 2025 obsession with the bold and jimmy23.

Both have only posted on the PRD with occasional posts on the char board.

Obviously this is a coincidence and two different people signed up on the exact same day to post mainly on the PRD board about other posters. Like minds or one mind?

Thanks for correcting that rob.

These management estimates need to be verified which the imminent itr should address but it should be remembered that the internal estimate for Mou 5 was 50% cos compared to the 12% in the Scorpion geoscience report. Independent reports tend to be more cautious than company forecasts and as there has been little testing of helium in the other wells expect this to be likely in the ITR, plus there is likely to be a downgrading of the Jurassic resource due to Mou 5.

That’s January 2024 Jasper but thanks anyway, rob is claiming he has reports from June 2024 and August 2025. Neither of these have been published unless rob can provide links? He often moans about “trolls” not providing links to aid his research but he has failed by his own standards for Keith’s request so far.

The Scorpion geoscience reports have never been released so it is interesting that you are claiming you have / had copies to paste from.

It is very necessary as it is a requirement to update the market with the total voting rights if there has been any change such as a placing during the calendar month. Hence the rns at the end of the month in July following the placing and the one in February following the placing ……..