RE: Bramill Resign - Continued13 Nov 2025 17:31
Interesting anomaly and costs to date. Did anyone spot that all the RNS releases stated Sark interest at 60%, except the final dry hole announcement that stated Sark at 53% not 60%. So something happened between commencement of the 30 day testing and the announcement of the result. Either this is a typo or perhaps UJO went non consent on testing (if so why?) such that their equity share reduced, or there was another undisclosed issue. This brings up the costs to date of the drilling programme, For simplicity I've just calculated the cost to UJO of A1, A2, Taylor, Mocc, and Sark. I've ignored Diana which never happened, the Rogers recovery project and the seismic programme. If we take their published numbers at face value and assume that UJO were paying an uplift of 1/3rd of their share of the first well on any new project plus historic costs. Then these are the costs so far. UJO net costs $4.22mm : Reach net Costs ( if you include the historic costs recovery) , then Reach's share of actual outgoing costs since the drilling drilling started is $555k. Assuming all were on budget. This might suggests that Reach's strategy was likely to get UJO to cover most of the costs of their share of the planned forward drilling programme. Given Reach are entitled to 55% of production it could well be that Reach may have already recovered much of their net cash drilling investment??? Perhaps a bit more clarity on the situation might help.
Kim_clay ADVFN