Member Info for HenrySinclair

Char do not have the means to build or operate a field and production facility.
2021 they implied off take and finance were a formality of proving up the field.
Jan 22 they now had “ambitions” to build.
Webcast Duncan states 2024. Moments later AP contradicts stating 2025
Nov 22. 3rd party editorial stated they only just met with govt body to formulate a working structure.
No surprise the SP is where it is.
If this was as strong a situ as BoD have implied, then EIA’s would be in place. Licences. Land agreements. Mitigation agreements. It’s bizarre to say that a consortium of will address those matters. They rest with Char. No major producer would but into this field alone. If it’s so good a deal, why wouldn’t the power company partner as a hedge.
Char have not provided practical development milestones and until they do there will be no serious uplift to SP. they have played/drained LTH of this chapter in their story. Too many unknowns. I’m sure the volume of gas on the books has a mkt value. But the SP reflects the doubt that PI’s may not be party to it.

Aurora
You assume other posters live GMT area.
When you say “we” are you writing on behalf of other readers/posters?
Am I not entitled to put forward my opinion?
For your interest. (You don’t have to agree or accept). I’ve based my opinion on the current info and history. Accepting Char is not as it was when elephant hunting, there are similarities to past. May 2011 they confirmed new advisor. They later confirmed completion of partnering with BP and Petrabras. March 2012 they advised completion of placing with Janus. Could argue that was done under the directions of PW. I think not.
I’m not suggesting a private placing is negative anymore than when I suggested the company would have future placing prior to the last one. That post was screamed down at the time.
You complain that others post irrelevant drivel, yet you shout down others having a genuine opinion.

Good morning Aurora 1.27 am ?

Expecting RNS confirming placing of shares, providing funds to underwrite construction contracts and purchase longer lead items to assure time lines of build program.

Your’e not supporting the team over concerns about their play and then shouted down, just same as if suggesting a likely fund raise when it doesn't fit others ideals.
Recall the big day when the mkt tanked and char fell from its dizzy high to rest 160p.. nothing char specific. History repeats and I prefer char SP much higher when it does. It wasn’t that long ago some folks pointing to the finance agreement from 2 highly regarded organisations. Like it was a done deal… just needed the CPR. Iirc the co had indicated mid this year for finance ? Where is the companies time line / mile stone program. What insti would invest without such a program? Yet folks on here are applauded if they suggest a hungry predator, as if that supports SP value. Difficult, when you offer sincere option only to be shouted down.
New kid.. keep posting. I didn’t agree with your logic many years ago re purchasing cash flow producer. YOU were right, your latest concerns are mine too.
ATB

BDC
I never said there would be a placing. I was simply commenting to a previous post that mentioned because AP held 11% then unlikely there be a placing. The fact is he previously had 11% and there were a number of placing a. That’s all I was commenting on. As SHC says… you don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand my observation.
With regards to debt financing. I do not pretend to have understanding of mechanisms. I do have concerns that it very likely will include bonds, with”possibility” of triggering additional shares (dilution),
That is not a fear of this RNS. But the mkt will want to know the details as soon as the co have addressed
Keeping in mind that as recent as jan web cast (post A2) the map was still the 2 finance institutions. I believe it reasonable for the co to offer as much supporting detail as poss. I’m not anti the RNS.

SHC
Sorry for your apparent defensiveness. But you forget the placing at circ 60p. Discounted to AP by 10% of that days RNS… it’s great to see a different Char today. You seem to struggle with others having an opinion. I’ll leave at that.

On the nimrod run both AP and Ndume held circ 11-12% of the co. It didn’t prevent placing. I not suggesting there will be. Simply tgat AP maintained his holding ahead of PI’s.
Also I would have liked some info re offers of finance from 2 highly regarded institutions. Is that proposal off now?.. chariot need to provide investors more detail.

B4Now
Thanks for your post. Appreciate if you can offer ongoing info re likely development matters. In the webcast char seemed positive in their forward outlook. I expected more detail to support investor participation, given the subsea deal being in place.
Can’t understand why Char haven’t “promoted” a mile stone chart.

Gday CEO
Yes… it’s hotting up…

Imo this is much more about APP taking CEO role. Much ground work / foundation has been accomplished quietly since the restructure. This in his words is CHAR 2. He obviously has a plan and the results achieved to date are likely as good as he hoped. There will be much reliance on the expertise of 3rd party infrastructure, and hope that is the reason for AP including the word ambition, rather than “plan” in his commentary in the RNS appraisal upgrade. Trust that there is much being negotiated that builds on the foundations already set.

Just as long as they don’t do some clever deal with blokes in suits who short the stock to dilute the shares. I’d rather they allow a bigger percentage to a farm in (Lixus only) and have control of both both operator ship and finance. Trust (hope) the BoD think same. No fancy deals (aka XEL) thank you.

Jimmy
Can you explain the value of the gas characteristics with regard to the volume of gas. Char ref the quality re saving in processing.
Does the characteristic have quantitive value in terms of reservoir pay if compared to other reservoirs of lesser quality, or is it only in terms of processing costs?

I Got it CEO
Regards

For anyone not seen previously:-

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/113021-uks-sound-agrees-binding-10-year-gas-sales-deal-with-moroccos-onee

I’m having same Q’s. Re reading the Rns 31.3
It is such a positive
The economics of the development. The cost for likely increased early off takes offset by improved ROI. So do ChAr need time to prove up. Died it mean that the known improvements simply underwrite what had already been “agreed”.
I’m also trying to comprehend how previous valuations were made on what basis regarding the quality of the then reservoirs compared not only to the increase but the stated post well quality.
If it’s not properly qualified by the brokers, surely the industry would put a value on the reservoir/ development costs.
It’s as if the mkt has mis read this RNS

If that the case, then that could impact my unease whilst waiting for the finance structure to be advised.

Thank you.
Disregarding Chars other investment ops, Risana /Lexus offers different ops and valuations. Far too complex for me to comprehend. I had been simply trying to apply a timeline and valuation based on
CPR
FEED
Finance
Off take agreements
Contracts awarded /construction milestones.
But it now appears that field prospect validation / possible farm in could be a stronger driver for rerate.

“If Total wished to be involved”
“Would not be based on only 3 wells, as previous valuations have been offered”

Jimmy
You and others have kindly offered estimates and possible valuations based on future productions.
I understand those estimates to be based on what Char have outlined. And applied to updated results. Do you have any opinion regarding interest from within the oil sector wishing to develop and therefore how this may impact those valuations. Eg if Tital wished to involve, I’m only guessing that their involvement would not be based on the value of production from 3 wells. Hope I make sense in my Q