Member Info for HighYield

Watchouse, MP gave some information regarding timing of the drilling of their three well program in their quarterly operational update (Oct 16th).

"M&P’s working interest gas production (60%) on the Mnazi Bay permit amounted to 59.8 mmcfd in the first

nine months of 2025, down 4% compared with 2024.

Preparations for the drilling of three wells are currently being finalised with drilling operations due to start

in mid-December, following the rig’s arrival in early November. These wells will sustainably increase the

gross production potential of the field, which currently stands at around 100 mmcfd, beyond the 130 mmcfd

capacity of the facilities."

CrustyPetes best guess regarding drilling start of CH1, seems realistic (as usual), if the go for the MP rig.

I have been a holder of Orca for some time now. Current market cap of about 59 MUSD, after yesterday's rally to CAD 4.15. Net cash of 98 MUSD as of 30th June 2025, making a negative EV (enterprice value) of 39 MUSD. However, a large part of the current cash position will be paid to TPDC, so when looking at working capital of 49 MUSD (current assets- current liabilities) instead of cash, the EV stands at about 10 MUSD. Not very expensive for Tanzanian gas producer.

Https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/aminex_plc/news/rns/story/x4o4m3w

"Options will vest upon the average closing price of the Ordinary Shares of the Company being no lower than 2.00 pence for five consecutive trading days."

I have no legal education, and find such legal documents diffucult to understand. If you have read it, please refer to the relevant section in the document. It is not positive, when you have different opinion about a matter, that you write " you are talking b*****. Instead write, I believe you are wrong and here is my argument why. I asked chat GPT, if exploration expenses under an exploration license are recoverable under the PSA. Here is the answer.

"If the exploration spending was incurred under the PSA (post-Effective Date) and tied to the Exploration Licence area, it is generally recoverable—but not (i) costs incurred before the PSA’s Effective Date, (ii) certain specifically excluded items (e.g., some bonuses, financing charges, annual licence fees), and (iii) anything outside the ring-fence for the relevant development area. Check your signed PSA’s Annex/Accounting Procedure for the definitive recoverable/non-recoverable list.

resourcecontracts.org

diplomatmagazine.eu

tanzlii.org"

Roger Jolly, sorry for not replying yesterday, but I am not reading posts here on a regular basis. I believe that exploration expenses are recoverable when made under a development license. If there are exploration expenses under a exploration license, I believe that those costs are not recoverable. It would be best to check with the company to get clarification. I have tried to email the company before, but no reply.

Crusty, the reason for higher price per mcf for WEN, was because TPDC paid their part of past capex, when taking their 20% stake by their share of gas revenue. That lasted for a couple of years, until the cost was repaid. Orca has a better PSA, and are allowed to sell gas to the private sector.

"You’re talking about a “cost recovery period” for opex and capex, but in Phase 1, Aminex has no capex burden. We’re fully carried by ARA Petroleum under the farm-out. That means the $35m you reference is irrelevant to Aminex’s cashflows; we are not paying it back out of revenue."

No, it is very relevant. The farm-out agreement states that AEX will recover the 35 MUSD carry, if not it would have been a very bad deal. ARA would carry AEX, but would recover this amount very soon after gas production starts. Now AEX will get the benefit of the 35 MUSD through cost gas.

Roger Jolly, only development capex is normally recovered. Historical exploration expenses are not included in cost recovery. However, it would be best to check with the AEX for confirmation. That is why I menthioned, that the 35 MUSD i capex will be recovered from gas revenue.

"The farm out free carry is expected to take us to $40m net cash /annum". That is not correct, it only applies when development capex are being recovered.

This is from the 2022 presentation I was referring to.

Ntorya development • First gas planned for end of 2024 • Targeting 140 MMcfd = gross revenues $178 MM p.a. • Up to $40 MM per annum net to Aminex (during cost recovery period)1 1. Based on management assumptions and Kiliwani North gas terms

The article was linked to, when I tried to get information about the Ruvuma PSA addendum, as the company would not disclose any details of the GSA. The important issue, is if the 40 musd in revenue is from a cost recovery period or not. Here is my Chat GPT link for any of you that might be interested. https://chatgpt.com/c/6875e8f6-9f94-800f-8c9c-a23a46f1f7cf

"You’re implying that Aminex’s $40m “net gas revenue” is before the PSA split and government take. That’s flat-out wrong — and it shows you either don’t understand the terminology or you’re deliberately trying to mislead."

No, I was making an important comment, that it was based on a cost recovery period, meaning when opex and capex are being recovered. Opex will be recovered in every year, but when AEX share of capex (USD 35m) for this phase has been recovered gas revenue will drop sharply. Failing to menthion this assumption, is really misleading.

No, you are mixing GSA (gas sales agreement), that regulates the price of gas, which be about 4 USD per BTU, and the PSA (Production sharing agreement). The PSA regulates the ecomic benefit between the gas producers and the state of Tanzania. Gas revenue is split between cost gas and profit gas. The producers will recover cost gas (opex and capex) first and when cost gas has been recovered the remaing gas revenue is considered profit gas where the government through TPDC receives a larger part at a rising rate depending on total produced volume. This is regulated in the PSA, but we do not know the details. Please read this article, that was published shortly after the PSA addendum was signed. https://legacy.ippmedia.com/en/news/omani-firm-gets-green-light-gas-recovery-after-end-talks?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Sorry, it should be 65-75% of net gas revenue, not gross revenue. Cost gas is always recovered by the producers.

P26, I read your post regarding the value potential in AEX. First I was not aware of any guidance from AEX, but i found that information in a presentation from 2022. However, when AEX say 40 MUSD net it refers to net revenue, not profit. Furthermore, you forgot to menthion that the number is based on a scenario where there is full cost recovery. AEX clearly states so in the presentation. As you may remeber, at the AGM some shareholder were trying to get more information regarding the PSA (production sharing agreement), which regulates the revenue split between TPDC and the gas producers. AEX replied that that information was confidential. The government in Tanzania normally receives about 65-75% of gross gas revenue, through taxes, royalties, TPDC's option to get a share of the license and share of profit gas. Unfortunatly we do not have the details of the Ruvuma PSA.

Thank you Crusty and others for providing an update from the AGM. To bad, that No information regarding the PSA could be disclosed. My concern for a higher government take (75%), is mainly related to this article. https://legacy.ippmedia.com/en/news/omani-firm-gets-green-light-gas-recovery-after-end-talks?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Crusty, please try to get some information regarding the PSA (Production sharing agreement).

Crusty, I believe that the price for gas has risen to about 4 USD per mmBTU, due to inflation adjustments. Maurel et Prom (Mnazi bay) reported 4.02 USD /BTU in their Q1 operational update. You, say that PSA (cost gas and profit gas) is not relevant for AEX " All sold at wellhead and hence the issues you raise with "cost gas" and "profit gas" is not relevant here - in just the same way that it was not relevant with Kiliwani either..... ARA/AEX are not sharing infrastructure or costs with the TPDC."

I do not agree, all licenses in Tanzania have som sort of PSA, that regulates the revenue split between producers and TPDC. So was the case for Killiwani and the Ruvuma PSA. As cost gas is recovered first, most of the revenue end up with the producers in the beginning of gas production, as all Capex and opex will be recovered. I asked Chat GPT about Ntorya PSA and got the following information. https://chatgpt.com/share/686f7eb8-2848-800f-bf1b-1bfa1fbdc3a3

However, I believe that the gas from Ntorya will be regulated under the Ruvuma PSA, which is more favorable towards the producers. Instead of guessing and asking Chat GPT for information, it would be better if AEX management could provide the correct information about the terms of the PSA. I have mailed the and asked, but no reply yet.

For those of you, that will attend the AGM, there is a very important question that has not been addressed, and that is the commercial terms of the Ntorya PSA. I have searched for that information, but not been able to find it from published information from AEX. I think many investors here are unaware of the financial implications from the PSA and split between cost gas and profit gas. Gas producers gets their opex and capex covered through cost gas, but when these costs have been recovered, the revenue split from profit gas is very much in favor of the Government (TPDC), about 75%. When the cost pool in Wentworth had been recovered, revenue from gas sales fell by about 70%. It is vital, when trying to estimate the value potential in AEX, to be aware of the terms of the PSA.

However, in order to move our current fair value range towards this potential upside we would like to see: 1) constriction start-up of the pipeline; 2) an updated CPR (expected post drilling of Chikumbi-1 well); and 3) a better picture of the supply/demand balance in next five years to fully absorb a 280mmscf/d production from Ntorya.

Last week Aminex provided an operations update on its Ntorya gas field, on the back of the operator’s updated Field Development Plan (FDP), submitted to the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation (TPDC) for approval. We see the operational update as positive for Aminex as it highlights the asset potential to deliver up to 280mmscf/d within the next 5 years. While we acknowledge that it is too early to fully value the company on this basis; nevertheless, it is encouraging to see the operator’s confidence to incorporate such a scenario in the FDP. Additionally, Aminex expects imminent news on the key pipeline for the project. Overall, this update provides support to our investment thesis and valuation approach on the company. ► FDP phased development – from 60 to 280mmscf/d within 5 years. While we acknowledge that this type of growth would be subject to necessary demand growth and offtake arrangements, it is still very encouraging to see the operator’s (ARA Petroleum Tanzania) confidence in the Ntorya’s resource size and its ability to deliver for such scenario. To put this in perspective, on our estimates, a twenty-year 280mmscf/d development scenario implies resource size of just shy of 2Tcf. This is significantly higher than our current base case of 140mmscf/d production plateau and 763 Bcf resource size. ► Key news to come shortly? The company also expects imminent news on the EPC contract award by TPDC for the pipeline project that would connect Ntorya field to the Madimba gas processing plant. Building this pipeline would be a major step for derisking the asset and would enable the partners to reach first gas in 2026. According to Aminex, the TPDC launched a restrictive tender for this pipeline back in October 2024 and the process for the award is almost complete. ► Valuation – We have adjusted our model to reflect one-year forward in our NPVs, as well as pushing a production start-up into 1H26 (from 2H25 previously). Additionally, we have adjusted our Low-Case and High-Case scenarios to reflect the operator’s FDP. Namely, our Low-Case scenario now reflects a 60mmscf/d production plateau (up from 45mmscf/d previously) and our High-Case scenario has increased to 280mmscf/d (up from 250mmscf/d previously). We have also made other minor adjustments in the model. However, the net result of all the updates has resulted in maintaining our fair value range for the shares of between 2.0-2.5p/share (Figure 1). While our fair value range has remained the same, these announcements have provided further comfort to our investment thesis, despite some slight delays in first gas. ► When to incorporate further upside? We believe it is too early to recognise a full value for the 280mmscf/d development case, albeit we have increased the contribution of such scenario to our fair value range from 5% to 10% (Figure 1). Hypothetically, if we were to fully value this scenario as a base case, we see a valuation potential of 4.13p/share

research update from shard capital. https://*********************/companies/uk/aminex-plc/research/shard-capital/aminex-plc-the-operator-has-spoken-/b3451312-071d-4a3c-a700-7af20ce8ff90