Member Info for in4cedros

LayLadyLay - I'm happy that LK keeps CapEx under review re Goudron - the revenue produced is still significant for the Company at the moment and I'm pleased you appreciate that water flood results could give a significant steady boost to production.

Dross - why not tell us, using the IPSC calcs, why you are scaremongering about the ' operationally cash flow positive ' WTI price?

rossannan - with all your knowledge of CERP and all the hours spent on this board I'm flabbergasted you are unable to access the official CERP website click on to CPR and locate the financial calculations regarding the Goudron IPSC - this will show you that, after allowing 5% discount to WTI, one of the figures mentioned in the report, the chargeable figure will be in the under $50 band which suffers a much lower Royalty deduction and no SPT ( if quarterly average below $50 ).

If WTI is $50 CERP need an increase to over $70 before they see an increase in yield on the Goudron oil - so my conclusion is if they were operationally cash flow positive at higher levels things won't change unless there is a huge decline below $50 - presumably it's one of the reasons, with your low risk attitude, you were so keen to ramp CERP when LK joined because he said he would raise production, which he is doing!

Dross - as you've been told before LK runs the company, not you, LK has all the stats and knows how he will finance the prioritised CapEx - if it involves taking the Lind Loan, for which the facility fee has already been paid, I'm very happy with that, the conversion option terms would be the most accretive yet for the company!

No chance you'll get any credit if the Lind loan taken especially as you made such a fuss at the outset about them actually putting the facility in place ' just in case ' .

Brycen - if you have the time go on to CERP website and view the CPR - there is a full brief of the IPSC oil calculations relating to Goudron- then decide for yourself why Ross chooses to suggest that WTI at $51 is less profitable for CERP.

Background here is that Ross has been around for many years and has had detailed exchanges on the calculation of netbacks in the past - he clearly believes readers here are ignorant and will be taken in by him - you acknowledged he sounded plausible!

Dross - showing your ignorance or deliberately misleading - WTI at $51 is good for CERP under the IPSC - CERP get circa 5% less than WTI so at that level we are in the sweet spot band of lower Royalty and no SPT - we'd need around $74 gross to achieve same net return ( SPT charged on quarterly average WTI) .

Don't let the facts get in the way of a (not very ) good story !

LLL - 1000 bopd is a milestone - It might satisfy you with your Post Office account risk / reward outlook but I doubt whether many CERP shareholders will be happy at that level for very long as it would suggest failure of the Predator CO2 project and the other SD interventions - keep up LLL!

Bamps - so Kirk wasn't influenced by the Klingons's Krapp!

John - i have not read the Brexit papers yet but I did manage the PG note on the AAU website.

I attended the AGM and Kerim talked about the life of mine at Kizzy and showed little enthusiasm for upping production significantly at the expense of mine life whereas the PG note suggests this is something that would be economically viable and would pay for itself over quite a short period. As the idea is in the PG note and Kerim has put it on the AAU site it may be of interest to shareholders to learn what Kerim thinks of the idea!

Hope you have a good day out !

Johnpwh - I quite understand your position regarding the question and it was kind of you to post the info in the first place - the fact it went pear shaped was not of your doing but VanVan covering is not helping!

Johnpwh - apologies for confusion - no way talking about dividends from AAU - just talking about getting cash out of the JV - if the road cost loadsamoney and Proccea have financed it they will probably want their cash back before AAU get their loans repaid. Priorities aren’t published info but Proccea don’t seem shy in pressing for their cash.

You mentioned the road in the first place and I merely suggested the question to put it to bed as it could be a financial irrelevance and Kerim could take the opportunity to impart that info to shareholders. I think Kerim is well able to deal with challenging questions - he doesn’t need VanVan’s protection - making a big fuss about it merely creates more interest - people might think there is actually something to hide!

VanVan - the mine is a JV with Proccea when the loan is repaid AAU surely expects to receive payments from the JV - at the moment the payments are received in the form of loan repayments - presumably at some stage the loans will have been repaid and then regular withdrawals which AAU need to avoid cash calls from shareholders will be taken as dividends - hence my qualified remark dividend/ loan repayments from the JV - I’m not expecting AAU to pay dividends for many years - I regularly state that and reference last set of accounts where the carried forward losses are huge!

Regarding your comment on the road if it was as clear as that I suggest Kerim was being disingenuous by voicing the possibility the Government would pay for the road - you can’t have it both ways VanVan - why did he ramp the Gov involvement in road if he knew AAU would pay for it all themselves.

If you want people to invest here let’s have transparency not mindless ramping from sycophants - btw I’ve framed the question so that Kerim can explain himself and he may well have a satisfactory explanation - just hope he doesn’t use yours as I have more respect for the intelligence of readers here!

LayLadyLay - probably one of your most moronic posts of the year!

CERP are a high growth company, based on LK expectations, if the operational cash flow substantially exceeds costs many would consider that profitable but CERP is unlikely to be showing profits because they have pledged lots of CapEx so I would be misleading the trolls if i didn’t include a caveat re CapEx as this is likely to amount to many millions on the SWP ( which is expected to increase production!).

Sorry the concept is difficult for you - some are risk takers others are not - no shame in preferring a Post Office account - why hang around a high growth potential stock like CERP?

Re BNPP it’s clear the loan was deemed ‘ affordable ‘ otherwise they wouldn’t have offered it but I am happy to acknowledge that it was predicated on LGO achieving increased production from the drilling the loan financed - we know that didn’t happen - I never guaranteed the increased production - I did warn at the time we would be fouked if the extra production failed to materialise!

In the mortgage market loans are made daily based on ‘ affordability ‘ criteria - some borrowers are unable to afford the loans because, for example loss of employment, that doesn’t mean the lender was wrong to grant the loan because they don’t know, in advance, which borrowers will default, doesn’t mean the borrower is to blame for taking the loan in the first place - most people don’t take on big loans if they believe they will lose their job in the foreseeable future.

You need to get yourself a new hobby this constant carping as a non investor based on blatant ignorance is a concern - are you mad or bad?

dividends/ loan repayments from the JV.

Johnpwh - may I applaud your attendance intention - always something to learn at these functions! Here’s a question I prepared earlier which seems close to your heart!

Hi Kerim, although you are usually quite conservative at our last meeting you seemed quite pleased with the prospect that the Turkish Government were going to pay for the road and many of us were impressed by that scenario so it was a tad disappointing to deduce from one of your later medias that this wasn’t the case. I can understand why the Government might not think moving a road for the benefit of Ariana was something they should pay for so I’m not too concerned about it but some investors thought you may have referred to the change of decision in one of the rns issued subsequently as transparency leads to greater confidence from investors. Investors used to scary numbers for UK road building would probably appreciate your estimate for the total cost of the road construction and any impact on the availability of dividends from the JV

ATB!

Chesh - he didn't say filter - TBH I don't think the FOMO will allow him to filter as he finds my posts so thought provoking!

Irene - I'm devastated by your disengagement I was soooooooo looking forward to your ideas on what LK should be doing to improve this company - although Ross seems to get most of his ideas from Fantasy Oil & Gas Manager at least he puts his head over the parapet sometimes ( can't believe I'm giving him credit LOL!) .

Irene - what you regard as irrelevant drivel most would consider common sense.

If you are going to invest here you are better off doing your own research so that you can have absolute confidence in your decision making otherwise you will be fodder for ' Nagging Doubters ' such as Ross and LayLady Lay !

I'm still astounded why anyone making so much of the COS figs in a broker note would want to invest here - have you thought about professional help for your FOMO?

Irene - people investing here need to be able to do their own analysis of the business fundamentals to determine if the risk profile suits their needs - I've directed you to the IPSC terms in the CPR but seeing your posts about COS on drilling SWP and your seemingly huge aversion to risk I do believe you should be questioning why you are even thinking about investment here!

Dross - those that have studied the terms of the IPSC as detailed in the CPR on the CERP website will, almost certainly, deduce that low volume, even at a high WTI price, would struggle to be a viable business model.

Higher volume is key because once the initial tranche is met the Royalty terms become more benign - at current Goudron production levels much of the oil is earning the premium rate and at WTI of $40/50 the figures look very worthwhile.

The Steeldrum production at circa 200 bopd is worth very little on the bottom line because of the first tranche costs ( assuming the TI IPSC is similar to Goudron) but even ignoring the multiple non IPSC opportunities offered by SD the TI field is likely to be profitable soon through the volume created by the Predator CO2 campaign. There is no guarantee of success for Predator but I'm impressed they have taken on that risk - particularly when management own 55% of the shares ( contrast with NR spending shareholder money and the bank loan ).

Volume is particularly important for the IPSC deals and I'm liking the steady progression and the likelihood that the business will be profitable soon, ignoring probable CapEx costs for production increasing projects on multiple fronts that most shareholders support ( I ignore Post Office book waving non shareholders!) .