Member Info for InJamesweTrust

Excellent post BRV - there can often be negative surprises. I still think back to holding Eco until the hundreds of millions of barrels proved be heavy and sour.

Was on a free ride but still a sore one.

Fwiw with various intervals I'd think SJ should work in some of them at least to show is if gas is commercial.

Only have here what I don't mind losing though as geology is never nailed on.

Do take comfort from BoD wanting Sandjet from the outset and it isn't just a knee jerk to the explosive perforating issue.

Ford 707

Given there are multiple intervals and wells I'd be very surprised if all were clagged beyond reprieve with drilling mud.

Like you say the company believes Sand Jet will do the trick.

Only four of the several zones were tested in Phase 1 as rhe company seems to have taken the view up sticks and get to Sand Jet we have fulfilled what was required.

My understanding is Sand Jet results could be in as little as 6 weeks then all the navel gazing will be over and we will know definitively if it has worked and how the 99.7% gas shows flow.

Like many have said, the wells were overpressure on drilling for a reason.

Given the drilling cost a sidetrack is unlikely to be ruinous expensive to plans if required. I would guess it will not be based on comms.

There may be alot of people with a red rose in their lapel and carrying a copy of The Times.

Nigel

For CNG, believe it is a relatively simple construct and could be raised on the back of income from AG contract once HoTs are formalised either via debt, equity or through AG upfront cash for favourable sales terms.

As for FEED, we will not be the operator when/if such decisions and information is required. We may have a stub but will have sold out. Think the BoD would realise and OHNYM probably insist that of the reserves extend beyond CNG plan and into gas for grid/export that a greater level of technical input will be required.

So a panic raise is not on the cards and if one is required for above reasons it will not be significantly dilutive and much value will already have accrued.

There is still appetite to lend with MoZ LNG and AMUR GPP attracting tens of billions in debt funding relatively easily.

Nigel

For CNG, believe it is a relatively simple construct and could be raised on the back of income from AG contract once HoTs are formalised either via debt, equity or through AG upfront cash for favourable sales terms.

As for FEED, we will not be the operator when/if such decisions and information is required. We may have a stub but will have sold out. Think the BoD would realise and OHNYM probably insist that of the reserves extend beyond CNG plan and into gas for grid/export that a greater level of technical input will be required.

So a panic raise is not on the cards and if one is required for above reasons it will not be significantly dilutive and much value will already have accrued.

Fully funded for Ph.2 and Mou5- there was always expected to be time between phases and Mou5 to be in April/May.

Expectation of cash to agree CNG deal funds any explrn might require.

Just Google the event and you can register fairly easily. Have just done so as hold Arrow in the risk fund too.

HBob

The top of the salary range for A2 in the branch is from what I can see about £22 an hour. From what I can see online it is far from minimum wage.

The cost of childcare is crazy though - £75 a day ina class of probably 8-12. So the nursery is getting £600-900 per day for probably two nursery workers who are on minimum wage and cost them £90 each per day. That leaves alot for overheads and profit.

Alas, we should not be subsidising shareholders and think employers of 500 or more should be required to pay the Living Wage. With in work benefits being reduced accordingly.

I'm all for social transfer payments but the amount I pay in tax, then in school fees and now they want to add VAT is astonishing. We looked at moving house recently and stamp duty was in six figures, where does it stop.

CCC

All the best to you and your wife.

The system is unfortunately shambolic as it doesn't give the support required where needed.

That this can be the case with the highest level of govt spending in peacetime beggars belief.

Nigel

I'm relaxed about people's trading strategies and have mentioned previously that I feel resources are likely closer to Jimmy's estimate than the multi TCF.

However, I wouldn't dismiss the other posters and they do add knowledge and info regarding O&G. I've done some O&G stuff myself but on the Finance not the hands dirty side and one can get enough terminology to gain comfort that the risks are what they are.

It's perfectly feasible for others to hold strong views on the size of the prize.

I'll take what is on the board and augment with my own research/review to keep my position under review. There are many useful posters on here.

Without wishing to put words in his mouth it is likely from the satellite imagery that was indicating the drill pad activity.

It is clearly stated he is speculating and much like the internet, the hive mind of the posters on here with useful O&G knowledge is something I'll gladly take to aid my understanding.

I'll also listen to the negatives but do get bored of negative for negative sake.

Fwiw I think it suits OHNYM and Morocco to have PRD involved. If one sought to replicate the kleptocracy or Saudi Arabia then there would be uproar.

Hence with PRD it is a commercial operator agreeing arms length deals (even if arms twisted a bit) with in country partners.

There have been plenty of opportunities to usurp the operator and it hasn't been done and I don't expect it to be now.

OHNYM will want an international operator to partner with if the gas is there to accelerate things and disenfranchising parties is not a good way to do it - dare say BP regret the TNK-BP venture.

So think Amendment #4 should be relatively straight forward.

Given the desire for sandjet as stated last year, the redesign of sandjet hopefully allows testing soon.

On the basis of the SP impact of the news, I have bought some more today.

It remains very possible for geology to do something unexpected (in either direction) bit overall risk reward is reasonably.balanced.

AV

No they shouldn't expect pot shots, perhaps constructive feedback but not pot-shots as this is one of the scourge of a world with too high a population of keyboard warriors.

Many of whom would have much less to say outside of their little broom cupboards in the cold light of day.

Nothing wrong with sensible debate but some of the nonsense spouted by the 5-10 nutters that only come out from under their stones when news is bad says a great deal.

Certainly death threats although most likely hyperbolic.are no laughing matter and at least GRH has published research and been.open on track record, something precious few others have.

People are responsible for their own actions and the nastiness that pervades yours and others posts is the drip, drip of decay more widely as society becomes less polite/considerate.

Nigel

Thanks, I think that is a compliment!

You equally know I hope I was being tongue in cheek.

Since posting initially, I've often said geology ensures nothing is a slam dunk.

The research of GRH/KeithOz/Methodology and many others do point to possible positives that indicate interesting upside potential.

There is a Bayes centre at the University here - I was more stats and econometrics, when I wasn't being distracted by rugby and socialising.

Ibiza

Was right with you until you evoked the England rugby team to be the one initiating the comeback.

Alas, with Borthwick they couldn't lave their own boots and worry about Saturday (particularly as I live in Scotland when not in London)!

Noting early.even Nigel seems to have turned positive.

Mistakes made but preference for Sandjet clear from outset. So let us see what it produces. May even buy a few more

For me GRH adds to the debate and general.pool of info and is clearly well experienced. He is not required to hold anyones hand and abuse by people probably not invested or not taking responsibility for their own actions is risible.

Sometimes I'd like the posts to be less cryptic but its a free world and he ought to be free to post as he pleases or withdraw to save himself from the hassle.

Best of luck either way.

Ibiza

I'm not an expert but my knowledge such that it is makes me think:

1) Sandjet can perforate out further than explosive perforation. Using sand as a jet means the explosive impact of crumbling geology mixing with.mud and making readings impossible is less likely.

2) the gas if there is under a general seal through incline fault/anticline and the route out would be through the pressured drilling pipe. So would not escape thus.

3) damage to casing should not affect the flow rates. The sands if compacted/fractured may not allow.pressure build for extraction efficiently but again technology is improving this.

Rigless testing in and of itself shouldn't weaken the formation but how much is known of the formation itself is harder to know.

Ideally if the gas is there we will see it tested through sandjet but when.....

KeithOz has a lot of useful stuff to say, just because the test hasn't worked out doesn't mean everyone should be traduced.

I think trying to portray this as a planned issue is disingenuous. This clearly is not what management envisaged, although they clearly had a preference for Sandjet.

Their foot dragging and not having permits in place for Sandjet last Autumn has increased dilution as it is being paid for twice and we have just paid for explosive perforation to maintain licence to no avail.

My understanding is PG has rubbed up alot of industry people the wrong way in the past so this 'genius' tag is perhaps not appropriate.

I hope sandjet proves successful but don't understand the lack of clear timeline now. It was a red flag when MOU-5 started getting touted but one I see only in hindsight.

Just test and confirm if it flows and get on with it.

This isn't just run of the mill as expected, the RNS talks about redesigning the testing strategy with Sandjet. The timelines are also unclear despite ph2 supposedly being imminent after Ph1

They need to be more clear on upcoming timescales.