Member Info for InJamesweTrust

For my tuppence, it would be borderline astonishing for the company to sit on positive MOU-3 results and then raise at a discount, diluting existing SH more than necessary.

However, the slide in SP probably indicates something is happening unless it is just ennui at time taken for results with no material update (usual treat them as Mushroom approach from PG).

I'm sure PG is aware of his fiduciary duty to shareholders so next steps ought to be carefully considered.

Can't see how results from MOU-3 can be held.back much more than the end of this month, even the most ardent venerators of Griffiths suggest Zenith should only need 4 weeks to get settled flows.

End of rhe month gives Zenith 5 weeks and other MOU-3 testing 12 weeks in total. Hence,.news should be due by then and if positive provide enough info to secure drill funding in a positive manner.

Razorman

There is an element of that about him but although much improved from 20 years ago it is still a bit old school/university ties boys club that controls the flow of jobs in a good few parts of the City.

Often puts me in mind of Hugh Bonneville's stockbroker(sounds more like a Trader/Fund Manager) in Notting Hill, or Tim Nice but Dim (and his rugby pals)

Are you suggesting we set our alarms Keith (for those not already awake by then). Mine is already set for 4.45am

Sefton

If you aren't capable of understanding what I wrote then investing instead for you. Also, if you don't understand just Google it instead of spouting some paranoid b*ll*cos about commodity houses.

I'm actually on a call just now about gas sales off take agreements but different type of gas and nothing to do with PRD.

Bit of a yawn fest but the nice Magic Circle folks are doing their best to make it interesting.

Why not read my message and counter anything you disagree with around FDP for 1-4 versus selling and seeking buyer proves up within a reasonable timeframe.

F&M/Jasper

Unless maintaining a meaningful equity stake with a degree of control (which would be hard to do and be carried on development cost) it is hard to imagine that they are currently in negotiations about an FDP.

If the gas has flowed they may be discussing how to meet the definition of commerciality. However, such parameters should be clearly defines before we test so as to monetise efficiently once it is proven.

It.may be a CNG development isn't cost heavy and being paid and retaining equity is therefore possible but for 1,2,3,4 I doubt we would be talking through and FDP on all 4.

More pertinent perhaps is a use it or lose it clause to drill and prove up and payments ratchets attaching to such activity if reserves milestones are reached.

Again, all guessing and conjecture as little real info known by anyone outside Baker Hughes or the Company.

I'd take the rocket out of the reference title if I could as it hasn't been a swift ride by any means.

Razorman

Think he is alluding more to the MOU-3 structure being in play with regards to monetisation of CNG.

With Zenith being brought in to confirm flow and reservoir characteristics possibly for a potential offtaker as well as AG who would need to sign up.

Very conjectural of course.

Ibiza

That I'm pretty sure is on a risked basis and uses the 12% chance of success I'd imagine rather than PRD 50%.

You'll see the calc in the note which states the basis used to reach the valuation.

17 horizons been mentioned on here but think it was 20 in the presentation.

Alas we didn't do Othello at school, it wasn't high on the book list at my sink estate comprehensive.

People can believe in the risk reward but be concerned about the execution. They are distinct points.

The idea of prescribing any negative comment is madness.

Also labelling anyone who isn't hyping it to the sky as a troll devalues the debate.

Hopefully the assets are commercial and between BRV/Wacky/KeithOz posts in the last couple of days I'm minded to think they are but there have been mistakes and the language on comms (official and unofficial) is sometimes unhelpful.

Instructive pist Wacky, more detail on the term than I've seen elsewhere and looks positive to be engaging in such activity.

Then wording is ambiguous as usual and leaves it open to interpretation.

Looking back, from H2'24 we were to get $3.1m annually from Corey Moruga.

Now if they aren't flowing 100 barrels a day then it seems that isn't quite going to plan.

The cash at period end 30th June was £4.4m.

Based on Sandjet ops commencing 6th June although there were customs delays - previous RNS' have stated that long lead items for drilling and SJ were being ordered.

So the SJ cost to set against the £4.4m may be weekly crew and digs which has been 8 weeks from yesterday. So I'd say around $1m ish - if the long lead items were ordered. The kit rental is probably in the 000s per day so maybe another 500k so around $1.5m (just based on cost of other kit and the relative complexity of this versus other exploration kit). Happy to be corrected with more accurate numbers.

As at today that leaves £4.4m - $1.5m which is about $4.2m if we convert to a common $ currency

Titanosaurus as per Feb/Mar preso is inked at $3.5m with some long lead items and stock already held. Some drilling expertise.in country also with SJ or this is what was intimated previously.

So, that leaves $1m or so for Zenith and/or G&A since 1 July which probably doesn't quite cover it but it isn't a million miles away in a very rough estimate from being funded.

Indeed the gap could be bridged by another loan of shares possibly but then the bank balance would be running on fumes, when really we want the fumes in the ground to drive the SP.

Dave

It can be construed ambiguously, as can the bit in the Zenith RNS about flowing new drills to support potential CNG.

One view is the flow isn't yet commercial

The other is that PG and comms company maintain as much ambiguity as possible so as not to tip results.

The SJ team are not cheap and would not still be there in my view if we hadn't flowed gas.

I believe Zenith there to help flow and model.

My other thought was they were there to design a sidetrack as SJ hadn't done its job but then why would SJ still be there so I discount that theory currently.

See ADNOC has just laid out $14.7bn today

Cybertron

I might be on record as not being a fan of (unnecessary) dilution but I'd take dilution over debt within reason.

BRV

Read that section, given it was written as testing occurred, the section on further drilling to support and extend the profiles of a CNG solution.

That is some indication that perhaps it is not supported by current results (one of the reasons for my recent concern) or that PG and Comms suggest it must be kept that way to avoid tipping results.

Time will inevitably tell but yes think payment for CNG to fund Jurassic prove up is Plan A.

Surprised now if MOU-5 is drilled this year. Time to mobilise rig, apply for permit etc and possibly raise all count against.

Fwiw I'm sure plan is if MOU-3 is Commercial is to monetise and use funds to prove up and/or divi.

I'd be greatly surprised if they're talking deals and even more with multiple counterparts but delighted to be surprised to the upside if so. Who knows, perhaps that is what Zenith came in for to confirm commerciality to AG & investors.

Looks like Lonny has been pushed and his options lapsed, given one tranche is in the money to c.£150k he was unlikely to give this up lightly but it may be he has a severance payment equivalent to the differential in value.

I think one of two things hapened:

Mistakes in timing of equipment and permits for ECS were ballsed up by Lonny and he was kept on until testing completed and then let go (or it was the expiry of a 12 month notice period following ECS failure),

Or

Testing was completed and Lonny disagreed with PG on the way forward. This would be unlikely to see his options lapse so I tend to think he was pushed rather than jumped.

As I write the 3rd is he has gone somewhere else and his options were bought out.

Again little attached info/context so guessing required.

Pv72

They P10/P50/P90 and if we get there, 1p/2P/3P are confidence intervals which is a statistical method of predicting supposedly to a degree of confidence the Chance of Success or the likely reserves based on Petroleum engineers inputs that come from the seismic interpretation.

There are different qualities of CPR and some will be more positive than others.

The trap/seal, faults etc all play a part in the CoS from memory there are 4 parameters and the size of the GiiP will be based on how the contents of the trap appear.

It is generally explained in the CPRs and the ones ECO produced in 2020 were fairly easy to follow in this regard.

If interested I'll ping a link and some page references.

The ITR here I've found less intuitive but that may be just my brain likes the pretty pictures in the other one I reference.