Member Info for JD-Nau

Absolutely agree. The debt burden and hedge structure were major drags on cash flow previously. With the field now producing into a much stronger gas market and assuming the restructuring reduces that debt pressure, the economics should be far more favorable going forward. A relisting would also allow for a proper reassessment by the market rather than just speculation in suspension. If they can stabilize the core business through this reset, there could still be upside as the company starts to generate meaningful cash flow again. The gas price rerating is helping sentiment, but it's the operational and financial turnaround that will really drive value here.

Another strong day confirms the recovery trend. Even with those interruptions earlier in May, hitting ~71.8k therms/day shows they’re on track back to the higher plateau. This consistent uptick since mid-May is reassuring. If this continues, we could see a solid month overall despite the hiccups. The market wants to see sustained improvement, and these numbers are heading in the right direction. Keep an eye on if this momentum holds through the rest of May.

Up and down like a hooker's drawers? More like up and down without any real substance. Just because capital is spent doesn't mean cash flow is there. Guercif has been a letdown for years, and MOU-3 is still in that ambiguous zone where it might not even flow commercially. That GBP16.438m carrying value at the end of last year means nothing if we can’t see actual gas flowing and sold. Until then, it’s just more noise from management trying to keep hope alive. Let's wait for something real, because right now, it looks like smoke and mirrors.

I don't buy the "Muddy40" bearishness. That balance sheet shows serious investment, and a successful MOU-3 flow/monetisation path could unlock the market discount quickly. If MOU-3 flows and supports CNG monetisation, it can change the whole perception of PRD from technical story to gas development candidate. This gives PRD a practical route to early monetisation before a larger full-field development or pipeline solution is needed. Guercif's GBP16.438m carrying value at 31 December 2024 is huge - if commercial flow is proven, it could be the key to unlocking significant upside.

I think investors are already informed of any subsequent confirmation required in a GM, so let's focus on the restructuring details. The Saltfleetby production milestone and booster compression are key indicators that once the balance sheet is fixed, we'll see a reset in sentiment and market the market working out a fair level. Historically, Angus presentations have shown a recurring gap between projected management timelines and actual delivery across Saltfleetby first gas, compression, debt reduction, and secondary-asset ambitions. Given this context, I think unsuspension after a clean restructuring could be the catalyst that finally bridges this gap and unlocks the stock's long-term optionality.

Comfortable holding through this – not that I’ve got much choice at the moment.

Compared to drilling risk, it’s very contained.

They’re not sentimental lenders

This is what a producer does. Not exciting, but effective.

What you have to understand about most small cap companies is that they are acquired as shells once a previous venture has failed. As long as the management changes from one venture to another then the bad (and good) from before cannot be judged for or against the present. If the management stays the same then that is obviously a different story.

Bu we have just had the opportunity to get them removed and we didn't take it. They convinced shareholders to keep them employed. It would not have been my decision and I voted in favour of the requisition, but that ship has now sailed. Like it or not they are here and they are here to stay.

We do need answers on what is going on with Colle Santo though. Why is the environmental application still not showing on the Italian website nearly a month after they told us it was filed? https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Procedure/ViaElenco/3/2

If there is a sensible reason for this then they should let us know and if there has been an issue with this then they should let us know that too.

I would also like to see a presentation on what their plans are for 2024. I hope that this is somethign that they are working on now. All I really want to see is when they plan to drill West Newton. That is the project that will get us out of this mess, not Colle Santo.

The output data is massively useful to me. Thanks Singhie.

Itsawrap - agreed, but a farm out still reduces the RBD stake in CS, so it is essentially the same thing as LNE issuing more equity. Either way, I cannot see a return for many years even if all goes well.

I agree Uggy. My concerns with CS are manyfold:

1. Will it ever get the license to produce - unfortunately I think that this is unlikely, though I hope I am wrong.

2. Will they get the 24-month production started this quarter - again I think unlikley especially since it still seems that they have not submitted the environmental report. https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Procedure/ViaElenco/3/2

3, If they do get the license then they need to raise €30 million. €16million to pay for the initial development and €14 million, it would appear, to pay for the option. LNEnergy claim that they will do this via debt but I find this unlikely as they are a private company with no revenue so how will they service the debt? If debt is not possible then they will have to do it by equity. If they do it by debt then RBD will not see any money from the early production as it will all go to servicing the debt. If they raise it by equity the RBD's stake in LNE will be massively reduced. I also think that RBD have massively over-valued LNE so I think that they redcution will see our equity share drop by around 75%

5. If they do achieve all of the above then LNE need to raise another €50millionin debt to build the full plant that they have proposed. This should be perfectly possible if they are already in production with revenue in the numbers that they have published, but all the revenue from the development will then go into servicing the debt - probably for around 6 years.

So my fear is that even if all goes well, they roll 6s every time and they get everything that they need for the 24 month production to commence this quarter, which I doubt, then we would still be waiting between 7-8 years for RBD to see any revenue from the project. The only hope would be able to sell the stake for a profit to somebody else.

And this is all if everything goes right. If things go wrong then the investment will likely be worthless.

Itsawrap, well spotted. I agree, that makes perfect sense.

Its all in this link: https://www.reaboldrequisition.com/wp-content/uploads/New-Colle-Santo-V2-14-12-23.pdf

Avanti sold 41.66% of Colle Santo to the ADX consortium for $2,730,000 in April 2015 and then acquired the rest of it for a deferred payment of $500k in 2019.

LNEnergy have an option with the new owners to acquire 90% of CS but we do not know at what price. This can be seen on page 3 of the company's presentation here: https://wp-reabold-2023.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2023/07/Reabold-investment-in-LNEnergy-October-2023-v2.pdf

LNenergy have not acquired 90% of the field, they have an option to acquire 90% of the field for a fee that has never been made public. The link that itsawrap has put up shows this. The field is currently owned by a group called the AVX consortium who acquired it for $3 million in 2019. I think Mark Frascogna from LNE is also linked to this AVX group too, so that is the connection.

This is one of the big mysteries to be about CS. We have invested £4.3 million for a 26.1% stake in an entity that doesn't even own Colle Santo.

Well that clearly settles matters. The current BoD have won the vote by a huge margin and this gives them a resounding endorsement from shareholders to continue managing the company in the way they see fit.

I won’t say that I am not disappointed in the result, as I think that the company really could have done with a new direction and there are still huge questions to be answered about Danube, Daybreak and Colle Santo. However, the vote is the vote and we now either need to pull behind the current board or sell our shares and get out.

I intend to stick in here for a while longer. After the information the requisitioners released about the prospects of Colle Santo I still have grave reservations about the project, but S&S have promised that we will see progress on this in this quarter so let’s hope they are telling the truth and can deliver on this.

Looking on the bright side, if S&S are able to deliver on the 24 month production permit in the first quarter of this year then this will deliver some income for the company going into the West Newton drill later this year. I think that we all agree that this will be the real game changer for the company.

The board now need to focus all their effortds on delivering this drill. I was very wrong about the vote, so I hope that I am also wrong with my concerns about the West Newton funding. I’d even be happy for them to put off the £4 million dividend until after the West Newton drill. I just want to see it drilled this year.

I still think that overall we have made a bad decision to continue with the incumbent CEOs given their track record, but a vote is a vote and they won, so I am clearly in the minority. Here’s hoping for a brighter tomorrow.

Interesting rationale from noveckinggood, one of the big board defenders here.

The current board are incredibly inept and anyone with any commercial sense should have sold out years ago. I guess this makes me, him, Watts and almost everybody on this board commercially inept then.

The company is now effectively worthless, yet those appealing for a change of direction via a shareholders vote are trying to “steal” it.

If the current board are incredibly inept and responsible fort the company being worthless and us all losing a lot of money on our investments then why vote for them?

Fingers crossed, there enough sane investors have voted for change and not more of the same. We shall see.

It is definitely not a case of when not if.

The last environmental application took two years to be processed before it was rejected. It has not yet been submitted according to the Italian governmental site.

The Italian authorities made it clear last time that the Environmental plan must be approved before the 24 month production test will be authorised. This is not negotiable, it is the law.

Colle Santo is not a renewable project. It will not benefit from any Italian funding designed to help push these through.

Colle Santo is also less than 1km from an earthen dam. The Environmental plan will have to prove that there is no chance that there is no chance of the project affecting this dam to get through. It will have no chance of doing this.

Colle Santo will never be approved. It is a total waste of money, but it did allow S&S to issue 120% of voting shares to LNEnergy in order to try and win the requisition.

It is £4,3 million wasted.