Member Info for Jimmy23

Keith.

We know there is gas, because prd said they were trying to get a stabilised flow rate.

What we don’t know is whether such gas can flow at a minimum rate of 2 mmcf per day to justify even small scale cng production.

I believe the best defence against a so called take over bid, is to get into production cashflow asap which will help remove the valuation discount of further equity dilution.

Unfortunately after two attempts at reservoir perforation no sustainable flow rate has been reported and there appears to be large volumes of water impeding production from reservoir zones that were expected to have high gas pressures.

I believe the mou fan prospect is now very high risk and hence the prd focus on the high risk high potential mou5 carbonate prospect. I still do not understand why prd would not de risk the mou 5 prospect by flow testing the carbonates in mou4 as previously announced in august, this would also calibrate the wireline logs for the carbonates. Perhaps there is a re interpretation of mou4 carbonates ?

Jimmy

I expect the share price to drop to the placing price.

J

Hi Gooner,

I am definitely not Jimmy Lea.

J

That’s boooooom.

Namibian licence application period closed to day, perhaps news soon.

Jimmy

The Namibian licence application period closes on 31oct after which licences are then considered and issued.

See. https://www.mayerbrown.com/en/insights/publications/2024/01/namibia-establishes-new-oil-and-mining-licensing-system

Hopefully news on Namibian licence soon.

Jimmy

The risk factors for the mou 3 well tgb 4 and 6 are reported at 22% with a commercial chance of success at 11% see, pages 84 and 85 of the august 23 prospectus at

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2023/08/20230810-Project-Allossaurus-Prospectus-FINAL.pdf

The jurrasic carbonates were rated in that report at a 11% chance of success and no recoverable prospective resources were reported in that competent persons report but a later report , not published by predator , but included in a later rns at 5.9 tcf net to predator with a 12% chance of success., which predator advised their chance of success at closer to 50%.

No explanation has been given for the difference of views for these risk %

My view is that mou5 is certainly a giant prospect, and there is a strong possibility that porosity and permeamability fracturing are not consistent in yje structure, which will require a high number of appraisal wells and possibly 3D seismic. With a 12% chance of success it would make sense to de risk the mou5 well by flow testing the mou4 wells 2 meters of carbonate reservoirs, which were previously announced by predator in august, but not included in the work plan before mou5 is drilled.

Jimmy

It now appears that the drilling mud used in mou3 has impacted the gas flow even though the sand jet successfully penetrated through to the reservoir. The reservoirs were supposed to have very high gas pressures, yet they have been insufficient to lift both gas and water to the surface, hence the need for swabbing we are told.

The reason that the drillingmud caused a problem with the reservoir is that it reacted to certain minerals in the reservoirs and formed a cake layer.

However, the carbonates do not have such minerals and 2 meters of high porosity high gas saturation reservoir was found in mou4. In august it was announced that mou4 carbonates would be flow tested, but that now appears to have been removed from the plans and its intended to drill mou 5 instead.

I believe mou4. Flow testing would substantially de risk mou5 from its 12% chance of success and it’s certainly cheaper than drilling a new well.

Worth reconsidering in my view.

Jimmy

Highland Matt.

With regard to fluids in the well, it appears as if the extraordinary high gas pressures encountered while drilling were insufficient to lift the gas and water to surface. This could indicate that the water is being replenished, so the welll could have crossed a gas water contact.

Just my speculation, others will have other views am sure.

J

I am still here, but reduced my holding substantially.

I wish you all well with your investment and hope your aspirations are achieved.

For me prd has become very high risk and further away from cng cashflow from when I first invested, also disappointed that mou 4 not being flow tested and focus is on high risk mou5 instead.

Best of luck to you all.

Jimmy

That rns should have be linked to an announcement of salary reductions and cost cutting, thereby aligning management and shareholders.

Opportunity missed.

Jimmy

Looking good for another boom.

J

I believe the compressor is for the sand jet perforation.

J

Kfp.

Of course you are right, you must drill to proove.

It’s about reducing risk and improving chance of success.

J

Hi fernan.

The seismic Avo and spectral decomposition worked for A 2 but clearly could not differentiate a gas water contact properly in A 3.

Serious lessons will have been learned and applied across the lixus licence.

Jimmy

With a near 40% increase that a super booooom,

From a very low level

Jimmy

This is a historical paper that describes the geology of the lixus licence.

The recent A 3 well will recalibrate these prospects also.

See.

https://geoexpro.com/understanding-the-true-hydrocarbon-potential-of-the-lixus-offshore-licensing-area-morocco/

Jimmy

Bold,

That’s so important, to unlocking and derisking the potential of the area.

However, we are also starting with proven gas in A1, A2 and b sands in A 3.

In addition, to now differentiating gas and water by seismic avo, we now have a more accurate way for seismic time depth conversion.

Energean not going to walk away in my view, a new gas basin on the footsteps of Europe.

Jimmy

I wonder does the anchois gas contain helium, as predator have reported helium in its gas. Very valuable.

Jimmy

Up 30% from a dreadful price, but it’s still a

Super boooooooom

Jimmy

Ijt.

I think it unlikely that it is based on announced flow test results instead of actual gas flowing , otherwise as a vesting conditions it’s based on the decision to announce any flow test result which is not really a company performance indicator.

Jimmy