Member Info for Jimmy23

Guys,

Much and all I would love to have 200 meters of B sands at anchois, I believe that quote relates to the onshore discovery in chariots loukos,

Which has certainly been over looked in the current share price.

Jimmy

Ilovesushi,

And chariot currently have £9 million in bank, so why the placing, or are you just looking to buy more at these prices

Energean up 4.5% to day, equal to nearly twice chariots market capitalisation, so their investors see the upside of having proven gas in the 3 B sand reservoirs . Proof of the value in chariot at these levels

Jimmy

At least prd have not issued an Rns on Friday 13 .

Here is hoping for good news next week, at least 20 mmcf per day

J

BDC,

I got the impression that A1 was not in a condition to re enter, so yes, if North flank O sand works, it makes a lot of sense to re enter A2 and drill to the O sand below, would not take long.

Jimmy

By the way, in the high production case energean will exercise its option for another 10% because payback for such investment is around two years, so that’s why the flow rates are the key for chariot.

Looking incredible value at these prices.

Jimmy

Surety.

The upside field development scenario proposed by energean is for three wells to produce 150 mmcf per day, so that’s 50mmcf per day per well.

The average flow rate onshore in the rharb basin from the same geological horizons, but thinner, is 1.1 mmcf per day per meter. So anchois 3 could technically flow at up to 165 mmcf per day , but 50 mmcf is all that’s required for the high production case which will generate $50 million per year free cashflow to chariot during the capex repayment period of approx 2.5 years and $100 million per year after that for about 10 more years. And with an infrastructure in place it’s very attractive to add in additional gas from other nearby prospects, a very attractive development scenario.

Jimmy

BDC.

Great summary.

I still think the odds of hitting gas in the north flank O sand are still good.

Firstly, it’s clear that seismic Avo is not distinguishing reservoir gas from residual gas after migration.

We now know that reservoirs that are dependant on sealing faults with sands nearby are not working in the rharb basin, as evidenced by chariots onshore dry hole and the pilot hole of anchois 3.

The good news is that sealing rocks at anchois are very effective even when they are thin. The north flank O sand looks to be very seperate and distant from nearby sands so hopefully it’s seperate over geological time and has not leaked away.

It’s still a 50%+ chance of success for the exploration target.

However it’s the flow rates that are key.

Jimmy

Hi bold,

The proven gas of 637 bcf includes the b,c, and m reservoirs, this well is to proove the deeper O sand and flow test the proven gas .

Jimmy

Surfit,

It’s common practice in the oil industry not to perform a flow test and instead take sidewall core samples , which establish permeability, extensive gas sampling, which establishes quality of gas and reservoir pressure .

The reason they need to flow test now is to design the completion tubing as there are 7 sands and they need to know which reservoirs can be co mingled for production purposes, and which require seperate production tubing

The flow rates is what’s important here for the market.

Jimmy

Fernan

The audited gas reserves, include the A , B C and m sands totalling 637 bcf, that may come down slightly if the A sand is not present in anchois 3.

The rest is upside.

Jimm

I was thinking overnight as to the possible reasons why they found mostly water in the O sand footwall .

Obviously this is my estimate without seeing data.

1. We know that the O sand had gas in it , but not in sufficient quantities, so gas had migrated and then escaped. Hence the Avo seismic signature.

2. The O sand was mapped as being juxtaposed against a fault and being sealed against the fault . We know there has been basin inversion in this part of morroco and usually the top seals work very effectively to stop migration leakage. But if the side seal was a fault and not the blue marls and there was reservoir on the other side of the fault, the gas would migrate into the C and m sands.

3. The same migration could occur if the time to depth conversion on the footwall side of the fault was different from the anchois field reservoirs side of the fault as a consequence the footwall O sand was juxtaposed against either the C or M sands and gas migrated into it.

4. The B sands have been reported as gas bearing, so if the time depth conversion was wrong in the anchois field then these could have had water. That’s really important to be gas bearing as it validated the depth model of the anchois field.

5. So far this indicates that the remaining targets are still good .

This could still be a 1 tcf field.

Got to wait on the flow tests which actually are more important than the extra gas reserves in the exploration targets. A flow rate from 150 meters of reservoir should easily do 50 mmcf per day or better. That’s what’s key here.

Jimmy

Ibiza.

You are mistaken

J

Might explain why the share price driven down on false news report.

Journalist for that incorrect press article based in Nigeria.

Jimmy

Ianfer,

That article you referenced refers to proven that pre date anchois 2 , the article is blatantly false and wrong. The contingent reserves are audited at 637 bcf and not the pre anchois 2 well results of 361 bcf. It’s just very wrong and misleading. Poor journalism

J

Energean price hardly changed and chariot down nearly 10% , something wrong there.

If anchois was a washout energean price would have fallen to, as it’s a core area for their future.

Jimmy

The scale of the development is based on the flow rates, which are yet to even start. We know energean want 150 mmcf per day from 3 wells, so this anchois3 well just has yo achieve 50 mmcf per day from 150 meters of reservoir , the equivalent proven gas onshore in the same geology can do 165 mmcf per day, so game still very much on. The reduced volume upside just shortens the field life, and that was not in the share price to start with.

Jimmy

What a shocking piece of poor reporting.

They used the data and illustration from pre drill of anchois 2 and refer to the contingent resources at 361 bcf and not the audited volumes of 637 bcf post anchois 2 well.

That article has zero credibility and chariot should immediately demand a correction and apology for very poor reporting.

Jimmy

Fernan,

Thanks for the quote.

This could be interpreted in two ways.

1. Anchois 3 pilot hole found some gas but less than expected, whereas chariot said, preliminary analysis indicated it was water bearing, referencing the O sand footwall. Only impact the exploration upside.

2. It could indicate that the A sand in anchois 3 was less than expected, after all chariot just confirmed that the B sands in anchois 3 were gas bearing. The pre drill estimate showed the A sand pinching out as it approached the east fault, so it may have pinched out earlier than the a3 well location, would not have a material impact in my view as the sands were already expected to thin.

Jimmy