Member Info for Jimmy23

Foot and mouth.

Perhaps if extra drilling mud was not required to control the well, then there is less likely to be the mud invasion encountered by prd, so better chance of flowing.

Does GRh wish to make a prediction of the flow rate from chariots dartois well based on his great insight.

Of course all predictions of the future are wrong, but interesting to see what ballpark of a flow rate he suggests.

Jimmy

Nigel,

I understand from the presentations made to institutional investors that if onshore is successful, first gas in 2025, probably at least one year from now.

The onshor retail investor will provide the cng equipment for early cashflow and higher gas volumes could be sent to the anchois processing terminal for export to the pipeline to power stations .

Jimmy

Nigel,

The rns states they drilled through the target reservoirs, plural, so it looks like the deeper navette reservoir has been drilled which would account for the very much thicker reservoir than initially expected.

Please note, there is 200 meters of gross sand reservoir encountered, it took chariot approximately 6 weeks to analyse the anchois 2 well results , following which the net reservoirs increased by 50% .

Jimmy

Ashisketty,

Chariot report a gross reservoir intersections of 200 meters and there are a gross 70 meters with elevated gas shows and wireline resistivity readings, along with gas samples. So it’s highly likely a gas discovery.

They report they hit their targets, so that sounds like it includes the deeper navette reservoir also, but they will need to confirm this.

The pre drill estimate was to achieve a flow rate of 5 mmcf per day.

So what’s the potential for a flow rate in this well.

Firstly we need to determine the net sand reservoirs, offshore it’s about 60% of the gross, so let’s assume 50% and only use the 70 meter reservoir that’s highlighted, so that’s 35 meters net.

Average flow rate rate onshore in the rharb basin is 1.1 mmcf per day per meter , so that would be a flow rate of 38 mmcf per day.

Page 14 of the corporate presentation reports an average flow rate of 1 mmcf per meter in the gulf of Cádiz and onshore rharb basin they report one well which flowed 15 mmcf per day from 4 meters.

So this is highly likely to be an important onshore discovery.

Jimmy

Great news, it’s a gas discovery .

It looks like the deeper navette reservoir has come in gas bearing also.

So a lot bigger than expected.

Jimmy

Wacky,

Thank you for your considered reply.

I too am invested in prd and hope to make a good profit, which is why I am invested.

The examples you provided all refer to examples where substantial gas resources have been unequivocally established.

Prd is in the situation where its potential reservoirs have been described by nuetech as most likely, not certain and they require validation by flow testing. Which is where we are now.

It’s my view that valuations of oil and gas companies have changed in recent years, particularly for explorers and hope value is given little market value.

At some stage predator will need to raise additional equity finance and I believe that it’s best placed to be able to do that after successful flow testing, as indeed pg has indicated that log interpretations require validation by flow testing.

Lonny has successfully arranged flow testing in Morocco previously and it has not taken the years that prd are taking to sand jet perforate and flow. I don’t know why it’s taking so long and no evidence has been presented as to the cause of the delays or indeed if other unnamed parties are playing a role. Other companies in Morocco do not seem to have this problem.

Jimmy

Mr G man

I am invested in both chariot and predator, and I see no conflict in being invested in both.

I discuss each of the companies separately on their LSE sites, each company have different strategies and I am happy to discuss chariot with you on the chariot LSE site.

With regard to prd, you might wish to consider the three fundraisings for sand jet perforation and it’s coming up to 3 years since mou 1 was drilled, I fail to see why you think it’s not appropriate to raise these facts as it’s the basis on which prd raised funds and which I invested.

Jimmy

BRV.

The post by wacky is suggesting that third parties are trying to undermine prd s licence in Morocco, without mentioning who or what such third parties are doing.

I am assuming the relationship with the prime ministers company as gas offtaker is excellent and as you suggest the relationship with onhym is excellent , so no other parties can interfere with their licence relationship.

Hence my question as to who is responsible and what are they doing.

Personally I think that prd may have too small a team in Morocco and or the strategy of persuing the lowest cost option can result in operational delays as suppliers seek the best terms.

Jimmy

Lancygeo,

Thank you for posting whacky comments.

In the post it’s stated that

“This game we are in is Dirty, Nasty and takes no prisoners, Billions of Ponds/Dollars are at stake and the opposition out there will stop at nothing to get there hands on our License in Morocco, to either upbuild themselves or make sure it does not come to Market”

There have been a number of posters here who suggest there is some major underhand strategy by unnamed parties to deny prd its Morocco licence. Please provide evidence of this stating what’s been done.

Prd, did secure a heads of agreement to sell its cng to a company owned by the prime minister of Morocco. That indeed was a very smart move and it’s hard to believe any third parties could undermine prd s licence in Morocco in such circumstances.

The only party that I can see that could influence the ministry is onhym .

Perhaps they are as frustrated as some prd shareholders about the delay in sand jet perforation.

Jimmy

Jt2017.

The shallow gas reported by prd at 339 to 350 meters is a top Miocene or Pliocene aged reservoir which has been estimated by an independent report to be 13 bcf.

IF shallow gas has been discovered, and the only evidence is yesterday’s share price and a comparison to the A sand re ported by prd, then clearly the gas has migrated from somewhere. It could have migrated from the leaked gas at guefrette, it could have leaked from a deeper reservoir , or it could have migrated up a deep routed fault. We know from prd drilling that if shallow gas is found , then deeper gas found also.

Interestingly, chariot has a prospect offshore which is above anchois west which is also a Pliocene reservoir, so upside there also.

Jimmy

Up 15% that’s an official

Boooooom

Jimmy

We know that guefrette was drilled to 961 meters to the equivalent of the anchois B sand, and the dartois sands are different from the guefrette sands, so I suggest primary target at 1200 meters and deeper navette reservoir at 1400 meters, all a very rough guess of course. So we are still some time way from 1st target. But predator reported gas reservoirs at 350 plus meters, and we know that guefrette primary reservoir had gas but that it had leaked away , so where did it go to a shallower depth ?

Jimmy

Too early for chariot to have reached its target reservoir depths. Maybe they are getting shallow reservoir gas shows like prd got at mou 3. Got to wait a few weeks to find out.

Perhaps prd will have started sandjet perforation by then.

Jimmy

We are too early to have reached target reservoir depth. Most likely at around 400 meters.

Predator have reported finding gas onshore Morocco at similar depths ,so perhaps we have some serendipity.

.got to wait another couple of weeks.

Jimmy

Mk11,

Please explain what my subtle hidden agenda is.

I invested in prd on the basis of their declared intent to perforate by sand jet and flow test, I added to my investment after mou 3 and waited for flow testing after mou 4, still has not occurred. I just want prd to do what they say and not keep on delaying sandjet perforation and flow testing and instead drill more explorations wells.

The nuetech analysis reports the reservoirs as most likely gas bearing, let’s flow test and prove and demonstrate its value.

A number of posters have hinted that I am engaged in some kind of undermining of prd for the benefit of chariot somehow. I see no conflict between my investments as the pipeline to Spain can accommodate any surplus gas, enough for both chariot and prd in success cases for both.

If posters have a different view then detail your analysis and explanation based on facts not fantasy views.

There seem to some investors here who have a hard time having the facts as stated by prd, posted for them to review.

We should encourage prd to do what they say they will do in a reasonably timely manner.

Not unreasonable.

Jimmy

Sand jet has not been mobilised yet, as there has been no updated rns with sand jet timelines as per the 20th February RNS which stated.

“ Mobilisation of the Sandjet crew and equipment will occur shortly after Petroleum Agreement Amendment #4 has been ratified and all necessary regulatory approvals for Sandjet rigless testing have been received. The time framework for the Phase 2 rigless testing programme will at that time be updated.”

Jimmy

Mr plot.

Chariot only repay the enog any anchois capex funded by enog, from 50% of its 20% of net cashflow. So chariot generate free cashflow from day 1 of anchois production.

Jimmy

Ford.

It’s unsettling because as a pre revenue company, time is money , time for g and a costs as well as the extra interest payable to pg on loan which I believe is repayable after flow testing.

Thereby increasing risk of pre testing equity dilution.

Jimmy

Offshore high cost of drilling

Nigel.

Compartmentalisation is a major problem when the cost of drilling is so high, pg will know this from his days at seven heads gas field.

However, onshore when the cost of drilling is relatively low , it does not cost a lot extra to drill different compartments if there is compartmentalisation.

The key issue is what are the flow rates of each the reservoirs that have been found and if the pressures between wells and reservoirs can be correlated as being in communication. That’s the start. If further infill drilling required that’s fine as long as it’s financed from production cashflow, there’s no ongoing equity dilution.

The ongoing silence regarding sand jet perforation is unsettling.

Jimmy