Member Info for Jimmy23

I see the real value in chariot as being in the gas division.
The renewables business is interesting and while it’s currently focused on providing renewable energy to the minining industry, the use of renewable energy for desalination of water is a huge global market. It will take time to generate positive cash flows but it’s a good add to the renewable division at little dilution.
Jimmy

Hi Keith,
Have you looked at the shallow reservoirs on the strip logs, we have good drilling breaks and increase in c1 and 2 in the gas readings indicative of a gas reservoir, but not logged as they removed the logging tool to stop it getting stuck. This may correlate to the shallow gas zone in mou 1.
Any thoughts
Jimmy

Private Tesla,
Predator need to drill down to a marker , the volcanic layer to make sure they go through all the reservoirs. It might mean an extra days drilling, so ok.
Jimmy

Interesting point by GRH depth conversion.
Looking at the seismic cross section published in the cpr the slump clay formation looks more than 250 meters from the bottom , I suspect we may need to drill to 1750 . As the drilling is expected to be through sandstone the drilling rate should be very fast.
The thick mud layer is really good news , we just got to make sure that logging instruments don’t get stuck in the hole, hence a new mud system needed.
Jimmy

Hi blissful,
To answer your questions, yes there is usually a lower rig rate known as the standby day rate when a rig has to wait, usually at a good discount to the drilling day rate as there no drilling costs being incurred.
You ask the question as to why would anyone buy at these prices as the price is falling, answer is because the drilling has confirmed the presence of a thick mud layer which acts as a seal above a reservoir and the competent persons report identified the risk of seal failure as the biggest risk, which is now effectively addressed , so a long term investor who understands this would see the current share price as a good opportunity ahead of flow testing of mou 1 .
Jimmy

Charlotte
Thanks for your reply. I am a long term investors based on fundamentals, appreciate you are a short term trader, thinking of getting in lower , which is fine, because we all have different investing strategies.
Jimmy

So Charlotte,
Will you be buying more shares if the share price hits your 3p target .
Jimmy

Figure 10 in the cpr is really worth a look, at
https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2022/01/cpr2022.pdf
Firstly in cpr , mou 4 has been renamed mou 2 and the previously named mou 2 is now called mou 4.
Note the area on the seismic with the description “slope” so the current drill results are in keeping with the cpr analysis.
In addition, note the reservoirs tgb 3,4,,5,6 are shown as potentially gas bearing at the mou 4 location, previously known as mou 2.
Interestingly if you follow those sands on the seismic to the mou 2 location, previously known as mou4, you note there is no structure at that location and that cpr did not expect the current well to find gas in the tgb, 3,4, 5,6 sands.
The rns yesterday has confirmed there was no gas in the shallow sands as expected, and that there was to be a slump deposit above the targeted gas sands, which is exactly what has been found to date.
Jimmy

The cpr risk factor states on page 23,
The risk factors that could contribute to project failure are the effectiveness of fault seals, both to lateral juxtaposition with upthrown sands and vertical leakage in response to Plio Miocene basin inversion, and whether or not structures are spill-full as consequence of enhanced closure post gas charge resulting from later basin inversion. “
The discovery of a large mud layer in the current mou 2 above the main sand target is proof of an excellent seal and hence reduces the biggest risk identified by the cpr.
Jimmy

Gg2020,
To answer your question, we simply do not know if the reservoirs that they found contains gas because it has not been logged yet. It needs wireline logs to be definitive yes or no.
Jimmy

Great post by Chatham.
The reason to halt is not just the slow rate of drilling through mud, but more importantly, they need to solve the mud problem so that the logging tools can get an accurate measurement of the reservoirs. They found reservoir but could not log it because of the mud.
Remember, mou 1 upper sands also had no gas, so not surprising that mou 2 upper sands had no gas shows.
It’s all to play for still.
Jimmy

Trends,
Chariot still hold 100% of the Brazil licences and have met all their licence commitments to date. The licences are currently on hold pending drilling by others in the area.
Jimmy

The post mou 1 presentation is at
https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2021/09/19204501/PRD-Proactive-Presentation-Final-09.09.2021-1.pdf
Page 13 shows the well results,
Note that there were a series of sands above the main target ofTGB2 which did not have logged gas , that is TGB 3 to 6 were gas void , same as what has happened in mou 2 now.
The safety case scenario of 1000 ft of gas is clearly gone. But the main gas target has not been drilled , hence why Pdr state there has been no change in the gas resources as a result of the delay.
Jimmy

Nordell
Here is an old presentation from 2017, see page 11
There are some yellow mapped prospects which are not described. The key issue is that the deep water where the giant prospects are in 1500 meters of water which is within the west of chariots block.
Jimmy

Hi nordell,
The pan continental corporate update from last year shows a significant part of their giant turbidite prospect extends into acreage in which chariot has rights to back into for 10% after a well is drilled.see
http://clients2.weblink.com.au/news/pdf_2%5C02589565.pdf
Jimmy

Oil analyst,
I have tried repeatedly to access the drilling logs but it keep crashes.
Yes, I would have hoped to find gas shows in the mud logs but clearly they are not showing. We know from mou 1 that most of the upper sands did not have logged gas, so I am finding it hard to come to a conclusion here.
On the one hand we there is source rock, as proven by logged gas at mou 1, we know there is a great top seal because of the mud, we are finding reservoir but so far we can’t tell the porosity levels yet, but does not rule out higher quality sands deeper.
I think they have to change the mud system and drill, it’s only a couple of days drilling away.
Jimmy

Oil analyst,
The rns states we are not at the target depth as we are just above it .
So the structure is still valid and un drilled.
Jimmy

Obviously disappointed by the delay, but looking forward to the flow testing of mou 1.
The presence of substantial thickness of mud is a surprise, but from a geological point of view I believe it’s good news, as I believe the biggest pre drill identified risk was top seal or fault seal failure during multiple basin inversions . Mud acts as an excellent seal. This would also explain that the gas cloud seen on seismic came from gas expansion at the spill points during basin inversion.
Will double check the cpr to confirm this.
Jimmy

Some further information on Namibia giant discoveries at.
https://oilnow.gy/featured/shell-hits-pay-at-jonker-1-prospect-at-namibias-orange-basin-report/
Chariot acreage are blocks 2714 an and b .
Note the pan continental giant prospect beside that acreage.
Jimmy

Older and wiser,
I too am equally confused by GRH message. Firstly is that a current message, if so is he indicating that Pdr are sidetracking at the moment.
Confused.
J