The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I get what you're saying and I would be more than happy to see the likes of Total join the project. My post was just exploring the possibilities; a company with gas exploration in TZ and links to the board is certainly a good place to start.
I would argue however that notoriety does not equal performance. Your point about stepping down from Mitchell is sort of counter-intuitive, a company with size and recognition, that ended up not delivering a successful exploration campaign (although far from entirely their fault). I also think your assessment of them isn't overly that accurate, they've certainly been around for some time and have had active campaigns every year for at least the last 15 years.
Hopefully we get the who, what, why, when, where and how soon!
@BC2504 Interesting point, could certainly be easier to come to agreements with friendly faces.
@Aussie_princess Saw this posted in the telegram too! Seems like a possible opportunity to split some of the mob/demob costs if we could get it out during Q2, before they need it (David loves to say how frugal he is!).
@PatShare and @PollyWold Appreciate the comments. It is tough to stick around with all the crap that gets thrown around here, but there's still some serious investors about who are at least trying to have some meaningful conversation haha!
Firstly, I’ll say this is purely speculation from some light research.
Did some digging and came across ‘Sakson Group’ as a potential drilling contractor.
Orca Energy (formerly Orca Exploration) was a natural gas explorer in TZ and now have an established natural gas resource that they supply across Africa and beyond. The key factor here is that James Smith our non-executive director was a senior executive of Orca back in their exploration days. Orca successfully used Sakson to drill a multiple gas well campaign through 2010-~2013.
These days Sakson appear pretty inactive on their social media’s (since about 2015) but there’s a fair few bits of news flow from varying exploration companies up until 2020 using them successfully across Africa and the Middle East. Having checked some LinkedIn pages of workers, it’s clear they’re still in operation now. It appears from this, they have reasonably recently finished up a few projects so would (presumably) be looking to take up a new project now/soon.
Nothing overly convincing to say it would definitely be them, but was fun to investigate and thought I’d share with the board.
I asked a few days ago and got no response. I kinda got from the post that they don’t really want people going, but at the same time, going ensures that any questions you have will get asked.
Currently unsure, 50/50 on whether I go depending on whether my questions get answered but the upcoming newsflow.
Yes Pat, for the most part that is exactly how it works. Although it’s not the share price of the day it’s based off, but either 1) a X amount (%) of discount off the average s/p of the last month or 2) X amount (%) of discount off the peak share price in Y amount of time (e.g last 6 months).
Sometimes if a company has big news in the pipeline they can convince a some institutional investors to buy shares above current market price, but below the expected market price, in order to bolster sentiment (This is generally quite rare). This would be good, and a possibility for us, but as I said it’s rare so don’t hold out for it!
I’ll point out the maths I quoted was from higher up in the chain, I was simply doing their calculations for them as they said their calculator wasn’t big enough to work it out. I did not verify their prior maths.
The last RNS stated the intent to start drilling at the end of the week (of RNS week), whereas this RNS announced that driling had actually commenced. Similar, but different - good to be kept in the loop!
The potential returns are ridiculous when you do the maths. Even if you do 50% recovery rate (calcs below) which is very low!
138bcf (p50) would be 4.2b profit with a $58/250 (profit/sale) per mcf.
500bcf would be 14.5b profit.
Yes, noticed this too. A few people in the telegram contacted the board and they replied saying it was a typo. 30%->55% as per the investor presentation is still correct.
Without a key you couldn't know for definite, but yes, there is a general trend where red would be indicative of an increase in the measured parameter (helium seepage in this case).
Without seeing the maps you're talking about I wouldn't be able to provide meaningful comment on them.
I agree that at the moment it is largely speculation, but at the same time I think that's healthy for the stock. FWIW just the fact the company is applying this sort of technique, presumably with some associated ground work too, is a sign that we are going in the right direction - no expense spared after the rig faux pas of last year.
Of course, ask away and I will try to answer any further questions you have.
As mentioned elsewhere I have worked with this type of data before, so I may be able to help clarify some things, but without access to the data and methodologies I may not be able to give you all the answers you’re looking for, but I will try.
I really like your theory because It's fun, intuitive and you've clearly done some homework!
My concern is that your thesis is based on RSD that hasn't been cleaned of both biological or geomorphological signatures - a big source of data error in this type of project. I've mentioned on this board that I've had first hand experience working on this type of RSD, and from my personal experience, you simply can not interpret reliable data from unfiltered sets of data, and therefore not the subsequent mapping either.
I will pose an example - If there was significant gradient (any biotic or geopmorphological feature) difference over an area which is hyper-saturated on the map, this could very well be the cause of a significant invasive artefact on the heat-map. Now, if this was the case you would then have a completely different heat map pattern. Following this you would have to re-infer how this interacts with something like the presumed lake formations along fault lines that your thesis relied heavily on.
I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying that without filtered RSD you would realistically never be able to know either way. There is always the possibility that filtering will have little to no effect on the data, as much as there is a chance that plugging in some sort of geo/bio data could make it do a complete 180.
Rewatching the lasted proactive and David states when talking about the tai like structures within the rukwa basin ‘there’s a number of lookalike anomalies…..there’s ones that are occurring within our 2D seismic area…’
Could just be me reading into his wording too much (we’ve certainly done this before). But to me this indicates there’s multiple within the 2D seismic area (largely Tai and Itumbala) but also multiple outside of this. Could be big if true, means if *and when* we get a successful drill it may be strongly indicative of the entire basin exploration to follow.