Member Info for Kasjnaton

Marrakeshreg

I am a supporter of this technology, as I am sure you are aware of from my previous posts.

I feel as though now we have absolutely nothing to lose, the basin model does not prove anything and you have hit the nail on the head when stating that it is now a fire sale.

There are of course hydrocarbons in the licence area that are in commercially viable quantities, and if this totals 20 TCF of which 10 TCF is recoverable then a decent share price can still be obtained even with a single drill, provided it is in the right location.

Obviously the seismic has not helped and so is of no value, the basin model is in error so also adds no value, so what value can be obtained from the prospects that are unproven? I guess very little and suggest that crudes 10% is way too optimistic.

For anyone still doubting the veracity of using remote sensing to identify mineral or hydrocarbon deposits then perhaps a read of some papers on this subject may change your mind;

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281709163_Study_on_oil-gas_reservoir_detecting_methods_using_hyperspectral_remote_sensing

It was not the fact that they were hiding permability, at 8% I think it is very good considering the area we are exploring in, it was the fact that only one of the two variables was mentioned.

And as I have already said though if the porosity will not be known until after flow testing then I fully understand.

As an aside JeztheFez mentioned that we would be given 'flluffy' words in an RNS in the event of TE-10 not being commercial.

I actually disagree with this and think that they will either state that it is or is not commercial and give the associated flow rates.

Ok, if permeability will not be known until later after flow testing then I can understand and accept that point.

Hoping for some really good news on this drill for everyone invested here which I am sure we will get.

Just thought I'd raise a few points as to why I am still sceptical that TE-10 will be any good, hopefully some of you will be able to answer and help put my mind at ease :)

Sorry for being so ignorant but if there is 4.5 TCF of gas at TE-10 and is not commercial then how does it benefit us?

Agree with you 100% Soundingoff that it is excellent that we have Schlumberger as our partners.

I think, as has already been mentioned (maybe even by JeztheFez or his brother), TE-10 is not commmercial or is border line commercial without some form of mechanical stimulation, I say this as;
a) We were told that we would not carry out this activity
b) Funds are tight, why else pay for 'services' via issuing more shares? Carrying out this activity is obviously going to cost some cold hard cash
c) If commercial without any additional work it would have been right at the top of the RNS
d) Both the porosity and the permeability of the geology at TE-10 would have been stated

The only reason that I can think of would be that there is already a potential buyer or buyers who want to know the result post mechanical stimulation before they proceed.

If a commercially viable zone has been hit I believe that it will be at the higher end of the estimates that have been mentioned for this drill.

I also took some interest in this when I saw SO's post earlier, a google search brought up the following link:

https://www.slb.com/resources/publications/industry_articles/oilfield_review/1989/or1989oct03_thin_bed.aspx

There is a PDF there with some interesting comments, although it is dated 1989, should be a good starting point.

The last thing GRH said was that he was going to be busy, prior to that he said he was willing to organise a meet up with Sound investors who are interested in learning more about the Technology that E&P companies can make use of.
If memory serves I think he did not make any comment on any of the drills on this BB however I wonder if it is worth asking the Sound BoD if Scotforth had given them advanced notification of any of the drills already completed being non-commercial before work work was started.

With respect to Sound and Scotforth I was under the impression that it was only discussions that had so far taken place. Whether or not these discussions lead to anything is another matter entirely.

OK, my apologise

We were already made aware of the exploration permit, which I thought had already been signed.

Therefore I took the new article to be referring to documents still yet to be signed, obviously for Sound this would be the GSA.

Hi Mert1, please could you share that information for those of us that don't have or use FB? Thank you

Woode, if you are going to use Google translate to translate a document I think it is worthwhile that you state this at the top of the post.

From the translation yuo posted;
In addition, ONHYM has signed three new oil agreements with the companies Repsol and Shell on the Tanfit zone and with Sound Energy

If you go back to to the original document it states:
l’ONHYM a procédé à la signature de trois nouveaux accords pétroliers avec les sociétés Repsol et Shell sur la zone Tanfit et avec Sound Energy

This implies that the relevant parties can now proceed with signing the documents, as full process and due dilligence has now been carried out and not that the documents have already been signed.

In Sound's case, if already signed I would be expecting to see a GSA RNS.

You seriously think that the price of this share would have reached £1 if the true valuation was known? and not some miscommunicated and misleading valuations given out?

£1 per share per TCF, is that in place or recoverable gas?

Well actually a deal has been done and now it is £1.50 per share per TCF.

But I am sure that before the deal was done you knew full well it was actually only 50pps per recoverable TCF, no? and after the deal it increased to 75pps per recoverable TCF.

Eric, thank you

An interesting article, my French is not great but on translating the following:

Par ailleurs, l’ONHYM a procédé à la signature de trois nouveaux accords pétroliers avec les sociétés Repsol et Shell sur la zone Tanfit et avec Sound Energy sur la zone Sidi Moktar Onshore et Grand Tendrara.

It appears that ONHYM are proceeding with the signing of three new petroleum agreements, one of which is with Sound Energy, no dates though for completion of this is within the article.

Could it be the fabled GSA maybe signed off soon?

Shed, I do not know what you value you aspire the share price to reach but I suspect that any offers made now would be unacceptably low, purely because we do not yet even know what we have, the find at TE-10 may not be commercial.

I do of course hope that it is commercial and with a porosity of 8%, it does, at the moment look very promising.

If it is commercial and it comes in at the high end, 2.25 TCF recoverable, along with the TE-5 horst this would bring a share price of almost £2.00.

Is Sound then also able to add some value to say approximately another 12 TCF recoverable based on the basin model and derisking other parts of the licence area?

Even at only 5p per TCF that would another 60pps.

So what happens if, when the basin model is updated the result is that there is 100 TCF of GOIP?
What happens if we get more for the derisked gas?

There are still so many variables and unknowns at this moment in time that it is not possible to put a value on the company.

Next piece of news I think we get will be GSA.

I have just had a read of the FSC from November, I am not sure if the following point has been raised but FSJCampbell asked a question which along with the response can be seen below:

10:14 AM Question from fsjamescampbell Are there any intricate / differences in geology, over the planned drill sites TE9, 10 & 11 that are positive when compared to the TE5 horst now that seismic data has been digested. Brian Mitchener (Exploration Director) If you mean at surface? we are gathering seepage information over each location to determine whether it is possible to predict success. if you mean in the subsurface the geology is very similar

The above can be found at the following link:
https://www.discussthemarket.com/company/sou.lse/live-discussion/4/

So have they already decided on a location for TE-11? Is it correct that the geology is really so similar? Now who would gain any kind of conifdence from the answer to this question thast we will find any commercial hydrocarbons?

And by the way thank you FSJ Campbell for asking the question.

I realise things have moved on since then but why drill TE-10 with the above information?

Jez, Then why would the managment even make such a statement about running room for extra dilling?

It may not be funded by an equity raise, if the relationship between Sound and OGIF is so good maybe OGIF would be prepared to make a loan to sound on favourable terms in order to pay for those extra drills.

We just don't know what is going on behind closed doors.

Well I just guess we shall have to wait and see if;
A, TE-10 is a duster
B, Sound make use of any available extra data
C, That the additional data shows up other locations to drill at and what the prospective volumes at those other locations are.

I guess we shall have to see what additional running room there is.

Another thought, would JP really want to step down if there was a very real chance that he can prove up several tens of TCF of hydrocarbons in Tendrara? even if it were to take until early Autumn of next year to prove everything up and sell?

PNE79

Please re-read the Q & A from the FSC and CC, the thing that intrigues me the most is the following quote;

'allow the management to ascertain the potential running room in the licence for future drilling programmes'.

This to me contradicts the 'we will drill three wells and sell' statement.

Could it be the case that if TE-10 is a duster and TE-11, with the benefit of extra data, is successful, that extra drills maybe funded by Sound dependant upon what that extra data implies?

After all if the extra data shows an additional 2 or 3 areas which have not yet been drilled/explored, and when combined with the seismic show potential reservoirs of 3 TCF recoverable each then would it not be prudent to raise funds to drill those areas?

It all boils down to a cost benefit analysis.

So how would you vote in the light of that extra information and any offer to purchase the company?

It will be an extraordinary set of circumstances that will lead to Sound being sold for £1 per per share or less.

Hi Ducati2, I could not get that link to work, the following should be ok.

http://www.scotforth.com/index.php/scotforth/news/1-hydrocarbon-morocco

SG47
You really think that any comments on here about another company is going to lead to negotiations?

If a company wishes to negotiate the last place they would do so is by using some BB in order to "advertise" themselves.

Companies will only be able to enter into negotiations if they have a contact/"way in" into the other company and something that is valuable to that company, of course they will themselves want something out of any negotiations, I see nothing wrong in creating a win-win scenario where everyone benefits.

I suspect that any negotiations would have been ongoing for sometime, why? Because best practice is to look at and consider all sources of inforamtion, especially when you wish to enter into negotiations to sell a compnay. Not having that information can put you into a weaker negotiatiing position.

I am sure that you are aware of SWOT analysis, if you were to carry one out now on Sound I am sure that under weaknesses you would have to include, amongst other things, our knowledge and understanding of the TAGI due to the limitations and issues with the seismic.

Surely gaining extra information, if available, on the TAGI would come under opportunities and help to reduce the above mentioned weakness, or perhaps even eliminate it entirely.

HI Marrakeshreg

I don't think that it is quite as simple as the seismics failing, I think it is more along the lines that the seismic data is valuable but the usefulness on its own is limited. As has already been stated by Sound, it is unable to determine the permeability or porosity of a potential reservoir.
Brian is a highly respected and well qualified geologist, with plenty of experience in the oil and gas industry, however everyone needs some extra help sometimes, after all Sir Edmund Hillary did not climb Everest on his own, he needed the help of Tenzing Norgay.
I said before that I think Sound is effectively wildcatting the licence with three drills TE-8, 9 and 10. I do not mean to be derogatory to anyone at Sound it is just how, rightly or wrongly, I see the situation.
I just hope that TE-11 is not rushed and is thoroughly thought through before a decision is made on where to drill and on the back of what data.
I know JP has stated that three drills and that is it, I wonder if that is still the case if both 10 and 11 are both non-commercial?
I also wonder if Scotforth would forgo an upfront payment for a slightly larger % of profits on a success case?
If TE-11 is also a duster and no one wishes to buy the licence for an amount that is acceptable to Sound shareholders, and we do go in to production, maybe we will fund some extra drills using additional data, and those elusive hydrocarbons will at last be found and unlocked.

I don't think anyone is complaining about the risk, we all knew it was high.
What people are complaining about is the guidance given to shareholders on what each TCF was actually worth.
The fact that you guys come on here and state that we are alright even though you are underwater is of completely no use to those people are not alright.
Yes no one forced anyone to buy shares in this company but the number of shares bought would be considerably different in many cases had the comms from the company been less ambiguous.
Now people are hoping for a $9 GSA for a 20% uplift in the valuation as well as other aspects including BOT and FEED etc. which could also give rise to another 20% increase in the value of the share price.
The share is obviously very oversold at the moment and should be closer to 25p but I am guessing that the market has determined that the GSA will be at the low end.
The other really annoying thing is, is that there is commercial gas in the licence area outside of the TE-5 horst and all we are doing is using inadequate seismic on its own to try and determine the best places to drill.
I dearly hope that TE-10 comes in for the benefit of everyone but I am not holding my breath on this.
I suspect it will be a case of non-commercial gas shows.
Where does that leave us then?
I wonder how much gas they think they have at TE-8, I am sure that they siad they could get it to flow gas commercially but it would require too much effort.

GRH, I noticed that you have already responded to one person following his request to meet up one day.

Has a time and date been set?

If it is going ahead would you mind if I tag along?

cheers