Member Info for Kasjnaton

Part 3

So...a colleague and I ...he is well known over at the other place....
having considered MANY business models, entered into an International alliance with them...
whereby we would change the business approach...and the nature and scale of the revenue stream

For almost a year (it is not a fast process for reasons I have partly outlined above)
we have been signing up E&P companies to our model...(I dislike the term ' E&P' as, surely, what is of great interest to investors is 'D' for Discovery)
which essentially reduces the up-front costs for the client companies and we believe greatly improves their chances of drilling success...
whilst enabling us to enjoy financial success ...via participatory rights...in various exploration activities

As far as I am concerned, it represents the creation of a 'virtual' oil company

We never ...or at least very rarely... suggest that drilling take place without relevant seismic...
but the key word is 'relevant'
ie it is surely sensible to throw better quality seismic...over much reduced areas of GREAT interest...
rather that using it as a primary oil finding technique

Of course...many here know that seismic cannot positively identify the PRESENCE of hydrocarbons....per se...
but rather the types and forms of the sub surface structures that MIGHT contain hydrocarbons

I consider that such point goes to the heart of the CoS issue

The satellite-enabled technology I describe provides a totally DIRECT indication of hydrocarbons...
thus very different to traditional techniques

The marketing has taken much time...and continues...
and it is early days and these drills also take time...
not least of which is time expended in the licencing arrangements...

but we are hoping to see some 'live firing' drilling in 2012 on several locations...
'live firing' meaning that... in the success case... we make money out of each such success via the business model (not as investors)

It has been entirely up to the client or partner companies to decide if they wish to actually go public
with the fact that they have signed satellite contracts...
and my view overall is that they might be advised to keep quiet about it for OBVIOUS commercial reasons...
one Company though has made such information public...

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obviously ...in addition to our BUSINESS activities as noted above
we have also been using such technology to better inform our own INVESTMENT decisions

yes...HOW I wish that I had met these guys back in 2008

and I have personally witnessed quite startling successes...
to the extent that, whilst the Company and its scientists will claim a somewhat lower CoS ...
I can tell you that , in respect of the most recent 25 predictions/analyses, over 85% have been correct
it has been

Part 2

My research indicates that about 1 in 12 wildcats become commercial successes...
some people like to quote 1 in 5 or so...
but I do not believe that to be correct
as it appears to reflect the re-categorisation of poor drilling results

This poor rate of success leads DIRECTLY to many companies in this sector issuing a seemingly endless number of new shares...
thus diluting the existing equity holders....often at lower and lower prices...
we have all seen many instances of that effect...
to my simple mind...dilution appears as a drug within this sector

a couple of years ago, I coined the phrase....'issuing shares like confetti'

the phenomenon was more recently described to me by a very senior Nomad... as the 'waterfall' effect

When I came into this sector, I did much research...
and soon developed a view that there must be better ways of finding hydrocarbons...than seismic ALONE

Please understand that I am not knocking seismic...I am a great fan of it...but used for the correct purpose

I postulated a theory to another poster that the US had probably developed ...or at least used... oil mapping from aircraft...

Through countless meetings and contacts, I eventually met with long term and very senior oil exploration people
(one such was a GM in BP's International & Frontiers E&P Division and country Vice President Exploration of various BP operations)
who had, many years before, developed ...jointly with a group of Russian scientists ...just the technology I was postulating...
albeit utilising satellite rather than aircraft-gathered images
(vast numbers of such images need to be interrogated for the all-important evidence of live hydrocarbons to emerge...
such evaluation is a truly mammoth task)

The technology works by examining physical changes at surface level...
changes in the manner in which vegetation performs when subjected to the constant barrage of chemical 'soup' emanating from the upward migration of hydrocarbons
(MICRO seepage...NOT please to be confused with seeps that are visible to the naked eye)...
and the effects upon the cementation of rocks where no such vegetation exists

(I am told by a senior geologist that such phenomenon is well recognised within the minerals mining sector)

They had achieved startling technical success
and, whilst they had achieved wealth for themselves...
that degree of wealth IMO did not correctly reflect the sheer immensity of what they have

I put that down to two main factors...

Resistance from the extant E&P community ...the closed shop approach...
ie resistance to change, bearing in mind that seismic was around at the time when many senior oil executives were learning their trade...
(imagine the initial conversation were seismic to be invented today...'shall we bang the ground and see what we can infer')
and a business model that revolved around a pure 'service ' approach

Hi Keith, excellent posts, and as you have proved with some digging around information can be found that negates people’s complaints of breadcrumbs. In fact if a few had done some even basic research they would have come across a whole bakery, one piece of information relates to the subject of hyperspectral imaging which you have raised.
This refers to GRH’s amazing post published on adv*n back in 2011, in which he provided information relating to several blocks in Kurdistan but was focused on Shaikan

For those unable to locate it, I copy/paste it from adv*n as follows:

PART 1

nearlycertain
20 Dec '11 - 16:27 - 141499 of 602059
Posting GRH's iii post again (so I can reference in header):

All

Longer term holders may recall a fairly impromptu ...but very senior level ...ceremony at the SH1 well site...
it was upon the first discovery of oil
and it has been all but lost in the sea of noise that sometimes dominates this board

That is a pity...

as, at that ceremony... it was suggested that the oil was 'unmeasure-able'...

perhaps some newer holders might even be unaware of that statement

I hope to show you WHAT 'unmeasurable' actually looks like

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My apologies for the slightly lengthy post...
especially as I said that I would post no more ...on Wifely orders pre-Christmas

But...I have permission for JUST this final one ...

For those who are not interested in the 'PRE-AMBLE'...

and who could blame you?

may I suggest that you skip straight to the 'MEAT' section

I have thought long and hard about putting a pre-amble in here at all...
but... were I to merely put out the second part of this post,
there would be more questions than there might be with this longer version...

The following represents my personal opinion only...

so here goes

PRE -AMBLE

In all of the post below, I bow to the MUCH greater knowledge of several posters here...
some of whom have held very senior and successful positions within the oil industry...

I recognise that, as a non-scientist and as a mere businessman and investor,
what I know about this industry can be written on the head of a pin or two

but I speak as I find etc....

As some here will know, I have been investing in oil shares since very late in 2008...
and in volume since 2009...
and, like many here, I have had my winners and a few losers...

I hold GKP...

somewhat later in this post you are going to see WHY

Now....leaving aside GKP as a rather special case ...
I regard the E&P sector per se as a very tough place for investors to make real money...
(yes, of course GKP is tough also...but for rather different reasons)

and IMO that is greatly due to the 'success' rates on drilling wildcats on seismic alone...

Hi GRH, since you have opened the floor up, my thoughts are:

Lonny is in Morocco, I imagine that he is respected and trusted and will be greeted warmly by the business contacts that he has gained from his time whilst at SDX, it could be said that he has a very positive reputation and those contacts will look favorably on him.

His sheepdog twitter post also seemed to infer that he was there to get things moving, could be something to do with bringing forward the flow test of MOU-1, help to get through red tape, get deals signed (could there be a deal close to fruition), or something completely out of left field?

I very much suspect that a deal (or deals) in Morocco could well be agreed in principle under an NDA, to be signed either after those companies have carried out their own due diligence, or when flow rates for MOU-1 are known. (If such NDA’S were in place would this have prevented Lonny from taking up his share options?)

The political situation in Ireland appears to be moving more and more favourably in PRD’s direction but is still an unknown at the moment as to how and when that will proceed.

Things have been quiet on the TnT front and I don't expect to hear anything from that part of PRD for some time yet.

How would I proceed? If the geology of MOU-1 was not so propitious then I would probably delay any activity there and do what I can, if possible, to get TnT progressing to a more exploitative point, in order to raise the necessary funds for continued operations in Morocco.
However raising additional funds before MOU-1 well tests seems moot as the geology there appears to be very promising and well worth flow testing before any thoughts of funding are considered, through whatever options are available.

Paul is the single biggest shareholder with significant sums of his own money going into PRD, he is not on £1+ million a year (unlike the BoD’s of some other companies) and will want to minimise any further dilution.

Those that have been stamping their feet saying dilution dilution dilution, we need funds now, we need to drill more wells now, are either behaving like spoilt brats or continually repeating this mantra for nefarious purposes. Maybe they are only used to investing in ‘lifestyle’ companies where the BoD has to continually issue more equity in order to keep paying themselves their exorbitant salaries.

I know the risks and I’m choosing to trust Paul for many reasons not least of which is that he has a significant amount of his own capital invested in PRD and is doing his utmost to bring the best results for shareholders, rather than some anonymous negative posters on this BB, who may not even own any shares.

Capitalidea, you'll need to log in to the investor meet website:
investormeetcompany.com
Click on recent meetings
Select all archive meetings
Type in Predator to filter results
Click on view meeting
You will now be able to see both the video and Q&A

Hi Tom, did you do any research over the weekend?
Did it encourage you to stay invested? I am guessing by your post this evening that the answer to that is yes. You must therefore have, from your research, gained a lot of trust in Paul and what he will acheive in Morocco.

Like you I am looking forward to the updated CPR and details of the JV to fund the next wells and testing.

Tom, you have bought into this company, either you trust Paul or you do not.
You remain invested so I take it that you do trust him, in this case you have to take him at his word in that there will be no further dilution and a deal will be done to get financing for drilling and testing the next few wells.

If you do not trust him then funding will come from dilution and you ought to sell up now, in order to buy back in after dilution, if you wish to do so.

All you can do in this situation is carry out further research, gain more knowledge in PRD to back up your thought processes and decide whether or not to remain invested or to sell out.

My perception is that the market is pricing risk into the share price as no deal has been signed, as soon as the details of the funding is known the market will react accordingly.
I am a shareholder in PRD, I trust Paul to deliver on what he says and I await details of how MOU-4 and 5 will be funded.

Again, only my opinion and I may be wildly off but I think we will get news of funding before Christmas and the share price will be at least at a level at which you will be able to break even at.

Is it possible that the share price can drift lower? Of course but I want to retain my holding and I perceive that there is a risk of not being able to buy back any sharesI sold.

Do I regret buying shares at a price higher than the current price? The answer to that is both yes and no, I don't have 2020 hindsight, buying in at a higher price was a result of information available at that time, the highest price I paid 17p will not even be a rounding error in the grand scheme of things, provided everything goes as planned.

As for picking on MEM and his timeline of news and events, may be you would like to list yours?

Hi BillyRayVal
I don't think Paul has a problem with working with big companies, I am sure that Massey can be categorised as such, so long as a win win scenario can be created for both companies.
The problem with CP was that it appears as though they were trying to strong arm Paul so that they could get hold of the data obtained witohut signing an NDA.
Other points you raise though are correct.

Chesh, the news coming out of PRD over the next few weeks will not be paltry...

Chesh
As I am sure you are aware, Lonny is not putting any CO2 into the ground, the EOR operation was well underway before he even joined.
I suspect that the progress of negotiation of deals in Morocco has advanced rapidly since his employment by PRD to the stage that he is now able to spend his time on other activities, i.e. working on deals in T&T, why else send him out there?

I am sure that the work that Lonny is carrying out in T&T will bring us some positive news in the not too distant future.

Hi FandM, it was Absolutely no problem at all to put that post up. Just happy to see that the information contained within has been of value to some people.

As the subject of RSDD-H has been brought up, with some people showing some interest in the technology I thought it worthwhile to repost some links to articles on the subject of hyperspectral imaging which I had found previously, please see those links below;

https://fs.ogm.utah.gov/bbooks/2017/08_Aug/Docket/2017-020_274-02_Hewitt/2017-020_20170912.1_RespondentsExhibits.pdf

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13202-019-00747-w

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

https://investingnews.com/daily/resource-investing/precious-metals-investing/gold-investing/hyperspectral-imaging-a-useful-tool-to-locate-gold-oil-and-terrorists/

https://www.geoconvention.com/archives/2016/285_GC2016_Method_of_Aerial_Imaging_Multi-Zone_Data.pdf

https://www.dlr.de/dlr/en/Portaldata/1/Resources/documents/2013/Erdbeobachtung_280313_web_72dpi.pdf (Specifically page 51)

https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2544309C2/en

https://www.ogj.com/general-interest/companies/article/17221104/exploring-for-onshore-oil-seeps-with-hyperspectral-imaging

http://www.tleonline.org/theleadingedge/january_2017/MobilePagedArticle.action?articleId=1046019#articleId1046019

https://investingnews.com/daily/resource-investing/precious-metals-investing/gold-investing/hyperspectral-imaging-a-useful-tool-to-locate-gold-oil-and-terrorists/

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

My knowledge on seismic and RSDD-H is very limited, however I think the following is a simple analogy that may be of use;

Imagine a cube, and within that cube there are spheres.

The size of the cube along with the size and number of spheres is entirely up to your imagination.

Seismic is able to identify the location of all of those spheres, aka seismic anomolies or bright spots, however it cannot, for the purposes of a hydrocarbon discovery tell which ones, if drilled, will be a discovery or a duster.

RSDD-H is able to map the surface of the cube and therefore give the location for a drill but it does not tell you how deep to drill.

It is therefore a combination of both siesmic and RSDD-H which reduces risk of drilling a duster and thereby increases the chances for a succesful drill.

Investor Presentation

Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc (PRD), the Jersey-based Oil and Gas Company with operations in Morocco, Trinidad and Ireland is pleased to announce that that CEO Paul Griffiths and COO Lonny Baumgardner will provide a live presentation to update investors on the current business outlook via the Investor Meet Company platform on Tuesday 28th September at 16:00 UK local time.



The online presentation is open to all existing and potential shareholders.

Questions can be submitted pre-event via your IMC dashboard or at any time during the live presentation via the "Ask a Question" function. Although the Company may not be able to answer every question it receives, it will address the most prominent within the confines of information already disclosed to the market. Responses to the Q&A from the live presentation will be published at the earliest opportunity on the Investor Meet Company platform.

Investor feedback can also be submitted directly to management post-event to ensure the Company can understand the views of all elements of its shareholder base.

Investors can sign up to Investor Meet Company for free and add to meet Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc :

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/predator-oil-gas-holdings-plc/register-investor

Investors who have already registered and added to meet the Company will be automatically invited.

Whether rightly or wrongly I read that quote as being that MOU-1 is a success but more work is required to get the job done to get to the finish point.

TT-T thank you, summed my response up well.

Was going to reply with the following;
I have not said that MOU-1 is a commercial discovery.
No assumptions have been made that hydrocarbons have been discovered with MOU-1, it's all there in the RNS, see the below;

Formation gas shows were recorded in a shallow sand at 605 metres measured depth ("MD") comprising 2.35% or 19,392 ppm C1 methane.

Total background, exclusively dry gas, increased from 0.6% to 1.7% (5,232 to 13,800 ppm C1) down to 1,159 metres MD. Formation gas shows of 1.8% and 3.8% (13,355 to 36,035 ppm C1) were encountered whilst drilling this section.

Below 1,159 metres in the lower Guebbas and Hoot (using the stratigraphic nomenclature of the Rharb Basin) total background gas was from 0.7% to 1.5% (5,000 to 11,996 ppm C1) but with traces of heavier gases C2, C3 and C4. Formation gas shows of up to 1.67% (13,643 ppm total gases) were also recorded.

Wireline logs were run from 724 to 1487.4 metres MD over the interval with gas shows.

A couple more unknowns;
What is the extent of the damage caused by wash out to the well?
Is it so significant that it has made MOU-1 unsuitable for full testing or appraisal?
Can it be re-entered with drill direction avoiding the area of damage? If this was an option what value would it add top PRD's assesment of the MOU-1 area? I suspect very little.

However if you want my opinion on whether or not I think that a significant commercial discovery has been made then I will have to say yes.
Well, I am invested here so I am going to be biased and consider what has been published in the last RNS in a positive manner.
Then there are the various other points I have already stated, well not abandoned etc.
Lastly MEM's recent post pretty well sums up as few more reasons to be positive

I am not saying anything about the next steps as it is quite clear within the RNS what that is.
I am stating though that there is doubt about the commerciality of any discovery that MOU-1 has potentially made.
Tell me just how much gas has been discovered?
Will it flow?
What rates will it flow at?
If it is commercial are the volumes found at the lower end or the higher end of the estimates given?
I would hazard a guess that no one, not even Paul, at this moment in time, knows the answers to these questions until of course the analysis of wireline logs has been completed. However I suspect he has a good idea of whether or not it is commercial due to the amount of experience that he has.
If he did not have a good idea then surely he would delay making a decision on whether or not to proceed with MOU-2?

So I go back to what I posted previously;
--------
As for MOU-2, Paul, it seems, thinks that drilling this will not add any value to the business.
The positive slant is that MOU-1 has proved up or will prove up the whole area that includes the area where MOU-2 was to be drilled.
The negative slant is that the whole area is completely unsuitable, for whatever reason.

Therefore MOU-4, if succesful, will either;
Prove up another area in addition to MOU-1 (where MOU-1 is also commercialy succesful)
or
It will give value to the Moroccan asset where MOU-1 is uncommercial
---------------
So which of the two scenarios is it? Potnetially no one actually knows, therefore there is uncertainty.

If he cannot categorically state, without a shadow of a doubt, that it is commercial what infromation does he release and when does he realese it?
It is the uncertainty of commerciality that I was referring to, sorry if this was unclear in my previous post.
for instance there is no mention of gas flow rates.

I obviously cannot speak for Paul, however my thoughts are that he has many years of experience in the industry and it will be from this knowledge gained that he is able to read sufficiently into the MOU-1 results so far obtained to make the best decision for PRD and currently that is to not drill MOU-2.
So it is only through experience and not hard evidence as of yet as the results from the wireline logs have not yet been fully analysed.

As for the RNS itself, did he have to release one now? I don't know, someone else will probably be in a better position to say if it could have been delayed.

The one thing that needs to be considered is of course, how much time will full analysis of the wireline logs take? If it is going to be a couple of weeks from now and no news is coming out of the company, questions will be asked as to what is happening with the drill, why no news?

By the way I am also optimistic that the results of MOU-1 will be positive, and in the work already carried out at T&T and progress on Ireland, the share price will be a lot higher in the future, the shorter term price movements though who knows?

As already stated, if the well is known to be a duster it would have been plugged and abandoned and RNS'd already that this has happened or will be happening. The fact is that they are continuing to carry out works at MOU-1 which will have a cost associated with it.
We have not been given any infromation that it is commercial either, and if commercial just how commercial it is.

From the following line within the RNS;
Wireline logs will require detailed interpretation to take into account borehole conditions caused by borehole enlargement where washouts have occurred in the open-hole section.

It is clear that we are currently in a state of uncertainty, markets dislike this and this could at least be part of the reason for the sell off.

Furthermore it is also possible that PG cannot release any more information as although he may have some strong indicators that it is commercial, he does not have the required evidence to release such information within an RNS until the detailed interpreation of the wireline logs.

As for MOU-2 Paul it seems thinks that drilling this will not add any value to the business.
The positive slant is that MOU-1 has proved up or will prove up the whole area that includes the area where MOU-2 was to be drilled.
The negative slant is that the whole area is completely unsuitable, for whatever reason.

Therefore MOU-4, if succesful, will either;
Prove up another area in addition to MOU-1 (where MOU-1 is also commercialy succesful)
or
It will give value to the Moroccan asset where MOU-1 is uncommercial

Just a thought, is it possible that certain politicians got into power by promoting a green agenda that at the time of promotion they knew that they could not delivery?
So to save face when in power they create a problem reaction solution scenario;
Problem, those politicians now in power cannot deliver on their green agenda, as the energy infra structure in Ireland is to immature.
What can they do? Create a situation to bring the general populace on board, who strongly support those green policies, this is the Emergency Energy Supplies which are planned.
Solution? Make use of gas until the renewable energy supply is at a mature enough level to supply the majority of or all of Irelands enrgy needs.
I am of course not saying that this is what has and is happening merely raising it as possible scenario as to why the immediate soltuion offered by PRD has not yet been taken up.