Member Info for KeithOz

Obviously someone doesn't see this as neutral, share price up 10% on increased volume, and into a periodic auction call. Let's see what happens by tomorrow :-)

Neither a poor outcome, nor extremely encouraging. They need to have a very detailed look at the drill core. Chromite is a Iron/Chrome mineral. Sometimes Nickel gets substituted for some of the Iron in both chromites and olivines. The ratios of Ni and Fe in both these minerals can give some indicators of where we are in relation to a feeder zone, but clearly we will not know this for some time. Also, as has been noted a couple of posts ago, this is Proterozoic age rock, not Karoo. There is an enormous gap in time between the two, and it is not at all clear if a Proterozoic age intrusion feeder is in the same place as a Karoo age feeder - this is what they are trying to determine.
The main takeaway is that they have successfully got to where they want to be, and the data will add to their overall understanding of the KSZ structure and composition. We also know that the start of B is still a couple of weeks away, and that the first B hole is similar in intent to this one reported today. It is the 2nd B hole that is targeting the 8200S anomaly.

Nothing reported as being seen in the Karoo gabbros, which is what the TDEM targets are associated with. Beneath the Karoo gabbros are sedimentary rocks of Karoo age, then underlain by the Proterozoic intrusive rocks - they have found them not be gabbro, but a very coarse grain intrusive body composed of pyroxenite. Because of the depth, any chromite or chalcopyrite is unlikely to be of economic significance.
It was always going to be a long shot at finding a massive sulphide deposit beyond TDEM range at the base of the keel, or of intersecting TDEM target A2 at a meaningfully mineralised point, as I said a couple of days ago. I'm not sure what they are going to make of this, whether or not it is a feeder zone, and if it is, of what significance.

He must have heard you, here it is:
https://www.investegate.co.uk/kavango-resources--kav-/rns/ksz-drilling-update/202109141024337174L/

Paul also stated in the presentation that the scoping study RNS wasn't intended for investors - the intention was clearly to do the study on just the gas quantity that a Moroccan industrial user would need. My assumption is that PRD intends to do an offtake agreement with production funding as part of the deal. The two power stations would be obvious partners, they are currently reliant on Algerian gas, over which hangs a political question mark. There are also significant industrial users or potential users within a short distance of Guercif.
I think funding for production as per the scoping study will be straightforward once the size of the available resource has been confirmed. Funding of MOU-4 & 5 seems more problematic to me, but Paul seems confident, and certainly knows more than me on this front.

Let me clarify what I meant :-) In the Proactive presentation, Ben talks through this with two slides, either side of 6m.45s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8k8XoNmp8U&ab_channel=Proactive
The first slide shows the TDEM conductor in a view that has been used previously. Hole A2-1 went directly through the middle of the red bit, which indicates the highest conductivity readings. Progressively lower figures are represented by yellows, then greens. Hole A2-2 is being drilled through the western edge of the conductor, going through the thinner area shown in green. Since this an area of much lower conductivity than was drilled by A2-1, I don't expect much in the way of massive sulphides from the depths indicated as being the conductor. The second slide shows the conductor from a different view, and clearly shows the gap between the two gabbroic systems, and Ben explains this is an unknown, due to the penetration limitations of TDEM. The main objective of this borehole is to find out what lies in this potential feeder zone - it may be a sulphide rich zone, it may be metal-depleted gabbro.
This is why I said "I would only expect visible massive sulphides in this core if the anomaly extends deeper than TDEM is able to penetrate and image." i.e. towards the bottom of the hole, not the upper half. Sorry for any confusion.
I also note that target B is being drilled with the "geological" hole first to investigate the keel & potential feeder zone, then the second hole shallower hole through the high-conductivity target, which appears to be on the wall of the keel, rather than at the bottom.

Glib, pardon my ignorance of chart-based forecasting, but re. your first paragraph - why should a trend line initiated before a significant event continue after that event? Seems more logical that if there has been a fundamental change that previous data should be ignored. Makes even less sense when there is the possibility of further significant events to come, where we don't yet know either the timing or favourable/unfavourable-ness. Seems more like the age-old human desire to see patterns and meaning even where there isn't any, such as gave rise to the astrological constellations.

Re. drilling of MOU-4 & 5 back to back (as opposed to testing back to back). Looking at slides 6 & 7 in the latest presentation, there appears to be a significant fault between the proposed locations of 4 & 5, although it is not altogether clear if this extends through the target Hoot Sand formation. It appears to run N-S, splitting the prospect into two roughly equal parts. It is not at all unusual for turbidite fans to become compartmentalised by faulting, so maybe the idea is to check whether the entire fan is equally charged. The whole Guercif Basin has been subject to major structural movement cased by by the Rif front, it appears that many structural closures are fault-defined.

Good morning , GRH. Re. dual / triple testing. Although I am a geologist, I am NOT an O & G specialist. My take is that dual well testing works best when the bores are relatively close together - within 1km or so. Since the objective is primarily to get an idea of reservoir homogeneity and permeability, it is understandable that the further apart are the bores, the more muted the response to pressure transient / pulse test, etc. Although we do not yet know the precise location of MOU-4 & 5, it is possible that they may be close enough together to perform a useful interactive test. MOU-1 is likely too far away from the other two to obtain useful data - although anyone with expert knowledge, particularly of down-dip dual testing, please jump in.
My guess is that the main reasons for doing all three well tests together is:
1. - it's cheaper - the crew only has to be brought into the country (and possibly through quarantine!) once, and all the equipment is hired for one longer period rather than 2 or 3 periods, and
2. - as you rightly say, think of the impact of announcing 3 lots of tests together. An integrated definitive set of results such as that would not leave any room for doubt, no matter how badly worded the RNS, and would be a deal-clinching data package to present to a potential acquirer or farminee.
Kind regards, and thanks for all the incredibly useful information you have provided to date - Keith

Should just point out that A2-2 currently being drilled was not targeting the A2 anomaly detected by TDEM. This is primarily a hole for petrographic interpretation. I would only expect visible massive sulphides in this core if the anomaly extends deeper than TDEM is able to penetrate and image. Because of the time it is taking, I assume they are going all the way to the Karoo/Proterozoic gabbro contact, believed to be at -800m.

I also picked up on Paul's statement about doing work to the West, and connection to the Rharb Basin, but am confused - isn't this licensed 100% to Conoco-Phillips?

Sorry pea fancier - try this:

https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20210909/pdf/4509xb1j4hdf1c.pdf

All you do for PRD & HE1 is post bullsh*t deramping nonsense. You talk about the companies fooling a whole new bunch of investors, yet it is you who attempt (poorly) the fooling. Filtered.

I think people are too busy smiling or setting up buy orders to post. Interesting appendices with full MOU-1 logs - just look at that mud weight!

Yes, a sale by a hedge fund owner. Interesting they only gave his current holding, not the details of the TR-1 which would also have shown his previous holding.

To me doesn't say much new, apart from a revised cost of seismic & drilling for next year, and a very small value assigned to potential LBF shallow traps. Lots of conditionality phrasing around the shallow trap hypothesis, which incidentally I don't think holds much value other than potentially demonstrating a 'discovery'.
With a phase 2 campaign cost of $10 - 17M, I suspect cash resources of $14M will be stretched, since there are ongoing working capital requirements on top. Farm out in the offing?
Two surprises - upcoming seismic is stated to be 2D, not 3D as I was expecting, and cos for Tai is still shown as only 15%, despite having found He, working trap, and potential reservoirs.

In the recent past, several members have asked how easy it would be to spot massive sulphides in drill core. Here is release today by an ASX-listed Ni company in which I have an interest:

https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/CommSec/commsec-node-api/1.0/event/document/1410-02419435-6C2CNFFMPGE1SA2CUFPOK2S2L4/pdf?access_token=0007jWOO2S7HatEHsB31VghQviIG

The first photo shows 13 x 1m lengths of core - I'm sure you can see that you don't need to be a geologist to work out which represents the 5.6m of massive Ni sulphides (NB - this is just a vein, not an orebody of the kind we are after)

The 'discovery" Empire reported was actually the FOG results. they are trying to get a lift on our coat tails.

I will name & shame JohnHenry & Chesh, who claim that there is still an overhang from the placing at 5p, and that the sp is still going lower. I posted last week that I had great difficulty filling a 6-figure buy order, with a limit at 5.2p (the published offer price), to be told by JH that there was plenty of stock available. Yesterday I put in another 6-figure buy order, again with a limit at the published offer price. Nothing all day, finally got filled this morning. Their posts yesterday: Chesh- "4p incoming". JH - "Placees still dumping the final dregs" So you two are filtered.
At last I can say what GRH has been saying at the end of his posts - "I hold more shares now than at any time" Of course. he has magnitudes more than me :-)

re the CHAR appraisal - the original Anchois well had gas shows less impressive than MOU-1, yet they are going ahead with an expensive appraisal/production drill in a field with less gas potential than Guercif, and offshore, which will be much more expensive to develop. When will the market realise that they have misunderstood the PRD RNSs?