Member Info for KeithOz

@Jimmy23. You have stated today "However, it also appears now that the jurrasic carbonated (sic) in mou5 were not of reservoir quality , hence the seismic Avo analysis indicating five potential reservoir sections was also not accurate."

Could you please explain how you have come to this conclusion, which appears to be contrary to the statement made by Paul Griffiths in the Flagstaff video? Paul said that pre-drill, the seismic indicated four potential reservoirs 20-50m thick. Post-drill, he said that pre-drill expectations have largely been met, with a "subtle" change in results due to the unexpected salt.

Do you have inside information that negates Paul's statement, or are you just making stuff up?

Apparently the folk who live in green boxes are still claiming that MOU-5 is a duster. I am curious as to how they know that. It would seem that their knowledge is based only on a partial understanding of what they have googled. Perhaps they should upshift to AI and ask: "Why would a company with limited financial resources complete a dry hole with a wellhead rather than spending a tenth of the amount on plugging & abandoning?"

"plans to prepare a farmout package for 3D seismic and a well to further evaluate the structure tested by MOU-5 with focus on the helium potential identified in MOU-5 and gas potential over the structure north of the MOU-5 well location."

"The extensive MOU-1 and MOU-3 rigless testing programme has made progress in identifying the extent of the reservoir formation damage and the range of potential options required to achieve reservoir clean up to facilitate potential gas flow. We remain confident that the selected option and/or options can eventually be successful."

"Prioritising the shallow "A" Sand for rigless testing is driven by the need to demonstrate gas flow and accelerate monetisation through a simpler CNG pilot development option."

"MOU-5 demonstrated the presence of our primary target and gave us the encouragement required to develop the helium exploration play and to focus on a large core area north of MOU-5 where reservoir development is predicted.

There is no doubt that the MOU-5 structure offers considerable potential, but unlocking this potential requires a large 3D seismic programme which the Company only wishes to fund through a farmout process given our immediate portfolio priorities to monetise our gas and oil assets in Morocco and Trinidad in 2025."

"The Company continues to maintain adequate cash liquidity to fund all our work programmes over the next 12 months"

"In Ireland, if awarded, the Corrib South licence will not require funding in 2025 due to a provisional commitment reached with a farm-in partner."

"The Group has received a second unsolicited approach from a downstream company in Morocco to market and distribute gas from a successful MOU-3 rigless testing programme. "

Under Section 12 - Other Intangible Assets, is an overview of MOU-1 to 5, suggesting all are potential producers, to be determined after using nitrogen lift on MOU-3. Worth reading this rather long section, but I don't know if this is still the plan, or was the plan at December 2024 but now shelved and/or abandoned.

With reference to the numerous questions as to why we have not received expected updates in a timely manner, I believe that the final sentence is key if PRD is in negotiations with Afriquia Gaz or another company.

"WHEN DISCLOSURE CAN BE DELAYED

Delaying disclosure of inside information will only be permitted where:

* the company has “legitimate interests” to protect; * the omission is not likely to mislead the public;

* any recipient of the information before its public disclosure owes a duty of confidentiality to the company; and

* the company is able to ensure the confidentiality of the information."

"It is the company’s responsibility to determine whether it can satisfy the above requirements. As was formerly the case, delay may be permitted in relation to a matter subject to negotiation or an impending development that could be jeopardised by premature disclosure or which threatens the financial viability of the company."

https://www.treasurers.org/ACTmedia/Oct05TTLinklaters50-52.pdf

Earlier today we were given a seemingly authoritative post including technical opinion apparently slanted to undermine the potential for PRD's assets. In particular I noticed this, regarding the planned perforation and flow testing of MOU-3 shallow sands:

"However, this is not without risk as the shallow horizons were not wireline logged and hence the evidence of gas is based on the mud logging results."

That is in stark contrast to the wording of the RNS of 13th June 2023:

"Prior to setting 95/8" casing an inflow of gas into the well was experienced. A substantial drilling break from 339 to 350 metres TVD KB was identified as the source of the gas. This correlated with an 11 metre-thick, unconsolidated, good quality sand with elevated background gas readings.

Mud weight was gradually increased to 1.25 S.G., above that required to balance hydrostatic pressure. to reduce the inflow of gas into the well. This gas zone is therefore significantly overpressured (122 psi overpressured) and likely to be supported by connectivity to gas volume to provide pressure support."

It would seem to me that the presence of gas is supported by the fact that there was so much of it at such high pressure that it nearly blew the well out. Rather a stretch of the imagination to call such an event just 'mud logging results'.

@Ibiza. I am in full agreement - that is exactly the point I was making in my 09.37 post. I do not understand how someone can come up with such assertions until the full drilling results are available. Since the drill finished four weeks ago come tomorrow, we should be expecting such results very soon.

@Ibiza. What are the "glaring omissions"? Paul Griffiths said this about MOU-5 in the Flagstaff video at 0m 40s : "and therefore made a SUBTLE DIFFERENCE to where we were on structure"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHAoqrDkT9k&ab_channel=CoreFinance

I can't see a reverse takeover being practicable. Even supposing SEL1/11 was reinstated, LOGP only held 20%, the other 80% being held by Barryroe Offshore (formerly Providence), which has been wound up. While Dr Boldy is a director of both PRD & LOGP, it would be very messy trying to work out who has what rights to the licence, you can't just turn the clock back and reallocate shares to former holders, and funds to former creditors, of Barryroe Offshore as of September 2023.

"On 8 November 2023 the interest of the shareholders in the total issued share capital of the Company

will be eliminated. The shareholders shall receive no distribution on account of their shares and the

existing shares and all and any rights attaching or relating thereto will be cancelled. Any rights and / or

entitlements of the shareholders as members of the Company pursuant to the articles of association of

the Company or any other document, or otherwise, shall cease as of 8 November 2023." (High Court ruling).

Paul has in the past mentioned listing PRD's Irish assets on the Dublin exchange. If this happened, and if the licence was made available again, then perhaps PRD could apply for SEL 1/11 with or without an arrangement with Lansdowne. However, Lansdowne are still trying to sue the Irish government, so that would need to be dropped in exchange for getting their 20% back. Then it still gets messy trying to work out the value provided by whatever entity (or entities) would now have rights to SEL 1/11, relative to the value of the current Irish assets in PRD.

Good luck with that.

Mostly a rehash of the interview, but interesting bit is the last two paragraphs:

"the Guercif biogenic gas presents certain technical challenges. Its shallow depth and the mineralogical nature of the reservoirs complicate its exploitation using conventional methods. Predator is currently testing solutions to increase pumping pressure and ensure a sustained gas flow. If these tests are successful, the company could sell a stake in this project to an interested local player.

In this context, Predator Oil & Gas is in discussions with Afriquia Gaz for the commercialization of its biogenic gas and helium. Griffiths confirmed that negotiations are underway, although differences exist regarding the quantity of gas to be sold. Afriquia Gaz would like to acquire the entire gas and helium content of the Guercif permit, while Predator prefers to sell only the compressed natural gas production from the MOU-3 well."

@affc21: Ramadan does not have much effect on government offices or business in general in Morocco, unlike many Islamic countries. Shops open later and close earlier. Driving is noticeably worse, and some people can be more easily aggravated (hypoglycaemia?) - this is particularly so when the holy month coincides with summer high temperatures.

Moroccan government is only linked to religion in a token manner - for example, government offices are open on Fridays throughout the year, despite Friday being their equivalent to a western Sunday.

For our readers in Morocco: Eid Mubarak Said.

Just to annoy certain folks here, I have a new conspiracy theory. The new low was reached this morning. Also this morning was the CEG shareholder vote to approve the sale of T&T assets to PRD. On finalisation, i.e. today, PRD has to pay CEG $250K in cash & $500K in PRD shares. Now, who would want the share price to be really low in order to get as many shares possible? Answers on a postcard to Eytan Uliel.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/PRD/acquisition-challenger-energys-trinidad-and-tobago/16903305

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CEG/notice-of-egm-p8giqvblgv5iczt.html

@Rob: An EGM request requires a minimum of 5% of shareholders, do you have this level of support? Also, it is not possible to propose a new board member without their express permission. Lonny did not answer my question if he was interested, I assured him there would be plenty of support if he was. Have you spoken with him to confirm that he is willing & able to take on this role?

Companies Act 2006

I don't think an EGM is going to help anything at this stage. What is needed is transparency regarding the results and timelines for testing ALL MOU wells, (including the if nots then why nots!) and for Jacobin-1 & Snowcap-1 workovers. There is an urgent requirement to develop these sources of quick cashflow. Shareholders have been left in the dark, given initial highly positive statements, then nothing has happened, nor explanations been given,

This must change, and we must be presented with a detailed, timed & costed plan as soon as is practicable.

If it doesn't, Paul should be left in no doubt of the next step:

Members' power to require directors to call general meetings (sec303 - sec304)

The directors must call a general meeting if so requested by the holders of 5% of the voting shares (or 5% of the voting rights if there are no shares).

The request for the meeting must state the general nature of the business to be dealt with and may include the text of a resolution to be moved at the meeting (provided the resolution would not be ineffective (e.g. under the Act or because contrary to the company's articles, etc., and provided it is not defamatory, frivolous or vexatious).

If the request is properly made, the directors must within 21 days call the meeting for a date not more than 28 days after the date of the notice calling the meeting. If the request included a proposed resolution, that must be included in the notice, which will then be part of the business that can be conducted at the meeting. (If it is a special resolution, the notice of the meeting must say so, in accordance with sec283, above.)

@Haway - They have presumably compared drill cuttings from the MOU-4 carbonate horizon with those from MOU-5 and found they are of different age (maybe dated by microfossils?). This suggests that MOU-4 missed the anticipated strata because it had thinned before reaching the drill site, and actually hit the next sequence down in the structure. While this suggests a slightly different areal extent of the targeted Domerian carbonates found as expected in MOU-5, it also suggests that carbonates are present beneath the Domerian, and that they have good reservoir properties, as shown by the MOU-4 data previously revealed. These strata may also have gas charge.

I can only speculate without seeing logs from both wells, but it may be there are additional potential reservoirs (Domerian carbonates plus the underlying sands found in MOU-5, and older carbonates in MOU-4). However, this potential positive may be countered by the overall structure being flatter and thinner than expected, due to the unexpected salt layer interfering with the seismic propagation. It would be nice to get some hard data, rather than just 'achieved pre-drill targets'.

He makes some good sensible points without any rants against MMs, but I would have liked to hear a lot more details about Morocco, particularly with respect to timing.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHAoqrDkT9k&ab_channel=CoreFinance

@JH - unlike some on here, I do not just make stuff up. May I refer you to pp 14 & 15 of the Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc

Annual Report for the year ended 31 December 2023 :

"Related party transactions comprised Executive Directors’ loans advanced through the sale by Novum Securities Limited of 22,189,580 existing shares at £0.055 to raise £1,230,427; 18,000,000 existing shares at £0.105 to raise £1,890,000; and 15,710,972 and 3,401,077 exercised share options at £0.08 and £0.10 respectively and sold at £0.057, resulting in a loan of £507,999 from the Executive Directors to the Company.

45,189,580 new ordinary shares were issued to Paul Griffiths, Executive Director, under his Stock Lending Agreement with the Company to satisfy in full his outstanding director’s loan to the Company. The remaining directors’ loans of £507,999 were capitalised and linked to a repayment in full upon the Company flowing a minimum of 1 million cubic feet/day from the rigless testing programme to be executed in the Guercif Licence or from the flow of a minimum of 100 bopd from the well workovers planned for the Cory Moruga Exploration and Production Licence. "

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2024.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2024/09/POGH-2023-Annual-Report-RNS-FINAL-09.04.2024-not-executed.pdf

Lonny's share of this is the £183K, which is the amount he is disputing in his X rant.

@Donal, with respect, this is not a matter of geology, but one of politics. I am not going to generate conspiracy theories, simply state some facts.

* Morocco has a huge requirement for gas, most currently imported, which is negatively impacting the balance of payments.

* Gas is not only vital for power generation, but is also an integral part of the chemical process for producing fertiliser and cement.

* Not only are fertiliser & cement production major exporting industries, but two additional major industries rely upon them - agriculture & construction. Over half of Morocco's GDP is ultimately reliant upon natural gas.

* Morocco is a beacon of progressiveness in the Arab world & Africa BUT the King is very much in hands-on control, and directly appoints the Prime Minister.

* The King, his family & close advisers have huge investments in agriculture, construction, cement and fertilisers, and now through SOU/Managem, in natural gas.

* The Prime Minister owns Afriquia Gaz, that is working with PRD on the CNG project.

* There have been several past announcements of major hydrocarbon finds in Morocco, which were later found to be non-commercial or even fraudulent - google 'Talsint affair'.

* PRD are guests in Morocco, the 25% held by the state has clear contractual privileges.

* The folks who run Morocco have very good reasons to get all their ducks in a row before we little folks are told what is going on.

* I recommend reading the posts here by Rosso. He lives in Morocco and has a good understanding of how the country functions.

After a night's sleep, I have re-read everything and come to a conclusion that many will not agree with.

1. Lonny (& Paul) made loans to the Company with repayment conditional upon specific quantities of gas flow at Guercif & oil flow in Trinidad.

2. Lonny believes that since he was sacked, the loan is repayable immediately, PRD do not agree. 3. His 6-month confidentiality requirement on leaving has now expired.

4. He believes (for whatever reasons - ONHYM/commercial/other) that proof of gas at Guercif has been delayed deliberately. This may relate to equipment supposedly not being available, licences not being issued, etc.

5. He is demanding that Paul release the information on resources and commence flow tests. He will get his loan repaid and shareholders will be happy with the information release.

6. Unless that happens, he will release correspondence (with Paul? with ONHYM? with service providers / consultants?) demonstrating that the delays to Guercif testing, and possibly approvals in Trinidad, have been deliberately delayed.

Some will doubtless claim that this is because the results are negative, I think there is plenty of evidence that strongly suggests that results will be very positive. Either Paul wants to release all the news at one go, possibly to minimise a hostile takeover attempt, or else ONHYM and the powers that be above them require absolute certainty first.