Member Info for KeithOz

I'll happily contribute towards the cost of a plastic rabbit for TW. A very large one. It's what he deserves.

@Matt - your summary is correct, and negates the view stated here previously that having a mud engineer on site (which they had) would have prevented these problems. This demonstrates that no matter the extent of the above-ground work, you do not know the actual subsurface until you drill. Data obtained from drilling is the gold standard, and at only $3-4M a pop is very good value compared to something like 3D seismic for initial exploration, which will still only give you an idea of what could be there. I do however agree that 3D will prove to be of value in optimising appraisal drill sites - once you are sure that gas is likely to be there.

@JH. You suggest that Peel were heavily involved in yesterday's sales to retail, and it certainly appears to be so. Perhaps they had 25M, which has now been moved. Today the bulk selling appears to have dried up, so maybe the other 25M actually is with what you and I would call a strategic investor? And Peel's allocation was to enable private investors to buy in at close to the placing price, thus acting as an open offer that didn't require the expense and hassle of a Prospectus?

There are pages of opinions here that the CEO of Predator has got everything badly wrong, interestingly from folks who demonstrate that they do not possess the critical thinking necessary to hold such a position, know nothing about oil & gas, nor how to run a business.

* "It's a waste of money drilling MOU-6". Paul's objective is to use the high-pressure shallow sands as a quick & cheap way to start the CNG operation, presumably the ability to use this reservoir as a standalone unit has been agreed with ONHYM. For such an operation, two producing wells are needed: MOU-3 & MOU-6.

* "MOU-3 shallow sands should have been tested & flowed by now if they are so sure that usable gas is there." If you did that first, how would you then be able to flow test the lower-level reservoirs, without dropping yourself into a whole world of very expensive trouble?

* "MOU-4 should have been tested to de-risk MOU-5". The Jurassic carbonate at the bottom of MOU-4 displayed measurable gas concentrations & porosity: RNS 13th July 2023 "2 metres of likely gas reservoir with average porosity 19.9% (maximum 20.6%) and average gas saturation 56% (maximum 73%)." I agree that perforating and flow testing this interval, if successful, would move MOU-5 up to 100% gcos. But what if gas didn't flow? What would you do, O mighty armchair CEO? Say let's forget about MOU-5? Or say that all this demonstrates is that the 289m vertical structure is not filled to spill, so we should go ahead and drill anyway? If you had decided on cost and time grounds not to test MOU-4 until MOU-3 was proven, just perforating and flow testing the bottom 2m would be a very expensive exercise, with only a potential feel-good benefit. Gas or no gas in that section, you would still drill MOU-5 to evaluate the remaining 287 vertical metres of a 189 km² structure.

* Time delays. I am as hacked off as anybody that everything is taking longer than hoped for. Some people here claim to live in a perfect world where every project is completed on time and within budget, and failure to do so would result in job loss. 1, I don't believe them, 2, they have never worked in exploration with its inherent unknowns, 3, they have never worked in a country such as Morocco or Trinidad. Some of you know that I ran a JV with a Gazprom subsidiary in the early 00's. Despite having the clout of the country's largest company behind us, nothing ever happened within the timeframes planned. Whether it was obtaining licences, customs/import approvals, planning approvals (sometimes with contrary requirements), or even simple decisions - multiple levels of people from minions to ministers had to be negotiated with and if necessary, paid off. I am assured this is pretty much the situation in Trinidad, I won't comment on Morocco in case I offend anyone there I have worked with previously.

Summary of rant: If you don't understand the circumstances and can't do it better yourselves, don't criticise

All this imho.

* I don't like discounted placings through bucket shops. But is this dilutive or accretive? Clearly the latter if these funds and those from the November 4th raise are used as stated.

* CNG. It has previously discussed here that at least two producer wells would be necessary to ensure continuity of supply. MOU-3 shallow sands perforation and completion as a producer were allowed for in the November 4th raise. The gas is obviously there at high pressure. MOU-6 will now be the necessary second well, enabling the parcelling up of a CNG unit for Afriquia Gaz.

* MOU-5. Hopefully successful, of course there is a chance it may not be. If not successful, there is enough money to bring CNG into production. If it is successful, expect a further raise - but at a much higher share price - to appraise the Jurassic carbonates to the optimal level for the most profitable divestment.

* MOU-Fan wells. MOU-3 will be swabbed shortly, John Tingas (who knows more about reservoir engineering than everyone else on this board put together) says it will flow. If it does, expect a raise (separate or together with post-MOU-5) which will be used to get MOU-1, 2 & 4 flowing. This is then another separate business to sell.

* Trinidad. The idea appears to be to accelerate production - Snowcap-1 and Jacobin-1 were already funded and en train. The November raise was to start up and buy the seven existing Bonasse wells and drill two more. Now we have funding for Snowcap-3 - Cory Moruga has potentially 20 million Bbl, good idea to accelerate this.

Yesterday I was accused of being a conspiracy theorist for pointing out the acceleration of negative posting. It is now evident that some of those negative posters had inside information.

Nigel: well spotted when you said "was anyone else aware of the hostility re Sound Energy? Odd to say the least."

Perhaps not odd at all. Who originally discovered the Tendrara prospects? What has recently happened to Sound Energy? Which company was involved? Who is the ultimate owner of that company?

Earlier today I said "They may also be working in a coordinated manner for a third party - this may be another O & G company, it may be a Moroccan entity that sees potentially very big money here".

It may be both, read between the lines.

btw, yes I am in Australia and just off to bed. No, I am not connected with PRD in any way other than as a shareholder. No, I am not 'acutely over-extended' - the last placing has temporarily delayed my target of a 1% holding.

As the Troll Density Forward Indicator cranks up ahead of the MOU-5 drill, some here are wondering why such considerable time & effort is being spent trying to talk down the company and its management. These people may just have an unpleasant personality and like to stir up dissent while remaining anonymous. They may be running a short position, or may be looking for a lower entry point. They may also be working in a coordinated manner for a third party - this may be another O & G company, it may be a Moroccan entity that sees potentially very big money here. In case you think the latter option is a conspiracy theory, here's a true story.

In the 90's, the sweetener aspartame was launched, and it started making big inroads into the consumer and industrial sugar/sweeteners markets. A couple of months later, articles started appearing in the popular press and women's magazines, claiming all sorts of dangers of this product. This included it being carcinogenic and the cause of Gulf War Syndrome and autism. These articles were total nonsense, and all written by 'medical experts' who upon investigation did not exist in the real world. I knew personally the marketing manager for this product, he is recently deceased. His company launched an investigation that discovered that all these articles were being produced by a 'financial public relations' company, employed by a well-known British sugar corporation.

This sort of thing still happens - a contact with whom I was discussing the PRD troll phenomenon told me of just such a London-based 'financial PR' company who allegedly employs people specifically to go on bulletin boards such as this (and Telegram) on behalf of their client companies. Of course I can't remember the exact details of this outfit, but possibly this company is named after someone who was married to Cepheus and was the mother of Andromeda.

Would anyone listen to investment advice from someone who does not know what 100% decline means?

European gas price just hit another high for the year. This is normally seasonal - I cannot recall when it has ever just kept rising all year.

https://x.com/KQuick20704342/status/1886225385815498764

Drones are illegal in Morocco, but you can declare on entry, leave at customs and pick up again on departure. Otherwise, it will be confiscated on exit and you will be fined. It is almost certain to be detected at all airports on entry and exit. Of course I'm not suggesting you try this, but if you enter by way of Nador Port from Melilla, there is no x-ray equipment and if you have a dismantled drone mixed up with other electrical equipment, no one is likely to notice.

This from Europa today. They have not found a partner, while PRD has, I suspect because although Inishkea West has a larger resource, it is geologically distinct from Corrib; is further away from Corrib than is Corrib South; has questions over the seal on one side of the structure; and is in much deeper water.

Interesting to note their estimate of NPV though - Corrib South would be cheaper per BCF to develop due to shallower water and proximity to Corrib infrastructure.

"Europa has a 100% interest in licence FEL 4-19, which contains the 1.5 TCF Pmean[2] Inishkea West gas prospect. The Company continues to look for a partner to drill an exploration well on the prospect, where Europa believes that a successful discovery has the potential to supply at least two thirds of Ireland's gas demand in 2030. The asset is adjacent to the producing Corrib gas field, which is one of the lowest carbon-intensity gases in Europe, much lower than UK imported gas. With compelling economics, which Europa believes will result in a post-tax NPV10 of US$2.0 billion[3], and a carbon emission intensity of 2.8 kilograms per boe, compared to 36 kilograms per boe for UK imported gas during 2022[4], the prospect provides a farminee with a very attractive risk reward proposition. The newly elected Irish government appears to be concerned about security of energy supply and as such it is hoped that they will be supportive of the domestic upstream sector. "

"[2] estimates based on internal technical assessments.

[3] assumes first gas in 2029 and gas price 75p/therm flat.

[4] Independent report as per RNS of 22 April 22."

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/EOG/operations-update/16878132

Https://x.com/KQuick20704342/status/1884730000454439321

...that finds this a little strange? A frequent poster here asks a whole string of questions that many would consider rude, insulting, or designed to undermine the company and its management. They then watch only part of the presentation, not including the answers to their questions. They post numerous criticisms of the company following the presentation, despite not having heard the answers to their questions. They then ask others here what the answers to their questions were. Maybe some issues of credibility?

If you want to view the Q & A, you can do so on the IMC website - only if you are registered with them.

Go to My Dashboard

Scroll down to Predator Corporate Update 24 Jan 2025 and click

Video comes up, on left just above the video are two tabs video (in play) and Q & A

Click on Q & A. The questions are in text form, the answers are audio clips.

Problem solved.

I did say that this is 536MB, so not emailable. I tried to transcribe it with several different kinds of software (I usually use oTranscribe), but none of the free ones would cope with that size of file. Afraid I have neither the time nor the patience to do it manually. If someone has a simple way of doing this, I'm happy to help out.

I do have a copy of the complete presentation including the Q & A, which I thought to be the most informative part. It is 536MB, so any ideas of how to make it available without infringing copyright?

@acot(yy)³: I have had a few tries, using an NPV model of projected cash flows. and also by comparison with similar deals, and previously put a couple on here for comment. The problem is that there are too many unknown variables. Vermilion is in the best position to estimate both chance of success and likely recoverable volume, since Corrib South is geologically an extension of the main Corrib field, which of course they know in minute detail. They would also be prepared to pay more than other acquirers, since it is enhanced incremental profit with relatively low capital outlay.

I know that's not what you want to hear, but with a possible range of 2.35p to £1.00 per share, I am reluctant to suggest a figure.

Of course those prices are per mcf. Or millions per BCF

Some things to think about when considering a value for Corrib South.

* I posted here last week that European gas prices are normally seasonal, but uniquely they have risen steadily throughout the last 12 months.

* Current natural gas wholesale prices per BCF.

Average for EU - EUR 16.5 / USD 17.3 / GBP 13.9

Ireland - EUR 19.3 / USD 20.3 / GBP 16.2

Three articles in today's FT:

"LNG tankers change course to Europe as gas storage levels drop. Traders divert ships from Asia and Colombia to take advantage of rising regional prices"

"Wall Street will stymie Trump’s US oil [and gas] surge plan, say shale bosses. Output set to rise more slowly under new president than during Joe Biden’s term".

"A shale boom is not Trump’s gift to give. What inhibits the flow of oil [and of course gas] is not red tape but low prices that fail to cover costs and pay dividends"

Gas for Europe (and especially Ireland) is not going to get cheaper anytime soon. Vermilion knows this, and getting their hands on Corrib South (with exploration success, of course) will provide them with at least a further ten years return from their investment in the existing Corrib infrastructure. Costs are for drilling and a fairly short connection pipe, vastly less than Energean would have needed to invest if they found anything other than water at Anchois.

Little surprise that Paul told us in the presentation that the Corrib South agreement becomes live the day the Successor Authorisation is issued.

For those unable to access X, GRH references an article from independent.ie dated 30 August 2022:

www.independent.ie/irish-news/energy-crisis-corrib-gas-field-operator-tells-taoiseach-micheal-martin-they-can-extract-fuel-for-another-decade/41945944.html

"In a statement the company confirmed: “On July 26 An Taoiseach (Micheál Martin) met with a delegation from Vermilion Energy to discuss the current gas supply to Ireland and the importance of the Corrib gas infrastructure to Ireland’s security of supply. The meeting was attended by the company’s president, Dr Dion Hatcher, Vice President Darcy Kerwin and Managing Director in Ireland Ryan Carthy. Mr Martin was accompanied by two officials.

It is understood the executives also put forward a case that further exploration in the Corrib region using two existing licences could extend the field for another 20 or even 30 years. The Government has banned licences for new gas exploration, but existing ones can still be activated."

Now Micheál Martin is back firmly in the driving seat, with a newly appointed non-Green Minister for Energy, perhaps the simple solution to help solve the increasingly urgent energy independence issue can be addressed.