Member Info for LordWM

Coinmarketcap is a crypto site I believe, nothing to do with Helium.

HNT is the native cryptocurrency and protocol token of the Helium Network.

Awesome, let's get indexed up!

Just to add, in my mind there are two main risks at present:

- Reserves / size of field - we have a confirmed reserves number of 355mcf (calculated by Aeon), but Bo is confident there's between 3-4bcf in the Rudyard field, is this actually there? (Even if there isn't they still have $115.2m over 12.5-year life of field).

- Execution risk - can they build the plant, recover the Helium and sell it.

I'm confident on both of these points.

To look at this another way, assuming they have 5 wells by the end of the year:

Wells - 5 = $20,000,000 Pre-tax earnings

Early cash will be used to fund further wells to expand production.

Each well costs approx $1.3m = $4m/yr additional pretax revenue (Slide 9 - chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://wp-helix-2024.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2025/04/Helix-Exploration-Investor-Deck-April-25-FINAL.pdf)

Let's assume they're at a static 5 wells by end of 2025, assume half ($10m) is used to fund expansion of production/further wells and possibly liquefaction plant, and half ($10m) is paid as a dividend (later in 2026). Obviously 5 wells won't be a static number because the wells/revenue will increase significantly with each addition.

But assume they pay a $10m dividend in 2026:

USD - $10,000,000.00

$ to £ - 1.33 = £7,518,797

Dividend per share = £0.0479

Yield at current SP (£0.147) = 32.6% yield

So is a sustainable and growing dividend yield of 32.6% priced into the current share price?

This dividend could easily double in 2027.

I bought in again during the investor call so have accidently been riding the waves from more recent events.

I'm still way down overall, having sold out completely after ST Micro car crash.

Fingers crossed I claw back some of my losses.

GLA, we need with everything we've been through with Nanoco over the years!

I may be wrong, this is the part I don't understand. I thought the 20% free carry rewards Atome for the work and risk so far, but they also intend to fund the build using debt, in return for a larger stake. I assumed they can use this because equity investors are also part-funding the project (ie so not entirely debt funded), which is why bringing all of the debt and equity partners together is so complex.

Again, may be wrong on this.

Wouldn't it be the case that equity investors contribute to teh funding of the build by putting money in, in return for equity at the asset level (Villeta), but the debt component is raised by Atome and secured against the assets/business plan? The debt being used to give Atome an additional stake, above the 20% free carry for Atome's IP, work, investment made to date?

This is something I didn't fully understand.

Does the 20% free carry mean the share that Atome get for the work so far, but they'll also use debt finance for an additional % stake (which they'll obviously have to repay over a fairly long period), alongside the other equity club investors (obs investing at the project level)?

So Atome will own more than 20% of Villeta, but anything over 20% will be funded by debt (20% being the free carry)

Have I got that right?

Helix have proven reserves of:

Reserves of 355 million cubic feet of recoverable helium with Net Revenue $115 – $220 million over 12 year life of field (Home page https://www.helixexploration.com/ and also stated on 23rd Jan RNS).

Bo continually signals that there's much more in the ground, up to 3-4bcf at Rudyard alone. An updated Reserves statement will help.

By my calcs Helix is currently valued at just over 1.5 production wells:

Wells 1.5 = Earnings $6,000,000

$ to £ 1.33 = £4,511,278

PPS £0.029

Multiple 5x = £0.14

We now have 2 drilled with one more about to be re-perforated:

Wells 3 = Earnings $12,000,000

$ to £ 1.33 = £9,022,556

PPS £0.057

Multiple 5x = £0.29

Is it likely the total Rudyard field is actually 3-4bcf of Helium?

Here are some numbers:

Wells 5 = Earnings $20,000,000

$ to £ 1.33 = £15,037,594

PPS = £0.096

Multiple 5x = £0.48

Wells 10 = Earnings $40,000,000

$ to £ 1.33 = £30,075,188

PPS £0.192

Multiple 5x = £0.96

Wells 15 = $60,000,000 Earnings

$ to £ 1.33 = £45,112,782

PPS £0.287

Multiple 5x = £1.44

Wells 20 = $80,000,000 Earnings

$ to £ 1.33 = £60,150,376

PPS £0.383

Multiple 5x = £1.92

This is assuming a flat helium price of $500/Mcf (could well be way more than this, not likely to be less)

This doesn't include:

- Oil discovery at Rudyard

- Potential Hydrogen at Rudyard Flathead - to be tested later

- Anything at Ingomar (Helium and Hydrogen) - to be tested from July Aug

DYOR

Good point Chromo, and head office costs are very low. Very low headcount, all of the expense is at the project level soon.

Yes I mean the price is low.

Atome is definitely flirting with top up territory.

Good to this this recovering. We're expecting good production figures and progress on mine development this year.

Long may the rise continue.

I think it will be June myself. I believe one of the finance providers (someone shared a link on this board a few weeks back) had a consultation period ending end of May.

I believe the offtake is agreed and they have a heads of terms, but the formal agreement will be signed when finance is in place.

I'm no expert here, but my feeling is right at the end of H1 / end of June.

Note that the EPC with Casale has been signed and 'detailed engineering has already commenced' - https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/atome/news/rns/story/xz4357w

So I think it's fair to say that this is definitely happening/FID is a formality.

Investment will be at the project level so no group dilution, and Atome will try to keep as much of the first project themselves.

They signalled they're 100% focussed on Villeta, so unlikely to be news re pipeline projects.

I'm guessing it will be everything together, completed FID, signed offtake and groundworks commencing.

I hope we can say that there's now little doubt that this will happen, having come so far.

The big question is..... how will teh SP react when everything is signed and construction underway?

If Dimitry does complete a sale transaction it will be for a significant premium to todays price/market cap.

If he doesn't, his GTM strategy appears to be paying off with this new Asian customer (reducing cash burn), potential for it to lead to incorporation of the tech into commercial applications, ongoing discussions with further potential new customers and the LG litigation.

Although never certain, it's more likely that LG will settle soomer than Samsung did IF Nanoco can proove that they have the funding to see litigation through (and have a strong case obviously which I suspect we can take as a given). Nanoco's patents are now confirmed and LG will be looking at the cost of litigation vs settling (or acquiring Nanoco).

I have a feeling this could work out very well at some point.

With the (successful) Darvin#1 well, the timeline was:

- RNS saying commenced drilling - 30th Oct

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/helix_exploration/news/rns/story/rg14kvr

- RNS confirming completion of drilling - 13th Nov (14 days later)

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/helix_exploration/news/rns/story/rmez69w

- RNS announcing commercial discovery after testing - 12th Dec (29 days later)

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/helix_exploration/news/rns/story/rg1g13r

We're now on day 18 at Linda, any day we could have an RNS confirming:

- Completion of drilling

- Total depth reached

- What the gas horizons are

- What Helium and Hydrogen shows were recorded

- Possibly an early opinion of what they've found.

Here's another strong signal that FID is close. This should move significantly at FID and beyond to first revenue.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/omussat_paraguay-sustainability-impact-activity-7322594025176272896-PiSr?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAAABzGrIBjQ2QYg6J0Liv23J8LdttO1_CLc8

Lovely RNS. Exceed revenue guidance = reduced cach burn = even longer runway.

Also, being one of the laregst TV manufacturers globally, Nanoco will have been attempting to engage with them for years, highlighting their QDs and patented fabrication methods.

So if this ever did get into legal action around damages, Nanoco will argue that "willfull infringement" occurred, as LG will have been well aware of Nanoco's patents for years. Nanoco will have spelled this out, and will have evidence of this.

It will be on LG to proove that they haven't infringed Nanoco's patents (unlikely), and that they weren't aware of them (also unlikely).

It could be a long road to any joy with this, but possibly not.