Member Info for Mitriti

NPV was never in the share price because AIM never prices theoretical value… but NPV absolutely does matter when you’re valuing an 8.5% WI for a settlement. The share price doesn’t decide that , the PSC economics do.

The problem with that logic Medjed is that a tag-along on Conrad’s terms is only one optional outcome, not the baseline. And if EME ever did accept 2.125% free carry, the value wouldn’t be calculated by “£1.6m per year for 10 years”. Cashflow from a PSC isn’t that simple. It depends on gas price, capex timing, financing structure, government take, liftings… a lot more than a straight yearly average.

More importantly, EME isn’t negotiating from a position where they have to take a tag-along. They hold a registered 8.5% WI. That has to be valued properly if reduced or bought out, which is why Nations can’t close their 75% deal without settling this first. You don’t start the negotiation from the outcome that’s cheapest for Conrad.

If a tag-along ends up being the final structure, fine but that’s just one of several commercial paths, not the one EME is forced into.

Stella If EME chose to take the same structure as Conrad, then yess… the economics would look like that. But that’s only one possible settlement, notthe automatic outcome. EME isn’t locked into a tag-along, and they’re certainly not forced to accept 2.125% unless they voluntarily agree to that structure

As for historic costs.. they don’t determine the value of the WI. Nations paid around $16m for 75%, which prices the PSC as a whole, not what each partner happened to spend getting there. Coro overspent… Conrad underspent.. EME spent about $2m… .none of that changes the fact that the WI is a registered 8.5% working interest that must be valued properly if it’s reduced or bought out.

And that’s exactly why the forced withdrawal matters… if it were actually valid, there would be nothing to negotiate. The fact they still need EME at the table shows the 8.5% has to be settled on commercial terms, not historic spend

Out now, heading home

No flyingSquirrell this has nothing to do with insolvency. The whole "debt holders get paid before shareholders” point only applies if a company is being wound up, and that’s not what this is. This is a contractual dispute over a registered 8.5% WI. The debt just gets dealt with inside whatever settlement structure is agreed ,whether that ends up being a reduced WI, a buyout or a tag-along. That’s exactly what the negotiations are for

Anyway… I’m heading home. I’ve neglected my day job far too much today lol.

I hear you Pied but the “2.125% free carry” only happens if EME actually chooses to tag along on Conrad’s terms. That isn’t the default. The default remains a registered 8.5% WI. A tag-along is simply one possible negotiated option, not something automatic and certainly not the only outcome on the table.

And just to be clear… EME doesn’t need to produce $30m to keep the full 8.5%. That number only applies if they decide to match Conrad’s development spend dollar-for-dollar, which no minority partner is ever forced to do. In real JOA disputes the sequence is valuation, then negotiation, and finally compensation or a WI adjustment. It’s never as simple as “pay $30m or fall to 2.125%”.

This is exactly why the forced withdrawal is such a key point. If it had been valid, Nations wouldn’t need to settle anything. The fact that a settlement is unavoidable tells you everything about how this will go.

I agree that a long legal fight is unlikely… but that’s precisely what puts the pressure on Conrad and Nations, not EME.

Exactly Stephen and that’s why this isn’t heading for “zero”. If it wasn’t worth anything, Conrad wouldn’t have needed a forced withdrawal and Nations wouldn’t risk closing a 75% deal with an unresolved 8.5% still sitting in the PSC.

EME is playing hardballl, just not the loud retail version of it. Once a dispute goes into the formal JOA resolution process, you don’t help yourself by shouting on AIM. You let the contract do the work. Conrad skipped the required valuation… cure… and offer steps, and EME pushed it straight back into the mechanism where a forced withdrawal simply can’t stand. That’s how you apply pressure properly.

Whether it ends as a tag-along, a reduced WI or an outright buyout, Nations still needs clean title by a fixed date. What they absolutely don’t need is ICC arbitration dragging on for a year.

That’s why this gets settled. It’s the only path that keeps their timeline intact.

Just my view… DYOR.

No, “bust” isn’t what I’m saying. Due process doesn’t wipe out a WI… it leads to a valuation and a negotiated settlement. That’s exactly why the JOA has a valuation… cure… and offer procedure. Conrad skipped that, which is why the forced withdrawal wouldn’t survive if this ever hit arbitration.

On the upside… yes, it can multibag. The current price is based on the idea that EME ends up with zero, but that’s not how a registered WI works under English law. If zero was realistic, Conrad wouldn’t have needed a forced withdrawal and Nations wouldn’t be stuck needing a clean title before closing their deal. The market’s pricing fear, not the contract.

So no… not bust. This ends in compensation or a structured settlement… and anything above “zero” is a major rerate from here.

Just my view of course… always do your own research.

You're welcome!

No, that’s not what I’m saying at all.

I’m not claiming EME keeps 8.5% and gets a free carry. That’s not how a settlement works. What I’m saying is simply this: EME currently holds a registered 8.5% Working Interest, and that cannot just be taken away without going through the full JOA procedure /valuation, cure period and an offer. Conrad skipped those steps, which is exactly why the forced withdrawal wouldn’t stand for a moment if this ever went to arbitration. And because Nations needs a clean and undisputed title to complete their deal, this will have to be resolved through compensation, a reduced WI or a buyout, not through giving EME zero.

Nobody is suggesting EME keeps 8.5% and gets carried. The point is that the 8.5% has to be either bought out, reduced or compensated properly, because it cannot legally be confiscated for nothing. That’s the entire issue here.

Just to be clear: it’s not about whether EME “keeps” anything. It’s about the fact that you cannot extinguish a registered WI without following the contractually required process. Once that process is respected, the outcome is a negotiated settlement... not EME walking away with nothing.

Under English law a registered WI is a proprietary interest, and it cannot be extinguished without valuation and due process.

Hello Pied

You're confusing equity in WNEL with Working Interest in the PSC.

EME does not own “8.5% of Conrad’s 25%”.

EME owns 8.5% of the Duyung PSC directly.

That is a registered WI, not a downstream slice inside Conrad’s 25%.

Your calculation of 2.125% is simply wrong and has no basis in the JOA, PSC or the Deed of Assignment.

WI is not diluted because Conrad sold part of their own 75%.

Nations bought Conrad’s portion, not EME’s.

EME’s 8.5% stays 8.5%.

That’s why Conrad tried a forced withdrawal: because they can’t touch EME’s WI without valuation, cure period and an offer process under English law.

If EME were really down to 2.125%, why would Conrad even bother with a forced withdrawal?

They’d just ignore them.

But they can’t...because EME’s 8.5% is still fully intact.

The market cap has nothing to do with the legal value of a WI that must be settled before Nations can close.

You’re mixing fiction with facts. EME doesn’t have 2.125% ... it holds a legally registered 8.5% WI. Under the JOA you can’t confiscate that without valuation, cure period, and a formal offer. Conrad skipped every required step, so the “withdrawal” won’t survive 5 minutes in arbitration.

The $800k cash call has zero to do with the value of the 8.5%. Nations just paid ~$16m for 75%, which gives EME’s slice a clear valuation. And because it’s the final slice needed for clean title, it’s actually worth more, not less.

Arbitration would delay the whole project by 12–24 months — a disaster for Conrad/Nations, not for EME. Which is exactly why settlement is inevitable.

AIM is pricing panic at thé moment, not reality.

Hard to say, depends on the deal but multiples for sure...

Good luck to all invested!

Going into arbitration is a big time losing game for Conrad and Nations as well and they know it...

The longer it takes from now to get to an agreement in principle, the more it's going to cost them and the higher we'll fly 🦇

100% MrH_m👌

Yes, arbitration can take long in general

but not this type. JOA petroleum disputes are fast-tracked and cannot run for a year because the Conrad and farm-in partner Nations cannot complete financing without clean title.

In practice, either the withdrawal will be frozen within days or the parties will settle within 2–14 days.

Full arbitration (months) is extremely unlikely because it would stop the entire Mako development.

Eme is in a strong legal position now and they should go for a good premium settlement now as they own the last 8,5% .