Member Info for NelsontheDog

You dont get to be a massive law firm by only selecting the finest cases on their winnability - you do it by using your brand to compete for all work and then providing a good service - winning a bonus but not a pre-requisite. Unlike LCM funding assessments.

The lawyers may give a view as to the strength of the case presented to GoI but they wont recommend a settlement - they earn more if this runs its course.

Thnaks for that update / reminder Wiggly. For me, that is the most optimism driving post on here since pre-Enog abandonment. This was the original onshore plan wasnt it? Fast route to revenue at lower costs onshore. If the test indicates a production viable well then Char have a route to positive cashflow.

Trader shenanigans to influence price - always a mid term bullish signaL.

I have no concerns at in regards to delivery of the memorial. I am curious to know the SOC but very chilled as to when that occurs and how - it’s a confidential arbitration process so i assume the disclosure isn’t going to fill in all the blanks - a range would be nice though or even an in excess of $x,xxx,xxx,xxx

Wishing you all a good weekend

The ring binder is embossed with the Bugatti logo and titled “leather seat swatches”.

I share your view Bear. The Forza AI trading model I believe is aimed at arbitraging a strategy to get the optimum yield out of staking and the intent was to put an element of those profits into BTC. My assumption from this expansion is that its been producing good results and they want to ramp up the numbers in it (and also keep the lights on). With Yellow Network due to launch in the next 2 months also, this could be a very good summer in stall here.

GLA

I agree Bouncy, but the RNS acknowledges the transfer of the subsidiary - not simply the return of ownership rights. The value of the subsidiary transferred does not need to be disclosed so the lack of specific assets within the subsidiary would not contitute a breach of the directors responsibility. Its a nuance that if true I would hope would lead to a disclosure in good faith, but I direct your attention to the phrasing of the RNS and mention of the subsidiary rather than simply a return of ownership rights - the plumbing of the transfer is not usually visible and hence my thought process.

I am not going to die on this hill by any means but I dont think it is immediately dismissable either as you state.

Shouty, shouty Metals! Its froth not fact here in the speculation on award. The SoC timing noise is irrelevant - we have clear guidance in RNS on timings and now further confirmation. You've seemingly allowed this BB to take your reasonable view and driven you to this. Have a herbal tea and we can look forward to your emergence when there is news. Hopefully there will be something to shout about then.

Yes Harry, yours is a guess also. My guess is with proefessional precedent though. It is likely that any farm out contract that involves the partner spending, has penalty for not spending - thats the likely commercial proposition and protection. So I am 90% cash from Enog, 10% your scenario or a variety of similar disappointments. We just have to wait and see.

Speculating further,If there is a pool of cash, Id like to see some onshore testing in the short term - could provide a better proposition with onshore also - this was supposed to be the sprint to production in comparison to Anchios I believe.

Good discussion here on what lurks in the shadows of the RNS. My guess - I think Energean will have paid a cash element due to not delivering on their committed research and in order to not make this clear (for honour and face [not a strong point for Energean]) they have put the cash in the subsidiary and transferred this across. In the next missive from Chariot I now expect them to add a paragraph on their cash balance being such that they do not need to raise in the foreseeable future (with no reference to the Energean money).

As i say its just a guess but given Energean completely reneged on their exploration commitment, I dont see the contract not providing for the money that was committed coming back in the drafting of the original agreement. Hence my optimism.

Agree with you Danedmunds,

It would be nice if they had shared the original fundraise valuation but I can see their stake already being in the millions in value on a $200m valuation let alone if this rises on launch. Certainly seems to be the current gem underpinning Coinsilium and with only 2 months till the launch we may see more speculation on this in line with pre-launch speculation for Yellow Network.

Hopeful because of this and not long to see what is going to happen.

Please could the collective board stop fretting - its twisting my melon man. Memorial containing SoC due Friday, RNS could follow that and be next week. More posts on potential settlement / top top end quantum of the claim much more to my liking whilst we wait (after all we have no part in the process so we may as well think on the positive side whilst we wait.

In terms of slicing taking profit - I am in this for the settlement but I will take profit if we rise and hopefully then move forward on a free hold.

I still harbour a view that the SoC number will be big - $4bn to $6b+ range - the maths is tremendous and we have had a full year of high gold with no clear signs of change for the next 3.5years whilst Trump flounces the once rock steady boringly predictable US economic backdrop to one side and then the other.

I also hope for an early settlement from India (but I think this is only likely if the SoC is very high - they are going to get very uncomfortable if the claim amount is high - early in the electoral phase - may be better to settle now when any upset is forgotten than let claim run and risk a bigger number driving higher outrage closer to elections.

There you go, some endorphin inducing debate to get into whilst we wait.

Pointless chatter on peoples buy/sell trade/invest criteria. The collective can not exert on the individual. Good luck to all investing or trading on a plan for share to go up. I wish the best of bad luck to any positions hoping for new lows. Adding to pointless chatter I have a trade and investment pot - a lot of my trades are on stocks I own a LT position in anyhow as my first criteria for a trade is would I buy this share as a LT hold anyhow. My JLP "trades were in the high digits and teens so i am not a great trader on JLP, but equally my investments in JLP were at 2pish many years ago now so I am 50% up - but I did sell on the way up as the allocation size exceeded limits - hence I took some money off the table at those times.

Whether a LT holder or trader, I hope most on here are using good asset allocation processes to ensure their exposures are good and in line with their portfolio parameters.

Best of luck as above - news coming soon on that production run rate for copper I hope.

Welcome home JL,

Nice to see your name on the board. Exciting times we are living in, hey?

I forgot to add - is the $1oom over 6 months also because they have way more targets than that - ie after this $100m another 100m? I think that will be the case - big statement of intent.

Very positive RNS for my twopenneth.

1. Refers to the Williston non-ops team who clearly have lined up some acquisitions with good economics and this will green light those to fruition- weve done the sums and this capital will get this underway.

2. Leaping to Paradox for a moment, they could use this fund to effectively non-op their own development with prior agreement but of more interest to me is that when CH says they are looking at partner and BO options they arent just sitting at a stall on the side of the road - CH and co have real money connections - bodes well.

3. And I think this is most key, the announcement declares that Zephyr is balls out going for growth and intends to be a mid size player sooner rather than later, whilst at the same time, the formal seperation of Paradox from ongoing non-op makes any buyout or partner agreements cleaner.

My hunch is that in the mid term, Zephyr BoD may choose to build a non-op empire with the eventual sale of Paradox giving a big fund boost to this new vehicle - that would more suit the BoD deal making ability rather than operational experience imho.

So big news and I wonder if this indicates a minority interest in Paradox deal about to be announced?

GLA

NtD

I find it hard to believe that AP with the family resources and experience he has available would have written a bad agreement with Energean. I do suspect that the contract allows a period of time and that Energean will behave as rudely and as slowly as their agreement (and even maybe possibly further if Char dont take court actions) to delay any closing payments or free the field for further talks. However I could be wrong and its an awful contract - I was amazed it was with Energean in the first place so there you go.

I dont see why an update can not be given - even if it is to say they cant comment due to contractual obligation in the near term. I have sent my concern to the company but I dont get the feeling this is a very responsive to PI's organisation.

Great clarification interview.

Route to producing - with the experts and referenced the non-capital skid based plant process for processing that they are looking at in these early development phases - good stuff - the right experts involved.

CPR - being worked.

Industry partners - On the phone - if we know two things from past CH history, he is a great networker and more crucially appears to be a great dealmaker also- knowing when to move at pace and when to sweat the details. The fact that Halliburton were all over this and will be reporting back independently of ZPHR to any who ask will also be of massive interest to the market.

Existing well partner - I would love to know who this is - they stumped a good amount of money on this and it could be the vanguard of a mid to large player positioning for further deals with Zephyr. Will they be disclosed at some point? I really suspect this was a move by a big player - a cheap way in under the covers that $7.5m risk.

September was the last RNS's relating to Anchios. This period of non-disclosure can be attributed to BoD awaiting Energean shifts, but simply tell us thats the case - really quite hacked off now in relation to this void of information - do better BoD!

Isnt Cane Creek one of eight oil targets in the paradox - if that is the case, there is a lot of potential to increase resource via drilling before this is sold. I think I would prefer a Cane Creek JV partner at this stage rather than a full buyout (like I have a choice!) - as I truly believe in the froth of excitement of 1 field, we could miss the value of seven more!