Member Info for NoEasy

Maybe its the way it is written but 'failing to reach all ph3 endpoints' isn't quite true.

Firstly it met all primary endpoints against baseline.

Secondly it did not meet primary endpoints versus placebo.

But, and its a pretty big but, MED2005 wasn't dragged down here, it reached its baseline targets, rather DS raised itself to match MED2005.

In effect Med2005 was still successful in this trial, to be effective for a significant portion of ED sufferers.... but so was DS.

Unusual, but no disputing that is what has happened.

There is no problem buying here. Let's put that one to bed. Going up to 16p, 17p, 20p is a sure sign that the poster is a trader. Holders prior to the announcement wouldn't be being positive about those figures.

This announcement is positive in so far as there is still a product that has the opportunity of making the company and shareholders significant money. But there is a massive negative.

The negative is the role of management. A placebo is used because it is known that it has no effect on the condition that the primary drug is being tested against i.e. DS has no effect on ED.

It simply cannot be argued against that the company did not definitively know DS to be inert when they chose it as a placebo in this trial.

So the management either 'thought' or 'believed' it to be inert. The question is then, for them to believe that DS was inert , you would expect that at the very least it had been used for the condition. So was it used in a previous trial? If so and the result was they found it to be inert that raises a pretty big question here.

Holders as of 7am this morning shouldn't be thankful this is going up to 16p etc we should be asking serious questions as to why we are down to 16p.

The results have not been helped at all by the sole inclusion of DermaSys as the placebo. In fact whether that can be considered a placebo at all really is a pertinent question. Placebo's should be totally inert. How does a placebo therefore suddenly become 'the drug'. Can DermaSys be considered 'the drug' without any trial itself against a placebo? How did the company drive past DermaSys in the first place? What in-depth reasoning caused them to consider using DS as a placebo?

If they had used a clean placebo this RNS might well have opened the floodgates here. A clear no questions asked result against an inert placebo is what all trials are about. This has opened up many genuine questions.

No idea how the market will interpret this but the questions above won't, for me, be dismissed by whichever way it moves.

I'm slightly flabbergasted.

Not going to get into whose is biggest but I've got a fair amount in here and it would need to six bag to get me back to level pegging on my SXX stake.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-09/south-africans-braced-for-yet-another-week-of-rolling-blackouts

https://www.ft.com/content/27a525a4-1aa4-11ea-9186-7348c2f183af

Yep I'm getting the verifying loop as well Brad. Seems like they are hot on protection against a DDOS.

'Sometimes the cheapest short term commercial answer proves very economically expensive in the long term and delaying the building of important infrastructure just ******s the country in the longer term. How did a nation like Botswana, which has 2/3 of Africa’s coal, with an enormous inferred resource of some 212 billion tonnes end up sitting in the dark? The simple answer is that Gaborone is no different from Lagos or Baghdad which both sit on a sea of oil and like Gaborone, also sit in the dark. Depending on what one believes, it is either God or nature that makes coal and oil, but it is men that generate electricity and it is the decisions of men that explain our darkness observes *PROFESSOR ROMAN GRYNBERG' https://cheryljdalziel.com/2013/02/19/power-issues-in-botswana/

Another australian serial entrepreneur who has been involved in a billion dollar take-over having started a CBM company (much like our own Tony Gilby) is Strata-X Chairman, Ron Prefontaine. He has now also taken up CBM acreage in Botswana.

From Strata-X's own website:

'Strata-X Energy strives to be first mover or early mover on opportunities it pursues. This strategy tends to lead the Company away from the main pack of the industry where leases can be prohibitively expensive for a small company and have lower NRI's. Further, Strata-X Energy’s management has a successful track record of recognizing and capturing growth opportunities in early stages which subsequently generated excellent shareholder returns.

While the first and early mover opportunities may not be considered ‘the flavor of the month’, Strata-X Energy believes that with exploration success in these areas, we can lead the industry into the next hot area, at the same time adding substantial shareholder growth.'

I don't think TG could have put it any better himself.

TLOU Energy ...... first mover on Africa's massive coal bed methane potential.

Eskom power outages:

Load shedding may take place under a number of different stages, depending on the degree to which Eskom is short on power. The higher the stage, the more areas need to have their power turned off simultaneously. When load shedding is announced, the stage that applies is announced at the same time, and corresponding schedules need to be checked.

Stage 1: Requires the least amount of load-shedding (up to 1,000 MW) and can be implemented three times over a four-day period for two hours at a time, or three times over an eight-day period for 4 hours at a time.
Stage 2: Will double the frequency of Stage 1, which means you will be scheduled for load-shedding six times over a four-day period for two hours at a time, or six times over an eight-day period for four hours at a time.
Stage 3: Will increase the frequency of Stage 2 by 50 percent, which means you will be scheduled for load-shedding nine times over a four-day period for two hours at a time, or nine times over an eight-day period for four hours at a time.
Stage 4: Will double the frequency of Stage 2, which means you will be scheduled for load-shedding 12 times over a four-day period for two hours at a time, or 12 times over an eight-day period for four hours at a time.https://www.relocationafrica.com/load-shedding-power-outages-in-south-africa-explained/

Just checked and the load shedding status today is -
'We are currently LOAD SHEDDING in STAGE 2 due to high demand or urgent maintenance being performed at certain power stations. To determine the time/s that you will be affected, please view the Schedule for your area.' http://loadshedding.eskom.co.za

Power shortages have been a major constraint on output in Africa’s most industrialized economy. Protracted outages could cost the country its last investment-grade credit rating from Moody’s Investors Service, which is due to deliver its next assessment on Nov. 1. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-16/south-african-power-utility-eskom-to-implement-rolling-blackouts

Seems there is a market for our power to go into the Southern African Power Pool.

Moveonup, the position on Liberia was given in the last prospectus.

'Depending on its future financial capabilities, the Company may approach the Government of Liberia with regards to entering into a new contract for Block LB-13, offshore Liberia.'

Would a sell and then an equivalent buy at the same price result in a rising share price?

Would have been nice if, instead of telling you not to go to someone else for an update, he had met that need to provide an update himself............. as he really should be doing. He's tone deaf.

Yep I've got Feb in my head as enough time for the negotiations on the PPA to have been settled Whizzer.

The Bots. Gov. were looking for an advisor beginning of October and we believe they are in place now so negotiations could be imminent.

There may be a lot kept 'in house' Brad. Strikes me that while we are only looking at a 10MW PPA with the government I find it hard to get past that we will be balancing that out with selling them (rather than into the SAPP) what initially comes after that in terms of generation, but this time at market price. A bit of give with the PPA pricing that gets us up and running and then a bit of take as we rapidly expand beyond 10MW.

Thanks for links guys. It's interesting to occasionally look back, for better or for worse, to see the eventual progress we have made.

I'm thinking that the PPA is what both parties want and that is pretty likely to happen. The funding could be the weak point in terms of time, when we get the term sheet from the BDC will it be acceptable or do we have a delay while we source it from one of the other potential lenders such as Barclays?

To state that there is confidence that the base commercial flow rate target will be surpassed would seem to indicate that the 80-100mcfd rate is close to being or has been reached with gas saturation still to come.

All the above is a round-about way of saying, having viewed the historic interviews I can see how far we have come and it seems that we are so very close to the starting pistol being fired on the most important bit to us....realising shareholder value.

'.....negative and credit opportunities begins to dry up. Time to get a move on Art."

He's not sticking to his usual practice. Would have thought we would have heard from Arthur by now in terms of media interviews as we are now out of money.

Election year in the US, a time when the stock market usually moves

Also moving up nicely on LSE this morning. Got in for a few more first thing.

My confidence is pretty high that we are on the threshold here.

May we see our 'cleaner energy' credentials being well received by the likes of hedge funds, pension funds, institutional investors when we get this over the line, as it seems we are on target to do in the near term?

There is without doubt significant and increasing pressure from fund investors to transition to cleaner energy generation companies. Our marketing of CBM gas to power will see a 50% reduction in carbon dioxide released when measured against coal and a 30% reduction of CO2 in diesel power generation. The Botswana government are heavily reliant on both diesel and coal for power generation at present.

We also have a solar attribute to this project.

The following article is also headlining on the FT but is behind a paywall. https://dnyuz.com/2019/12/01/hedge-fund-tci-vows-to-punish-directors-over-climate-change/

In July TG stated the commercial gas flow from the two current pilot pods was the 'critical risk for the company going forward', 'indeed the primary risk'

This is where the statement on Wednesday by CC that the gas flow was likely to surpass the base commercial level was equally of critical importance.

After months of dewatering significant commercial flow rates we are led to believe are now expected. This surpassing of commercial base rate would tie in with the time taken to de-water, the larger the area de-watered the larger the likely area of gas release.

So that leaves the PPA and finance.

Of the PPA the government do want this. In October the government stated:

'The Ministry of Mineral Resources, Green Technology and Energy Security wishes to assure interested stakeholders that it remains committed to the development of the Coal Bed Methane (CBM)-fuelled pilot power plants.

Pre-negotiation discussions between the Government and the two companies, Sekaname and Tlou Energy who have been selected as preferred bidders by the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Board (PPADB) are ongoing. The Government is also in the process of acquiring a transactional advisor who will assist in the negotiation.

The project is a Government initiative geared towards facilitating development of the local gas industry.'

The project finance of $30m, once the PPA is secured, '....will be, very, very simple to conclude' according to CC a couple of days ago.

Always worth looking at the negatives, and I've welcomed the balance people provide here, but as of now I'm struggling to put historic negatives forward that now outweigh the current positives.

Helps reinforce the reason why CC stated PPA then finance in that order. My words in brackets.

'Although the direct parties to the PPA are the power producer (TLOU in our case) and the offtaker (Botswana Government in our case), this document is equally relevant to lenders and equity investors of the energy project. They would want the project to be creditworthy and may further want to restrict the ability to assign or transfer the PPA. The PPA allows the power producer to secure a revenue stream from the electric generating facility, which is necessary to finance and/or to repay for the project. Securing predictable cash flows is in fact one of the most important factors in obtaining finance for the project. As such, the economics of the project would revolve around the terms and conditions of the PPA, which go way beyond the mere purchase and sale of energy. Negotiating a financeable PPA therefore remains necessary notwithstanding the availability of other credit enhancement mechanisms like a corporate parent guarantee, performance bonds or insurance covers." https://www.juristconsult.com/news-media/publications/key-issues-in-negotiating-a-power-purchase-agreement-ppa/

It certainly appears as though it's happening otherwise the government wouldn't have recognised its own deficiency and sought out external advisors conversant in what is for them a pathfinder CBM project.

PPA is in the hands of the newly appointed advisors and the newly appointed Minister for Mineral Resources, Green Technology and Energy Security. The length of time they require is anybody's guess, CC stated near term but African near term could mean tomorrow or in twelve months.

The prospect of being offered finance seems to be a given and from everything CC has said seemingly just a question of securing terms that are going to be suitable to us. I do think any finance deal will attract an equity release.