Member Info for Nomlkanymore

Absolutely my last post on this thread as it is indeed a waste of time.

Mirasol

What you actually said was "I've been in RKH from the start and need no suggestions as to when and what I post thanks......." whilst simultaneously suggesting a different rule to other posters where you get to decide the merit and topic of their posts, despite the fact that many have said they found it interesting.

Please tell me can see the double standard.

Then I am sure each of your 11500 posts have been full of articulate, relevant and genius content.

All the best.

Mirasol

When I decided to start posting on these boards again, after many years of absence, it was absolutely with the promise to myself NOT to get drawn into pointless arguments and a waste of time. Trying to explain to complete no-hopers that their ARG investment was based on flawed logic they clearly didn't have the intelligence to understand, or with trolls who just want to cause trouble, I agree a total waste of time.

However, I don't think the post I made about Falklands history is readily available on Wikipedia and although I agree with you completely irrelevant to todays share price, I thought it of some interest generally whilst news is quiet. It seems some agreed with me.

I see however, you have appointed yourself board "policeman' and get to choose which topics are posted. Good luck with that, I believe that to be a still greater waste of time. But as long as it makes you happy and feel important, I wish you well.

Captain Onslow forced Pinedo to lower the Argentine flag and leave, he also allowed the militia to leave on the Rapid as they had planned to do.

NOT A SINGLE PERSON LEFT THE ISLANDS WHO DIDNT WANT TO

Luis Pinedo recorded every detail I just explained in his logs which are on record in Beunos Aires

Sometime in the 1960s Juan Peron rewrote this history as Britain invaded the islands and expelled the Argentine population. Argentines repeat that false narrative until today.

900 people died in 1982 because of that nationalistic and false narrative.

The actual historic record, Luis Pinedos logs, tell the truthful and honest account.

Back in day when we first discovered Sealion I decided to do a bit of research about the Falkland island history and indeed the merits or otherwise of the Argentine claim. There is excellent research by Pascoe and Pepper if anyone fancies a read, but the real evidence that not only is the Argentine claim false, it is knowingly false was written by the very Argentine Captain evicted from the islands in 1833. Luis Pinedo.

There are lots of claims about who sighted the islands first, who landed first, even who first put a colony on the islands, however there is no doubt that Spain administered East Falkland between 1767 and 1810. However, unlike Argentina, when the Spanish Empire fell, the inhabitants did not choose to become Argentine, every single one of them, packed up and returned to Spain, via Montevideo. Nobody claimed "independence" nobody remained as an inhabitant, the islands were vacant from residents. From 1810 to 1828 there were a few visitors, whaling ships, fishermen, etc. But no civilian population. Spain still"claimed sovereignty", Argentina (or the United Provinces of River Plate" claimed sovereignty and Britain remembering its ancient claim to West Falkland claimed sovereignty. All knew without a civilian population the claims were worthless.

In 1828 a German businessman Luis Vernet approached both the Argentine government and the British Consulate in Buenos Aires about a business venture on the islands, he stated that he didn't care about sovereignty and just wanted to make money, both parties agreed and Vernet set up a thriving business, until in 1831 he tried to intervene with American shipping and the US Lexington attacked his camp and destroyed a lot of the buildings. Vernet left the islands never to return and the majority of his associates left with him. Vernet left the irishman William Dixon in charge of the 20 or so who stayed.

In November 1832 Argentina, in full knowledge of the British claim attempted to seize the islands, they sent the SS Sarandi under Luis Pinedo to deliver a governor Esteban Mestevier, some paid militia and some convicts to set up a base. Britain obviously saw this as an act of aggression, and sent HMS Clio under a Captain Onslow to retaliate.

However, Pinedo dropped of the militia with Mestevier and the convicts, but found the remnants of the Vernet business, nearly all requesting safe passage back to the mainland having been left for 2 years. Pinedo was charged with exploring nearby islands so promised safe passage on his return trip. When Pinedo returned he found uproar, Mestevier had been murdered, his wife attacked and the militia had mutinied. The militia had arranged to leave the islands on a fishing boat the Rapid.

Pinedo forbade the militia from leaving, agreed to take the Vernet citizens and Mesteviers family on the Sarandi and was about to leave when HMS Clio arrived.

(continued)

It is easy to forget the scale of what is being envisaged here. In the very long decade of Sealion been unloved and undeveloped one could quite easily lose perspective of its potential value.

If not before, it certainly seems Navitas understand this.

Once a development starts, it unlocks a whole wealth of knock on opportunities, which even under an accelerated approach could take 40-50 years to complete. Finally, that penny seems to be dropping.

Sealion and surrounding f2 discoveries are a multi-phased approach, many of the surrounding prospects have GCoS of over 80% and some are huge. This has always been shown as a 3-phase 3 FPSO approach, but could easily be more and can be run concurrently if capital investment is available.

This is without further exploration and appraisal of high potential prospects in the South North Falklands basin Isobel Complex, PL001 (not-RKH) and the un-licensed NNFB. The potential is and has always been enormous. With the right investment and engineering, there could be double digit developments over the next 10-15 years and Navitas could run the show, carrying RKH at least part of the way.

With that kind of investment and income, further exploration in the SFB may occur bringing Darwin and the nearby RKH acreage into play much earlier than otherwise.

The key to this and the difference from the lost decade is Rockhopper were selling a dream, Navitas are selling a reality.

ZXY

PL033 license is owned by Navitas and RKH. The original 3D seismic was carried out across the middle of PL032 and PL033 in 2009. This picked out Sealion, and area North of Sealion where the 14-10/03 well was water wet, and the corresponding segment of the western 1/3rd PL033. You can find some of this information in early reports on RKH website. All the PL001 and the remainder of PL032/33/003/004 was completed in 2012.

PL033 interests me because of the seal failure on the feeder channel at 14-10/08. People forget that half of the potential Sealion reservoir is water due to this seal failure. I would be interested in following potential migration pathways East, and hoping to identify a potential reservoir. From memory there is a large sand structure (Jason???) in PL033 that could fit the bill.

As always the NFB is highly prospective, there could be 100+ small discoveries as well as a few billion barrel STOOIP.

Seismic for the next best areas a good campaign is $100m for 5000km2, depends what you ask for really. We'd need 35%.

It is disappointing that Navitas has had the foresight to take the operator ship of PL001 and acquire 65% of the acreage for peanuts and RKH couldn't be part of the team. Pl001 needs to be looked at in context.

A few years ago a complete spanner was filling the iii chat boards with outlandish, utterly false ramping of Argos Resources, comparing the prospectively, future potential, and likely shareholder returns with RKH, many of my posts around PL001 referred to the prospectively published at the time, the Chatham and Rhea prospects (20-30% GCOS) and the share of the Johnson gas field. This acreage was and still is less prospective than PL003/PL004/PL032/PL033 the DES/RKH acreages now controlled by Navitas.

However, that is not to say PL001 (and indeed surrounding acreages to the North and West) are not highly prospective by "normal" standards, we have a proven hydrocarbons system in a new frontier. Navitas are hugely smart picking up the acreage almost whilst no-one else is looking.

When looking at the NFB geology, it is always important to return to the Richards and Hillier analysis, we have a source kitchen likely to have expelled 60 million barrels of oil. So far we have found about 3-5 million STOOIP likely across all discoveries. It is of course possible due to seal failure or poor reservoirs that the remaining will never be discovered or recovered, but this is unlikely. I believe once we start exploration again multiple structural and stratigraphic reservoirs will be successful.

Looking at the new JHI information Tyche A offers a clearly defined fan fed from the North and Dinlas would appear to be a stratigraphically spacious fan, albeit less defined. They need drilling,

From a priority perspective, if I were Navitas, its Phase 1 production, Sealion local fans appraisal, Phase 2 production, Isobel and Elaine (Sanson Terrace) exploration, Phase 3, PL001.....and maybe acquire average to the North. I desperately want RKH to be a part of all of it.

6th May 2010: Rockhopper Exploration (LON:RKH), the North Falkland Islands Basin oil and gas exploration company, is pleased to announce that well 14/10-2 on the Sea Lion prospect has reached a depth of 2,744 metres. Initial data collected indicate that this well is an oil discovery, which would be the first in the North Falkland Basin. Rockhopper Exploration (LON:RKH) has run a suite of wireline logs and logging data collected thus far indicate that the oil well has encountered a 150 metre gross interval of sand and shales. The data show that the well has 53 metres of net pay distributed in multiple pay zones, the thickest of which has a net pay of 25 metres. These pay zones have an average porosity of 19%.

15 years of waiting, £5.40 and 5p. But today is a big day. Finally.

I can wait 2 years to first oil.

This is going to be great.

The answer to whether FID is priced in must be that it is at least partially. An RNS from Navitas saying "oops we have changed our mind" would see RKH back in the teens before the end of a days trading. I would expect a moderate rise to over £1 pretty soon after FID and then depending on Navitas timing a gradual but not straight line increase towards £2 at first oil.

The route to much higher market capitalisation depends greatly on both Navitas and RKH and their ambitions.

From a Navitas perspective they have the entire spectrum of options from a 30 year development plan for PL003, PL004, PL005 and PL033/34 where each subsequent phase is slowly explored and developed using the income from the previous production, to a more expansive and aggressive exploration/development where new partners and investment is brought in to expedite exploration and development in multiple simultaneous phases. Which one adds the greatest long term share holder value to navitas and therefore RKH will be complicated, I would imagine they'd want to identify large fields quickly and then decide the most cost effective way to develop them.

From a RKH perspective they are just a passenger in those acreages, Navitas are the operator and RKH will follow their lead, like it or not.

The choice for RKH is whether they have any hunger in either being an operator or partner in any other acreage. I certainly do not want them swanning off to Egypt or the Med again, so they should remain focussed on the Falklands.

At the end of 2026 there will be a new licencing round, the last few have rubber stamped existing licence holders due to low interest, but I hope that is not the case this time. JHI/Argos are in contravention of the PL001 licence, and although I know a few islanders hold Argos shares (and used to feed overly positive rumours to certain posters on these boards), it should be easy enough to take the licence for free with a concrete guarantee to drill one exploration well, there is also other acreage both to the North of PL003, and to the east that may have some prospectively, it would be interesting if Sam or others have the motivation to be explorers again.

The other area is of course the South Falklands basin, it is a tough and expensive gamble, but RKH are the licence holder immediately up dip from the Darwin discovery, and like PL001, Borders are also not meeting the terms of their licence. The FIG could play hardball.

From a RKH perspective as shareholders we will see their hand, the low side (assuming Sealion is developed) is a slow moving but extensive 30 year development of high profit low tax 5 licence acreage, with multiple tick follows tock discoveries and developments. That is a fantastic company worth multiples of today

The upside of all the above, plus highly prospective local acreage and the wild card jackpot of oil discoveries in the SFB all in the next 5-10 years, to my mind is what made this the crazy adventure from the start.

The share price has only been higher than todays is for about 40 days of the last 15 years. A lot of folks have enjoyed the rise from 10p to 90p and have rightfully taken profit of the table. There was a mention of Bluehorseshoeloveschipfat the other day, and his mantra was always to bank profit even if it meant leaving some for others. Anyone sitting on a multi bagger, or recovered some long forgotten losses would be very sensible to play safe, even if FID is just around the corner. What I think we have seen is relatively weak resistance to 90p plus, and a highly likely race to £1.20 on positive news.

With respect to "ramping" and "deramping", most investors in a share will quite happily restate the fundamentals of why they have invested, and with RKH being present at the start of a new oil province frontier is quite easy to explain, and equally, stating a business strategy that allows early access to billions of barrels of oil is not "ramping", it is restating what is available in the companies literature and other scientific or business sources. Pretending you have "heard a whisper" of new positive news, especially when you haven't, is ramping, or overstating the upside potential beyond the science (which is quite hard to do with Rkh).

Equally, deramping, is not reminding investors that there is still risk to FID, that nothing is certain, and to protect profits. This is a straightforward investment strategy. Again, pretending you know of new risk, massively overstating known risks, or simply trolling is quite clearly deramping.

The question is does it work, subtly perhaps, but I have only ever seen one poster gclark25 with the ability to actually influence the market in real time.

I would question the sanity of any poster who has spent 20 years posting almost daily on these boards, including over 10000-20000 posts telling people that ARG had more oil than Rockhopper (and then losing everything), or that Sharon had told him unreported news (when actually people were deliberately sending him garbage to watch him spew it over these boards for fun). And to finally, after 20 years to sell up RKH at 40p and open shorts while watching others double their money. What could possibly motivate someone to keep posting when everyone holds their comments with contempt? It's a strange one.

I read a poster the other day suggesting Sealion development is A-B-C-D-E-F and any exploration of Isobel or other areas was G-H-I-J, this is probably the most likely sequence of events, but I would prefer a different sequence:

Sealion A-B-C-D-E-F-G Sealion Satellites H-I-J

Isobel A-B-C-D-E

PL001/NNFB A-B-C-D-E

SFB (near Darwin) A-B-C-D- etc

Utilising income and partnerships to unlock both basins in the next 10 years.

Navitas Resources (from Navitas website):

Shenandoah 211mmb

Buckskin 27mmb

Danbury 10mmb

Neches 4mmb

Monument 33mmb

Shenandoah South 19mmb

Sealion 819mmboe

1,123M Barrels valued at mcap £2.4bn or £2.13 a barrel

Taking the same 819mmboe and applying the 65:35 ratio net to RKH gives RKH net 414mmboe

414mmboe at £680m mcap is £1.64 per barrel

Of course Navitas are much further in developing their resources (or at least the first third in North America), but only a year or two, it depends what NAV discount you want to apply.

If you say that Navitas share of Sealion is valued pro rata with RKHs (not strictly fair, but for the purpose of this debate), it says that 1.3bn of Navitas value is Sealion. Therefore the other 300mmbs (recently turned to production) is worth £1.1bn. This would suggest that when we get first oil of RKHs 400mmbs we could expect a RKH valuation of £1.4bn for Sealion alone or £1.70. If in the interim we find a Sealion scale discovery with further exploration at Isobel or other we would be looking at £2.50+, and then £3.40 when that moves to first oil, plus the added value of Sealion being in production. A third major discovery and we go again and again.

They both look relatively appropriately valued, and shows the upside to both of bringing the huge Sealion resources into production.

For 13 years Rockhopper failed to get anyone excited about the North Falklands basin. Whether it was Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, Greta Thunberg, Vladimir Putin or some other global factor, only a completely over-reaching premier oil showed interest. Pierre Jungels said, "Premier wasn't the best offer, it was the only offer". Navitas have changed all of that and have carved themselves what I believe to be a fantastic deal, but they deserve it, without them the dream was dead.

So, assuming FID happens, option one is for Navitas to work their way around the NFB picking of multiple phases of production, low risk exploration, appraisal, production and spend 30-50 years generating a fantastic revenue for RKH and themselves. They don't NEED a farm-in partner, so nobody has them over a barrel.

The question is why would they want one, and what value would a farm-in partner bring, and what would inspire Navitas or RKH to part with what is now a fairly robust Plan A.

There is a technical and logistical benefit from adding experienced partners, and other posters have shared their wealth of experience as to what those logistical benefits might be.

However, the real equation is whether using new cash to go faster and develop multiple phases simultaneously, whilst also carrying out exploration in either or both of the NFB and SFB adds shareholder value. That is actually a simple equation around net asset value, is producing 80% of an asset next year worth more than 100% in 10 years time??

My view is they should proceed through FID without a partner. Then be incredibly transparent that the new farm-in equation is a trade-off of investment of significant cash for faster development and exploration, not on the basis of "we need you to make this happen", those days are gone.

Exciting times

As someone mentioned earlier, the largest discovery in the North Sea for a decade is the Yggdrasil Norwegian field at 96-134mmbs

The current Sealion discovery has a 2P contingent resources of 730mmbs and a 3P of 940mmbs. This includes all the discoveries and appraisals to date.

In the NSAI competent persons report in March, there were 20 additional fans identified in the Sealion region of the NFB the biggest four of these prospects each have a 3U contingent resource over 80mmbs, and also have the highest geological chance of success out of the 20 fans. Beverley, Gwendoline, Malena, S2 could add 350mmbs and all have GCoS of over 33%, which in exploration terms is very promising. The remaining 16 targets have lower chance of success but have the potential of ANOTHER 250-500mmbs.

These numbers give a Sealion region maximum opportunity of 1.6-1.8bn barrels. NSAI already gave a significant uplift versus previous CPR assessments.

Then we look at the "Isobel" complex. The 2016 ERCE independent audit (after the exploration campaign) and the Plenderleith paper both identify the same 10 fan targets in the Southern portion of the Isobel complex. The three "Isobel" fans have a STOOIP of over 720mmbs we don't have a recovery factor but for the purpose of argument lets apply 33% so 240mmbs contingent resource opportunity, the two Elaine fans have a STOOIP of over 500mmbs (170mmbs resource), and the five remaining fans Irene A&B , Lydia, Emily and Doreen 600mmbs (200mmbs resource), So another 610mmbs. The GCoS of these targets is not published we had no wireline in the 14/20-1 well, no flow test etc.

There are an additional 4 smaller fans in the Plenderleith paper north of Isobel which are unnamed.

This is before we get to the PL005 targets Helen and Susan, or Ann in PL003. These are lower CoS but certainly are not unviable.

I am very interested in a further target on the Sanson terrace east of the Isobel prospects, this is where the feeder system entered the basement and looks to be sand rich throughout the entire F3 era. This could be a structural play and I would love to see a detailed appraisal of the prospect. It could be really exciting.

The more the scale of opportunity is understood the more likelihood and common sense it would before further farm-ins and accelerated development rather than a step by step over 30 years. If done correctly Navitas/RKH could bring in partner cash for relatively small % of the fields as uncertainty reduces. This looks to be the fastest route to accelerated shareholder value.

RKH can enjoy that journey with Navitas driving the strategy, if via farm-out RKH do get cash rich quicker, then they can decide whether to do more exploration either in the NNFB or the SFB. I don't know if they have the hunger, but if it were me, I would make every attempt to renew the licences and ask FIG to open up new licence areas to the north of Sealion and strip JHI/ARG of their licence for not meeting the licen

Its not a fact though is it?

in 2010 we had a 100% of two NFB licences we now have 35% of five NFB licences. It is not only possible, but very likely the three incremental licences hold double the prospective resource than the two we held 100% of. So we have more oil not less. That is before we assign any value to the SFB licence.

The dilution in shares has been a necessary evil, the appraisal and flow test of the field and the exploration programme in 2016 was funded at significantly higher sp than today and looks good value.

The dilution to get to production is painful, and far more than we hoped in 2010. We simply did not get the farm-in interest that we hoped and "deserved", and after a decade of Premier oil pain, Navitas have been able to negotiate a great deal for themselves, well done to them.

900 million shares in issue, with the acreage we have, funded to first oil feels like a great place to be in 2025.

The value is in Navitas strategy to develop the 730mmb field quickly, maximise the upside in the fans local to Sealion(+500mmb) , explore and develop the rest of the PL003/004 licences (>>500mmbs), the development of that strategy will unlock enormous opportunity.

If RKH decide to go alone in other licences in the 2030s that is up to them,

But the future value has not been brighter for a decade.

Feeder channels for Isobel (or the SE complex) are almost certainly a different source to Sealion, The Sealion delta flows from the NE whereas Isobel flows from the SE almost 100km to the south. This would have been two distinct river systems rather than the same one redirected over time.

"It will be interesting to see how RKH will balance their priorities between paying down debt, dividends and further exploration / appraisal". That EXACTLY....and the correct decisions will have the greater impact on shareholder value.

With regards licences, you and I expect other players to join the party, who, where and in what format remains to be seen. For example, why farm-in to BOR/JHI if you can convince the FIG to revoke their licence and take the lot, they are well outside their licence requirements. I don't know how hard-nosed the FIG would be if other parties show an interest in the licences.

The interesting one for Navitas is I doubt they'll keep PL005 unless they commit to at least one exploration well, who knows if they would want to.

I absolutely think they should run new 3D over any exploration area before committing $50m a shot at exploration wells, and also employ people who understand how to read them....15 years on I still cannot fathom what Phipps and Duncan thought they were doing!

The licence status is can be found on falklands(dot)gov(dot)fk.

Discovery areas are seperate from exploration areas, and as there has been little or no interest in any of the licences for the past 10 years, they've all been left to run. I would imagine that FID would meet all the requirements for PL032,PL033, PL003 and PL004 it would be very harsh for the FIG to say further exploration would be needed, in theory they could delineate the discovery (production) area and move the Isobel out of it and put a drill or drop criteria, but I doubt it.

Borders certainly are way out of time from discovery to appraisal based on the licence and if some else showed interest they could justifiably lose it. JHI/Argos also could lose PL001 if someone had a better plan.

This I think is the point, does FID open up the NFB in such a way as the expiration of licences at year end 2026 is not the rubber stamp extensions that they've been for years. Does it allow Navitas/RKH to come up with a plan for key areas, will it open up new licence areas, and most importantly are there new parties interested in the licences. It is a more interesting licensing round than the last three!

I like your analysis, agree with nearly all of it.

LTT

My personal view is that there are simply too many "opportunities" for a single partnership to dominate, what Navitas and RKH should do is use their first-starter advantage and knowledge of the basin to make sure all the best chance of success large prospects are prioritised to them. However, I am confident that the migration pathways will lead to large discoveries in unpredictable places in the NFB so there is plenty of room for everyone!! The more the merrier.

A few points on "Isobel". Sealion is really two very large fans overlaying or underlying 30 or so smaller fans. This was our stacked pancake analogy and was generated by the feeder channels moving over time, analogs with the great African lakes today. The reservoir was good in most places, but the fault on at least one feeder channel failed giving us the known OWC.

Isobel complex looks different. There are three clear entry points for the feeder system all fed over the Sansom terrace, this slowed the flow and the deposition meaning that fans tend to be specially smaller by area, but potentially thicker (the exception being Elaine South which may be more similar to Sealion)). This explains the reservoir deposition differences and potentially difference in porosity and permiability

My theory is that like Sealion, at least one of the feeder channels failed at Isobel, but unlike Sealion there is a second fault structure to the East, this fault can be seen in the Penderleith paper. This is why there I no OWC, as the entire reservoir is contained. This is probably the interesting part of the complex, the fans themselves 50-60mmbs each (there are at least 16 of them) will work or not, Isobel Deep and Elaine South (maybe 100-200mbs each) will need exploration and appraisal. I tend to think these are back in the queue behind the remaining fans in the Sealion area.

The one area that I am very interested in, I have not seen the 3D seismic in detail is the Sanson terrace feeder channels. These would have been fast flowing sand rich channels, and the deposition would have been relatively consistent throughout the entire F3 era. This "could be very thick (300m+) good quality reservoir, full to spill and explain the absence of OWC in the 14-20/2 well. (Equally it might not be :-)). I might have to wait 7 years to find out.

I don't really have a good reason for the high pressure at 14/20-1, if I am right about a full to spill on the terrace, we've got nowhere near the shallowest points of the reservoir to identify any gas.

I think the main point is that RKH is on a great journey with Sealion alone, and most shareholders can enjoy the journey once FID is announced, there is near guaranteed upside.

For those who want multi bagger exploration returns, then it all depends on which players get involved on which acreage.

At the moment there are a whole range of potential "value-add" steps that will come as soon as production wells start being drilled.

At the moment the main Sealion complex as currently appraised sits between 500-900 million barrels recoverable, we will learn more about the true scale, and accurate recovery factors once we start producing, there will be both nice surprises and disappointments as no reservoir is uniform.

What is interesting is that the recent RKH CPR then shows 20 fans that have yet to be penetrated within the discovery area, these are all potential tie-backs to Phases 1-3, and have probability of success ranging from low to 80%. These additional fans have a P10 greater than 500mmbs recoverable. Some of them we may get for "free" as they will either overlay or underlay planned optimum production locations. I would imagine, given their tie-back potential Navitas will develop a plan where they would be understood ready for tie-back potentially in the mid 2030s. It seems a long way away, but there are 20 or so to do and some are quite small (by Sealion standards, very large by normal standards).

From an exploration perspective the first decision point is next year when the licences come up for renewal, firstly do Navitas take part in new licences, do they keep PL005 (SNFB) and therefore have a commitment to drill, or do they just keep the production licences. That will at least hint at their plans.

Equally for RKH, do they keep their SFB licenses, look for new ones alone in the NNFB or join with others on PL001. I think committing to exploration wells in a six year period 2027-2032 aligns with the timing from ZXY, and also poses the question to current share holders about taking Sealion production profits off the table or waiting for exploration.

It is important to remember that Navitas are the operator of PL003/4/5. Therefore any further exploration of the South East F3 complex including the Sanson terrace, Helen and Susan will be driven by Navitas. With Shenandoah online and producing, and Sealion online and producing it will be a pure financial question for Navitas when and if they choose the next exploration targets.

This leaves Sam with a decision. Is Rockhopper Exploration purely a puppet of Navitas, following it round the NFB licences paying 35% of the costs and receiving 35% of the spoils. BTW that is a fantastic business, but wholly reliant on Navitas with very little for RKH to actually do. It could still easily lead to the Nasty Nick £6 per share or potentially much more, as more discoveries are made and production ramps up.

There was a question about tie-back Isobel to Sealion. I don't see it like that, my expectation is that by the time Navitas want to bring the Central Development Area into production multiple fans between Zebedee (the southernmost of Sealion discoveries whic are part of CDA) and Elaine South (the northernmost of the Isobel F3 complex) will have been discovered, and there will be four or 5 phases. More if Helen, Susan in PL005 are successful or if (as I hope) there is a large structural reservoir on the Eastern Flank.

Or is the clue in the name?

Will Rockhopper independently take part in the Dec 2026 round of licences and push the FIG to open up new areas such as those identified by Jones et al in the NNFB and Phyllis graben, based on a positive FID and therefore prospective income funding exploration, there is a whole Western Graben that hasn't been drilled since 1998.

Will Rockhopper look at an exploration well PL015 next to Borders discovery and hope for an oil discovery?

Will Rockhopper look to gain operator ship of PL001 in partnership with JHI?

With Sealion income and production experience maybe there is value in going alone, or more likely having to give up far less than 65% of future discoveries.

A lot of this will rest with Sam Moody. It's been a long 15 years, we still have 4-5 years before this big decision really needs to be made. Sam like all of us is not getting any younger.

It would be nice to see another minnow wildcat hit big in the Falklands.

This is an interesting discussion.

Firstly what we know from Sealion is that during the F2 sand deposition era, a huge river was depositing sand into the North Falkland Basin which was our prehistoric lake. The nearest analogy to look at in the modern world are the great African Lakes where you can see huge rivers depositing into massive lakes from all directions. With Sealion we can see that a huge fast flowing river entered our prehistoric lake and at various times over the many thousands of years the entry point into the lake moved, changed and the deposition pattern changed. There were also smaller rivers or river deltas which formed the famous stacked "pancakes" we are all familiar with.

We can see at Sealion, in the immediately preceding era, the F3 sands were desperate, far less widespread, and of far poor quality. This would suggest that the rivers entering our prehistoric lake were less fast flowing, eroding more clay stones than sand stones and therefore depositing far less in the NE of the basin. This is why as the poster below pointed out, the reservoir quality at multiple F3 locations (Jayne, Rachel) was quite poor, the irony of the DES campaign is that they ran out of money on the NInky well about 30m above what looked like the most probable location in that part of the basin.

In the F3 era, if we continue the analogy, the fastest flowing river and therefore the largest sand deposition on the areas where we have 3D seismic is at Elaine and Isobel. I linked the BGS paper on the F3 sands at location previously. The deposition looks promising and there are several overlying and local fans being fed over the Samson terrace into that part of the basin. Of course there is a risk until each of those fans are tested, but I haven't seen any reason not to be optimistic that there is a decent amount of recoverable oil. The lack of OWC but presence of high pressure is ye to be understood. The second promising opportunity is that unlike Sealion the feeder channels are faulted, this means if one failed as in Sealion, there is a second opportunity as a trap, and therefore the feeder channel sandstone could also be a reservoir.

It is a more complex system than Sealion, unless the share price allows another $100m dilution between now and first oil, we may need to wait and see. I don't see it as a meh....quite the opposite, but neither is it a dead cert 1bn barrels.