Member Info for Olderwiser

The Q&A on the 11/7/25 Investor update has been released, well worth reviewing

Copied a couple in here as of particular interest

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/investor-update-73

Question 4:

How sure can you be that Dubhe will not experience the same wettability challenge as the Megrez-1 well or will we only know once testing is complete?

Megrez-1 was an exploration well, located on the other side of (above) the regional seal, and evaluated horizons that had never previously been tested. By contrast, the Dubhe-1 is expected to be the final appraisal well in a field that has been penetrated with three wells and from which successful flow has already been demonstrated from the primary target. Based on current data from previous wells and flow tests in the Ahpun topset, there is confidence that the Ahpun reservoir contains movable oil saturations. However, definitive confirmation will come through drilling and testing, which are essential steps in validating the reservoir's characteristics.

Question 22:

The Megrez-1 well ultimately disappointed despite the Company’s confidence. How do we know that the Dubhe-1 well won’t also disappoint?

There can be no guarantees of any result before drilling and testing, however we can confirm that Megrez-1 and Dubhe-1 are very different wells, in different geological settings with very different risk profiles.

Megrez-1 was an exploration well, drilling into an area that had never been previously drilled, but which looked highly prospective based upon analysis of seismic and regional activity. After drilling the well, the data received indicated great potential for commercial success. Ultimately, despite oil being encountered in all horizons, with oil saturations as high as 60%, the well was unable to flow oil in commercial volumes. At some time in the future when permanent production facilities are in place, it is likely that the Company will revisit in order to better understand how to make the oil flow. This may or may not include the use of tertiary recovery techniques. It was too costly without permanent facilities to do this work at the time; hence the reason operations were suspended on the well.

The Dubhe-1 well, by contrast, is likely the final appraisal well, appraising an existing discovery – the Ahpun field where independent experts have estimated 282 million barrels of 2C Contingent Resource. By contrast, there was no Independent Expert Resource estimate at Megrez. The primary target, the topset horizons (SMD-B), have successfully flowed in the Alkaid-2 well and has also had oil shows in other wells on the acreage including Talitha-A and Pipeline State-1. Dubhe-1 also offers three additional exploration targets, none of which has any resource estimates ascribed to it, so there is potential for additional resource upside.

Going into the Dubhe 1 appraisal well, it was a low risk well, as it was supported by already drilled and tested wells in the same reservoir. The primary risk was around how reliably the seismic data predicted the Dubhe1 location properties.

With that data now released it affirms the reliability of PANRs interpretation of the already discovered reservoir. For those still smarting from Megrez's failure to flow hydrocarbons, in Dubhe 1 the reservoir has already passed the “Will it flow hydrocarbons question” in the successful Alkaid 2 SMDB flow test.

So the low risk Dubhe 1 has now substantially reduced that low risk, by proving up the depth of reservoir and reservoir properties in its primary target the SMDB sands, at 565' these comfortably exceeded the 500' predicted by calibrated seismic mapping

Which with this proven reservoir height, then leads into the wine racking production of the SMDB, which unlocks the PANR modelling of 360mmbbl v the conservative CGA 282 million barrels in the SMDB

https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/pantheon_resources/news/rns/story/r7p121r

“This initial IER is based on Pantheon's base case development plan for Ahpun, but does not yet incorporate the benefits of planned infill drilling (or "wine-racking") in the southern portion of the topsets, where they are thickest. Analysis of the interference between "parent" and "child" wells in such a scenario is more complex and time consuming and will only be required later in the process of achieving FID. Preliminary management estimates indicate that "wine-racking" the wells in this area would add an additional c. 80 million barrels ("mmbbl") of high value recoverable resources. When combined with CGA's estimate, this would bring the total expected ultimate recovery from the Ahpun western topsets to c. 360 mmbbl”

I see this sentiment on a few forums, but although results can be characterised as good or bad, therefore binary

The reality is the binary win outcome has a much higher chance of success, as the SMDB has already been proven to flow light oil in poorer sections of the same reservoir

Much like backing a form favourite for a win , but still getting outsider odds

Dicko80 20:24

I expect the Dubhe 1 pilot well, will be at target depth soon.

In the approved plan of operations, drilling was scheduled as copied here (Dubhe-1 drilled 7/15/2025 8/31/2025 )

https://dog.dnr.alaska.gov/Document/Download/526D477C5506454E9EFAA5DC0522872/2025-03-19_Application_LONS%2025-002.pdf

This a guide not a hard timeline, but would be realistic, so yes it is a six week schedule, and it did start late on the 22/7/25

What needs teasing out is the meaning of “drilled” IMO that would be all drill activities, which would also include the horizontal drilled section. As many will be aware, the optimal horizontal drill location will not be chosen until the logging while drilling and wireline data collected in the pilot hole have been analysed

To be clear there are 2 drilling operations, the pilot hole and then the horizontal, on completion of these drilling activities the well is then ready for “completion” which is the fracturing of multiple stages in the 3500ft horizontal, in preparation for a flow test

All up I expect the first drilling target in the angled vertical pilot hole (with no mechanical problems), target depth would reasonably be achieved at around 4 weeks or less, so maybe if the oil gods are smiling in the next 6 days

Mrinvestor93

I am not sure that logic stacks up in this case, previously fair enough, bond holders got shares at a 10% discount to 3 or 10 day VWAP. So were able to trade some of that 10% gap at a small profit. Of note bond holders did not have a choice, where PANR opted to pay in shares, the acceptance of shares was compulsory in the contract

The bond holder was required to take possession of shares they may not have wanted at the time

This time bond holders have volunteered to take shares, in exchange for debt at an agreed price as part of a capital raise. Most importantly on the same terms as other participants in the capital raise. Heights capital then went further and purchased a further $3m worth of shares for cash

This is different, bond holders sought out the shares, presumably because they think there is a profit in it, so it is unlikely the will be selling at a loss, otherwise why would they have chosen to risk their capital. This time they are no different to any other investor that took part in the capital raise, although they may settle for a lower profit, they went in looking for a profit

Nabors Rig 105 shows in the appendix at the very end of the PO approval

https://dog.dnr.alaska.gov/Document/Download/816470F9B97F4CFFBEA4D40029922DAE/LONS%2025-002%20Great%20Bear%20TAU%20Dubhe-1%20Exploration%20Well%20Unit%20Plan%20of%20Operations%20-%20Approved.pdf

Looking at the Copernicus satellite pictures, although hard to make out detail, there is still pad preparation activity ongoing

https://browser.dataspace.copernicus.eu/?zoom=15&lat=69.8347&lng=-148.76857&themeId=DEFAULT-THEME&visualizationUrl=U2FsdGVkX1%2BFaBil0IGYFFAZQtyY0mCfowNteIVWbIKClzXiVZ2XLK9aRIg515sFHGMKBMHK9EEPd3S1wDmpZ1YBP2XjU48lZ5lBz5uZrChUh%2BlzB2QMgzaGQXbRDtXj&datasetId=S2_L2A_CDAS&fromTime=2025-06-24T00%3A00%3A00.000Z&toTime=2025-06-24T23%3A59%3A59.999Z&layerId=2_FALSE_COLOR&demSource3D=%22MAPZEN%22&cloudCoverage=100&dateMode=SINGLE

Multiple layers of gravel are laid, onto the excavated pad, where tundra has been removed down to the permafrost. The principle being to prevent the permafrost from thawing and losing stability, with layers of gravel that also incorporate as permafrost and provides insulation from the summer heat penetration

If you scroll back over a week or so the pad changes (racetrack circuits phasing in and out) are consistent with cycles of gravel being spread

It looks like PANR are on track to meet the Plan of Operations timeline, which shows pad preparation completion by end of month, and rig move on the 1st of July

Glenefarne who are charged with getting the pipeline project completed say yes

https://youtu.be/i7ns5PH2W7E?t=2719

PANR have done all of their modelling on the basis that there is no gas pipeline. If the gas pipeline is built, gas sales and subsequent savings on gas reinjection are all upside on the $5 to $10 per barrel of market recognition

So if their is no pipeline plan A continues without the upsides of A+, one of which is Off taker Funding, leveraged off a Gas sales agreement

I am increasingly confident the pipeline will be built, beyond the financial, geo political, domestic gas shortage, and security drivers. It is Trumps baby , his signature project and he will be a right tyrant in getting it. Probably painted orange above ground to boot

WanderingBull

That is not how it works

First you discover, done

Then you flow test done

Then you prove prove prove, that's the current plan

Dubhe has been labeled a show me well, but lets not forget, once the show me is done, it is a production well with reserves based on its reach.

Production will of course require additional facilities and an approved field development plan

The Q&A section of the latest Investor Meet Company has just been released

Go to the Q&A tab, a lot of interesting questions not covered in the presentation answered

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/investor-update-68

SG22

Is any one claiming success is 100% certain, of course there is risk. As you highlight if it was 100% certain, going all in would be the only sensible thing to do.

But given there is risk, it is assessing that risk using the available data that makes sense. So if risk is low and reward is high that makes sense

What is known is the Dubhe 1 target reservoir, the SMDB has already been flow tested in a poorer part of the reservoir, and it flowed light oils , NGLs , and associated gas there. So the risk of zero flow is very low, in fact given the flow rates there it modelled up as commercial, giving a low risk of sub commercial flows at Dubhe 1.

In terms of reward a show me well that does show, will be very valuable. Contingent resources in the immediate area will become reserves, which I am sure you are aware are next level in value. Further value will be attributed to the rest of the modelling in the entire SMDB, as the SMDB modeling at Dubhe 1 will have been validated by actual results matching the model

SG22

I have asked this question of a number of trolls, they mostly refused to answer, that tells me something

SG22

Can you answer a question for the record

Do you think buying PANR at 30p now, will be rewarding in the next 3 months, yes or no

When after 3 months, and there is a share price gain, will you admit you were wrong about PANRs prospects

Fair warning there are catalysts that if successful support a significant gain

Dubhe 1 initial results

Alaska Gas Pipeline progress"

Of note PANR have a small quantity of 3P reserves in the Alkaid ZOI, based on the result of the Alkaid 2 horizontal well

https://www.pantheonresources.com/index.php/investors/shareholder-documents/695-lee-keeling-associates-estimate-of-reserves-resources-and-future-net-cash-flow-for-the-alkaid-horizon-within-the-ahpun-field/file

Pg 5

Possible reserves Oil 2,800,000 bbls, NGLs 2,328,000 bbls, Gas 27,389, 000 cf

The liquids, oil and NGLs can be summed as salable liquids

In the Lee Keeling report the liquids are attributed a future cash flow value of $95,550,000, no value was granted to the gas at that stage

These number were base case, and reflected the $80/bbl prevailing at the time

Max and David, cover the why on Dubhe 1 in this presentation, well worth the time to view

https://youtu.be/4Y_crvEZPRg?t=928

Visible signs of progress on pad preparation at Dubhe 1, dated 25th May

Megrez 1 top of screen, Dubhe at bottom,

https://eos.com

69.83411=148.69527

Sorry I cannot put up a direct link without including my personal account detail, but with the site and GPS coordinates above it should be searchable.

Abacus

This statement is wrong

- Estimates provided by consultants are based on the available data. All of the analytics performed for Dubhe-1 will have aslo been ran for Megrez.

It is impossible for analysis to be the same "ALL of the analytics", when the key one proof oil mobility is missing at Megrez

As you are aware the target reservoir of the Dubhe 1 well is the SMDB reservoir, it has been successfully flow tested using a modern fracture stimulation, in the revisit of the Alkaid 2 well. Fortunately in Alkaid 2, on the way to its target the deeper ZOI, it passed through the SMDB, exposing a potential test site. Despite this being on the fringe of the SMDB, in a poorer more shale prone part of the reservoir, with only 100ft of net pay, it produced an average flow of 45 bpd over a 5 day period.

This is the major difference between Dubhe and Megrez, Megrez failed the oil mobility test, the Dubhe target reservoir has already passed the oil mobility test

FYI Dubhe is targeting a SMDB reservoir section 500ft thick v 200ft at Alkaid 2 SMDB, and into an improved porosity and permeability

Yes Kodiak and Ahpun are separate reservoirs, and are considered separate projects, although there is some overlay where the basin floor fan (kodiak) extends under the Ahpun acreage

Roughly size wise Ahpun has 400m barrels of recoverable liquids, and Kodiak 1200m

Ahpuns advantage is its immediate proximity to the TAPs oil export pipeline

Abacus, as I am sure you know, a prospective 600m barrels is very different to a contingent 600m barrels. In Megrez 1 if oil had flowed the result would be a re rate from prospective to contingent. So the comparison in which you equate prospective and contingent as equal is flawed logic