We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Not a bad read with regards to project Nour overview, ambitions and potential funding routes:
Better than issued RNS's
https://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/cefim/green-hydrogen/chariottotaleren-projectnourinmauritiania.htm
Rgds Sft
Hello Fernan: I was actually concerned how we were going to fund the offshore development directly after I came in post Stena Don drilling campaign.
If you and BDC belive we are fully funded to production of onshore gas, then fair enough.
I am not.
It may be that we secure addtional financing, figures crossed, if not its another share placing and further dilution.
Time will tell, I hope your right.
All the best Sft
Hello TheBold, Good points (Jimmy has also thought similary).
Such is YET to be determined of course and maybe that's why we (imo) have NOT had the FINANCE conformation/assurances I.e. Such financing MAY well ALL be being currently negotiated in ANTICIPATION of a successful drilling campaing ??? Figures crossed, and would be the best way forward when underfunded and after so many share placings and dilutions?
Hey BDC: Okay, it must be difficult to find? Or not readily available? but such a link placed on the bb would surely encourage other investors???
GLA
Rgds Sft
Hello BDC,
Re "Or you could just read the most recent RNS's and listen to the most recent investors call ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
I have had ANOTHER scan back and only found the two RNS below RNS relevant
29th Jan 2024 7:00 am RNS Operational Update
No fiscal assurance regarding fully funded to production for onshore
10th Jul 2023 4:32 pm RNS Proposed Placing, Subscriptions and open offer
1 For near term onshore drilling and development planning on a new onshore Moroccan Licence, expected to be awarded imminently; and
2 New ventures and working capital (🤔)
I may well have missed a conformation of fully funded to onshore production, If so I apologise. If you could post which RNS gives us the assurance conformation. It would be appreciated.
I would love to belive the investor calls, I do remember a bb poster found (sorry to whom it was) and posted good evaluation stating they they need $28million.
It was the only price placement on the onshore programme, I have seen. I should have kept the link!
A repost of that artical would be good as I have not been able to find information from CHAR on ALL costs.
Again BDC a link to the RNS would be greatly appreciated.
All the best Sft
Hi Fernan, I did and thought it a good post, and appreciated. Potentially good figures.
If the BoD's would issue a statement of assurance it would disprove the markets (and my) doubts AND afirm your calculationgs. Not too difficult an action (imo) to implement with significant results.
I do not belive this an inappropriate request, considering the current status??
Whimax, your previous thoughts regarding the required % sell off, may not be totally unfounded but the figure (I belive ) equated to just under 3% (pre 3% add at last fund raise) of Covalis 6 % correct?
I firmly belive the BoDs should address the issue and a statement of fiscal assurance would go along way, it would of course not fully derisk the onshore drilling or the offshore drilling flow test concerns.
All IMHO, DYOR.
Rgds Sft
Hey GP, Historically it has bottomed out at the next share placing price point, some one had best ask AP (as he does not know what and why 🤷♂️ this is happening to the sp 🤔🤥) when and and what price the next round will be.
IMO markets (and I) do not belive that management have sufficient cash to get to production, thats IF they drill and find commercially vial quantitys?
Have mananagment ever stated they have sufficient to get to production...i belive they have not...."only to drill".
Ask the CHAR IR to confirm the company cash runway to full onshore production, see what they say?
If management issued a statement confirming that the company will not and has no need to conduct further share placings you would see an instant return to 12 to 14p imo, strange that no such statements (or definitely and RNS) have been forth comming????? 🤔
An RNS for a mandatory TR1 change (sell off) still not forth comming, that is strange to.
Unless it's it part of the 87% that are us private share holders????
Which means the 6% have not sold out if not they must have private access to the ear of AP, especially if they came in at the last 14p fund raise?
Rgds Sft
Could it (% shorting) be used to offset a potential % of loss and actually earn (a small amount) in a unknown time line of uncertainty i.e. with out taking a loss by selling and remaining "in" as a resolve of the issue remains expected/ hope for?
I have seen this used before by creditors as an insurance against loss.
Ohhhh but "TheBold" going back to using the word RISK which I would guess that ii brokers have to consider....what happens if the onshore drilling on completion is a deemed not commercially viable?
Where is CHARS revenue income untill offshore is developed, what happens if there is not the flow rates expected (Energean have factored in some protection because of this...correct??).
These are the type of considerations that should be factored in...so it depends on your, mine, ii's etc etc appetite for risk...or can you give me or other investors 100% guarantee.
Positive: CHAR seemed to have allocated a high % of success BUT not 100%.
GLA
Rgds Sft
Hey GP, sorry bad timing. Must try harder.
Hey "TheBold" It will actually all be fine (hows that for you)? Unfortunately there are a few investors that think differently, so your short term by in will be affected, but as you have just jumped in recently, I do understand. Did you buy in at 12p? Or catch the bottom? Weldone. I am sure it will come good just not quite yet.
No I still have around 500k of shares, only offloaded 100k to TRY and recoup elsewhere during this stagnant period. IMO of course.
Yes checked the latest unaudited mid term, MAYBE you should to? Also have a look at the note 16
I will actually post another link for you. I try to do that when making comments in an attempt to support my thought process.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/ENOG/energean-israel-3q-2023-accounts-kap0pnfk31j8vmg.html
Summary: The carrying amount as of 30 September 2023 was US$2,588 million and as of 31 December 2022 was US$2,471 million.
My apologies if an honest assessment is not to your liking and I do understand you type of traders love to pull the deramp gun to discredit any one that get in your turnaround way, but I think it's going to be a while before we get a climb and for the reasons I have stated.
Good luck, if you bought in at 8p you may double your money if the onshore strike it.
Rgds Sft
It means investors even us PI and especially II's really do not like RISK:
Risk on onshore AND the offshore appraisal drilling, risking in financing and even risk from the new partner: tiny FREE carry for the give away, has the partner secured the financing for the development, they ALREADY carry a VERY SIGNIFICANT debt
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/simplywall.st/stocks/gb/energy/lse-enog/energean-shares/news/energean-lonenog-has-a-somewhat-strained-balance-sheet/amp
FINALLY investors are still not sure of Chars cash runway vs time to income (rosk another share placing at 8p??) no value placed on the other renewables arms only further RISK as further financial drain with no planned income revenue stream in short or medium terms or even spoken about longterm.
Finally there is RISK with CHAR management team itself.: Ability to control finances, cut short offshore drilling before flow testing, and stratagey on share dilution.
All my opinions DYOR, or listen to the (TBC) experts?
Interestingly (Positive?)
Still no TR-1 RNS issued for the sell offs? Has it been many of the PI (87%), or has an II (6% er?) just ignored the 3% change notification requirement ???
Hello TSSZ, very interesting and very informative artical. Excellent find and thank you for posting.
I was just wondering about stating payment is confirmed?
Looking at a previous much older Retuers artical the abritation information looks the same.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/iraq-petitions-us-court-enforce-oil-export-arbitration-award-against-turkey-2023-04-11/
I was just looking at the journalist and his history.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Bozkurt
It may be he is using the arbitration information for political OR investigative exposure purposes.
I am not sure of the current US District Court for the District of Columbia has as yet enforced a ruling ????
Again a good find, just may not be quite there yet, BUT certainly very informative.
Thank you.
Rgds Sft
Hello ValueS,
The economic logic sits very well and I fully agree.
The internal politics of Kurdistan independence aspirations (imo) must be / has been a important play in this, but it being too weaked or too deeply aggrieved is a dangerous game. Even more so with Iran having such powerful "the great game" players in Russia /China.
If Iraq and the Kurds can find a safe middle ground together both in politics and contracts, part of the Middle East has a better balance point.
Logic would say, that the timing and time is very close for a resolve for them and Turkey?
Despite these shorters not believing it or possibley covering either their or their clients investments?
Time will tell.
GLA
Rgds Sft
Correction: should read: ".....at best being just UNDER max OPEC deliverables"
Rgds Sft
Hello ValueS,
Thank you for the post, the figures, from the artical, look good and really informative:
" Iraq is committed to OPEC decisions and after its second cut to producing no more than 4 million barrels per day (bpd)"
" .....Iraq's current crude oil exports range between 3.35 million and 3.4 million bpd, he added.....
With the artical confirming previous production figures for Northern Iraq exports
"...Turkey halted Iraq's 450,000 barrels per day (bpd) of northern exports on March 25 last year after an arbitration ruling by the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) which ordered Ankara to pay..."
So it looks to confirm, as others have posted, bringing the Northern PL back sits well to at best being just over max OPEC deliverables.
Not that the Northern production could be brought back up so quickly but even when it has, it allows for "fat" on any unplanned Southern export unplanned shut in's / loss of production.
So I found those quoted figures very reassuring.
Thank you for posting.
Rgds Sft
Should read: "....These guys DO all this with a lot of professional investor experience...."
Hi Itsaponzi,
I am not saying this is the case but ii's can take a % short position to offset an investment, especially if holding at a high(er) average position?
Alternatively as it is clearly disappointing to see a 0.09% rise its increase could be utilised to undermine any confidence in a near term resolution, if WorldQuant did or did not know anything, accept there remains uncertainty. These guys to all this with a lot of professional investor experience.
To have a secure information source in Iraq, would imo be very doubtful.
They do like playing with % shorts though, they seem to have quite a few??
https://www.stockomendation.com/short-positions/holder/worldquant-llc
Still this seems to be running on a bit longer than many thought and as shipping prices increase, the Houthis /Iran senarios will not abate as Iran do not want them to...the Houthis actions have increased because the third party supplier financing has been increase accordingly ..so its not finishing soon.
Iraq will start to see AGAIN its better having the Kurds as strong than being manipulated by Iran to weaken them based on independence, some small form of devolution may be the way forward.
Just my opinions. DYOR/guessing.
Rgds Sft
Excellent and positive information TSSZ.
As FCFY also informs, opening that pipeline is cheaper for transportation and all parties are loosing ridiculous amounts of money.
Turn the taps on an all benefit, especially the Kurdestan people! 👊
FCFY you points are very insightful and appreciated.
Rgds Sft
Hi Inafer/Whimax
It's a gamble for sure, in that I feel that for the time being there are other opportunities "potentially" available within time frames.
I held on for the farm in news and it was not what I was expecting.
I did correctly belive that the onshore was going to be outside of any farm in deal as it was a good move to provide seperate and MUCH needed income to CHAR in a faster time frame, especially when BoDs knew what the farm in deal was going to be and how long it would take offshore to production income.
I, as ever, remain just as cautious on the finance vs cash runway.
Char remains my largest investment BUT feel I must speculate (not with out risk, I am fully aware) to try and recoup (i do not have enough to invest further and average down...again) following the sp fall, which I think will remain around 10p for some time.
In a way i hope I am massively wrong, not in my part transfer in to two other investments but that the char sp regains back to 18p "and beyond"
I may pull more out but will wait and see, the two other investments are almost as speculative but sit in closer return periods ( I hope!).
Then I would return my investments back in.
Could all go Pete Tong and some times it is best to sit it out and be patient, and not get swayed by such movements....its the finances that worry me.
Again I stress its just my take as ever DYOR.
Sincerely GLA.
Rgds Sft