Member Info for Surfit

Then you know that a contracting service company would not or could not falsify to that extent?

If you prefer to trust Chariot (of no income in 18yrs, ambiguous reporting of A1/ A2 testing, not fully out lining the redirecting of raised cash etc etc) and there data for the truth and not Energean, Stena Drilling, and onboard third party service hands all of whom have to be culpable? Oooookay.

Kind rgds Sft

I really can't see a O&G company miss driling for a negative result. To be frank, that's just wrong.

If A3 was what was expected there was plenty of options for Energean. NO company turns down a hugh and SIMPLE development. They could have reevaluated the "great find" and stated, following THEIR OWN FEED analysis, the costs had increased and sold a percentage to another Operator. Happens all the time.

If you look at Shells (AND partners) discovery in Nambia probably written off to the tune of 400mil. The difficulties for getting oil / gas at these super deep depth are hugh.

Note: They, so some research indicates, are looking for more partners to share the risk.

https://www.offshore-technology.com/news/shell-unviable-oil-discovery-namibia/?cf-view

TotalEnergies (+Partner) still working on a FID for their finds. Decision expected June/July.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/totalenergies-set-take-fid-namibia-venus-project-late-next-year-minister-says-2025-05-13/

I stated previously that the lack of a Energean asset sale may have been a contributing factor, but if they found good gas they would not have tottaly abandoned the development but sold a good percentage. Chariot and the Moroccan would have signed off on it in double quick time, to get to production.

Although if the OFFSHORE data is still regarded as that good, we will secure a partner and AP will announce this at the AGM. They have had since September to look around, and also had all those companies that were trying at the last farm in.

Let's see. I flipping HOPE SO, but will not hold my breath, as the air tanks are now a empty.

GLA

Miss a target on purpose, directional drilling and logs are all recorded you know.

Rgds Sft

Omission

INSERTED "Offshore : Anchois+" The only way I see it's (OFFSHORE) going to be "subsidiary lending" is via the likes of Gulf states consortium funding, possibly helped by Morrocan brokering....again pure guessing.

At least its got interesting again.

GLA

Rgds Sft

Hey Wiggly,

Re Onshore: I am hoping that is why AP did not say anything re Loukos as he wants to drop some good news, they may not have finalised because if they had they would have to disclose via a RNS (I.e. price sensitive information) BUT to assume (With Chariot) can be dangerous.

So hopefully they have found someone to pay for exploration and or development? Very much remains in the "hoped for" box at the moment imho.

The only way it's going to be subsidiary lending is via the likes of Gulf states consortium funding, possibly helped by Morrocan brokering....again pure guessing.

At least its got interesting again.

GLA

Rgds Sft

No mention of Loukos? Interesting good or bad 🤷‍♂️.

Hopefully they want to announce some real news via an RNS and or at the meeting????

The Proactive interview does not say anything new WITH the acception of conformation regarding their new strategy of funding at subsidiary level to be applied on the OnG side.

No news on the Hydrogen status pilot in Morroco and business model assessment in Mauritania, no news on Djibouti.

The big win would be on project Nour, if subsidiary funding can be secured....but they "may" be using the mining renewable in SA, Zimbabwe and Zambia as a proving ground for wind and or solar to develope the Nour project (combined with successful pilot of the hydrogen electrolysis in Morroco???,but that's a pure guess because they have not said.

As before let's hope they are saving something real for the meeting.

GLA

Rgds sft

Option to purchase is now on ii Gardie

Rgds Sft

Hey KnC,

The truth is I do not know, all we can do is wait to see what AP tells us at the meeting.

But whether that turns out to be true, could on past recorded presentations, be subject to doubt.

If its genuinely good and financial substantiated good news the market will see it, IF its more poor deals, more risk and more smoke and mirrors the market will see that too.

1. There is money to be gained from renewable financing so that side could be safer. The markets may look favorable at the resultant separation especially imho, if Laurent Coche: Green Hydrogen CEO and

Benoit Garrvier: Transitional Power CEO have over all control. I.e. AP is not in snr control of the board.

O&G: We have lost (as we all know) western institutional investment vehicles due to ethical anti fossil fuels BUT the Gulf states, China, Norke and possibley the States are still investing, so maybe AP can via his African dealing can tap into that?

But is Wallaces seismic data any good, there has to be doubt...guessing (not sat at the table) that would require further drilling and flow testing to prove and as another poster pointed out onshore is the cheapest way to test Duncans "data" AGAIN

I doubt Anchois will be moved forward, its onshore first. As before, minimum IMO +3yrs now for Anchois and only IF onshore proves Duncans Data.

But we never know the Morrocan gov may get help from the Gulf or China and we're off to the races 😂

Kind rgds Sft

Harry I was thinking about share consolidation (as you now seem to have jumpedonbthat bandwagon), as the amount of share placings has driven the number up to ludicrous levels, but thinking on a bit, that possibility has reduced some by the demerging of the company into two and the subsequent spliiting of the avaible shares.

True we and the market have not been given any detail on how this is to be done. Typical of the BoDs, I.e. make such an announcement and a reason for a share placing, but be vague on the detail so they can get an easy vote passed but the clarity will be supplied at the extraordinary GM, so you can, I assume vote your disfavour then possibly. But the demerger does naturally reduce the shares for each remaining company, without having the added sp loss that a consolidation results in.

H one piece of advise, your sounding more and more distraught, if the losses are that bad, I.e. its affecting your mental health, please do not be afraid to talk to someone...BUT a bb may not give the required council you might seek?

Kindest Sft

Timeō Danaōs et dōna ferentēs

Chariot have put out the voting rights for all those that are using Internet Nominee platforms I.e. Interactive Investor etc etc

‌2025‌ ‌EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING‌ Vote by ‌12-JUN-2025‌

Rgds Sft

Hello Surety, Do you have a link to Cavandishes assessment? Or is it undera subscription?

Rgds Sft

Jeeesus Surety, that's a slight difference. Taken the rope down now 😂

Let's see hey? Although its quite a big spread though between risked and unrisked🤔

I would assume that the Cavindish are in the dark as much as we are regarding risk that is reflective on there being still "some" uncertainty about the gas flow rates and quantity (Anchois and Loukos), the requirement for funding, will there be exploration Off and Onshore on the current (and maybe wider fields), what thoses results could be, Nambia and what's actually going to really happen.

Well at least the boring 10months post A3 are over, could be good news could be terrible 🤷‍♂️

Rgds Sft

Crickey that seemed to have changed down some, what was the un-risked evaluation, I supposes its percentages of 1.4p?

This reflects the reality since farm in and A2 results.

Rgds Sft

Jimmy

Things go wrong in exploration (NOT FOR 18YRS) which is why it’s so important to generate enough cash to cover basic overheads (I FULLY AGREE, CHAR HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS) and stay in the game without annual shareholder dilutions (I FULLY AGREE, BODs HAVE NOT AND CONDUCTED EXTENSIVE DILUTIONS). This is what is holding back the chariot share price as the market keeps on anticipating another fundraise (I FULLY AGREE, THE MARKET SEE NO END TO THE CONTINUED MISTAKES).

I remain unclear as to why people fail to see this.

Strange world 🤷‍♂️ Until the BODs demonstrate fiscal prudence, understand the operational costs accurately, budget accordingly and deliver what the publicly state....oh and deliver a product we will remain in a distressed position and unsupported position.

IMO of course other make statements as if they are fact and like the bod's it does not materlise I.e. 80% success of drilling 😂 classic hey Jim.

I suspect people would rather hood wink in new investors, than make a true assessment. 🤔

The market will rerate when the BODs deliver.

Rgds Sft

👍🙂

Thank you for your input Klein, I will ignore the insult but point out again the market Share Price and that assessment is (imho) directly in proportion to my doubts raised.

Question: Why is our sp valued at 1.4p with a market valuation of 16million 🤔. Now of course if you came in at that price although based on past management performances (management abilities and quality, is regarded as of some importance)

Working back from that is my attempt to understand why.

I appreciate that you wish to see more positive comments and am assuming you invested, like a few more recent guests, at a very low entery point? Those who came in at 1.5p could feel positive.

The points raised on concerns imo are valid and based on historical precedence.

It dies always make me smile when posters attack the poster rather than counter the arguments.

I wanted out quite some time ago but the farm in deal and subsequent SP fall scuppered that. So averaged down to reduce my SP.

It's hard to trust DW and his work, remember the two of four onshore wells drilled will have targeted the best as per their data....🤔

Farm in negotiation skills, A3 offshore well targeting, not flow testing.

But my negative is not specifically intended as an attempt to see the share price fall but in the hope of posters submitting sound counter points. Not generally possible the market agrees with me not you.

Kind rgds Sft

I agree Fernan, there is seems no intent to reduce such. Now there is going to be two seperate companies it will increase costs overall.

The other point about Chariots not forfilling the tasks outlined in /as for fundraising through share placing is the questions asked is are they:

Not accurately assessing the costs of the tasks?

Not accurately assessing their out goings?

Not accurately informing where some of the funds are going to be redirected?

Knowingly miss representing their intentions to complete the tasks knowing redirecting towards both other projects and operating costs?

Take your pick, it is appreciated that smaller companies need to be nimble but they MUST also maintain etremely tight fiscal knowledge and controls.

Unfortunately the sp reflects market sentiment and possiblely a more accurate understanding of the ability and integrity of Chariots Directors. Compounded by the unusual position of a company never generating a sustainable income in 18yrs.

None the less, the renewables arm has been the first to secure some sort of financial support but requires better clarity on costs vs income. The O&G fits firmly into toss a coin due imho due to the above points raised. I.e. no rerate until the market see and real chance of income.

GLA

Rgds Sft

Yes Fernan, he has been there too long with too poor results and poor operational decisions imo.

Re the financing: reading the last two banks that supplied 50mil each: 100mil.

The RNS states:

· Innovative DEAL designed to guarantee customer demand to ENABLE NEW renewable power BY providing developers WITH revenue certainty needed to break ground on new projects

AND

· US$100 million in guarantee financing has the potential to unlock an estimated US$500 million of new renewable developments, equating to a total generation capacity of circa 500MW from wind and solar projects

I read it as financing projects?

Rgds Sft

Hey Fernan, thank you for clearing that up for me.

I appreciate your not interested in the renewables arm neither was I but I am warming too it, but they still have a $155 mil to invest.

I have lost total confidence and trust in the O&G side.

Wonder who will be the CEO of each probably AP he will probably get an increase in combined salaries 😂

He can't leave DW alone on the O&G, he left the group alone for years before he stepped in to support and expand the groups arms? 🤔

Again thanks for the information.

Rgds Sft

Hey Fernan,

I thought the recent $55mil from Standard and the $100mil from British International Investment & GuarantCo (the total was $175mill)

Quote "unlocks new renewable projects by providing developers with the revenue certainty needed to reach financial close and commence construction"

They have signed the "Du Plessis Dam PV2 as the first solar generation project to reach financial close as part of Etana's larger renewable power offtake portfolio"

Construction starts (reportedly Q2????? 2025)

Also state "could unlock over US$500 million worth of renewables projects in South Africa"

1. They go on to say in a new paragraph "The US$20 million equity investment portion of the Etana financing....so that leaves $155million for other projects to invest in correct????

2. I must admit I do NOT understand what they mean by: "US$20 million equity investment portion of the Etana financing, which provides an ESTIMATED READ-THROUGH VALUATION of Chariot's economic interest in Etana of $34 million, will both support Etana's growth and provide working capital through to first revenues.

Can anyone educate me on what this actually means and gives???

3. They then go on to talk about TRADING: "It is anticipated that average margins of 15% can be achieved on traded volumes across the initial portfolio of wind and solar projects with projected gross EBITDA and annual free cash flow before tax to be in the region of $10 million within two years"

The problem of course has been believing in what the management say and do. But let hope the renewable guys a bit better.

In addtion these should be straight forward Construction projects (for Africa) and as its mines AP is possibley providing good introductions into this and its all in his area of knowledge 🙄🤷‍♂️

They are saying they do not have enough cash to keep the lights on (again), sort out the demerger, pay for Nambian licence or keep securing new projects.

We definitely need some clarity on how AND WHEN hydrogen can be funded at a "subsidiary level" I assume..but how are they going to get there?

Are they saying that the electrolysis pilot must be proven in Morocco before funding can be looked for in project Nour Mauritania feasibility study completed but no information provided on what are the component parts required and again how long to raise capital?

As usual it's all down to how much the market trust the BoDs and as we clearly see NOT ALOT there is too much smoke and mirrors and failure BUT as they have been able to secure A SIGNIFICANT SUM (175mil) quite clearly the banks DO have trust in some one in Chariot renewables arm?

Thoughts, rgds Sft