Member Info for Surfit

I also think some "people" are getting confused with how FID fits into the process:

Start extract

"......FID stands for final investment decision (FID). This is the point in an energy project in which the company or companies owning and/or operating the project APPROVE —OR SANCTION —the project’s future development. With the FID, the company or companies basically say to investors and the media ‘we are moving ahead with this project because we have (or have raised) the money necessary to pay for its execution and start of operations, and we believe that this project will make money for us in the future.’

Typically, it is the board of directors of a company involved in an oil and/or gas project who makes the Final Investment Decision for a project. When companies say that they have taken or made an FID, they mean that they approved the project to go ahead.

For example, Chevron said in one of its most recent project decisions: “Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVX) announced today it has sanctioned the Anchor project in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. This marks the industry’s first deepwater high-pressure development to achieve a final investment decision...........”

End

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Complete-Guide-To-FIDs.html#:~:text=FID%20stands%20for%20final%20investment,Why%20Does%20FID%20Matter?

SFT Note: IN some cases the FID is then separately proceeded by SANCTION, BUT it MAY be interpreted (as most do with OnG experience believe) that CHAR will receive the 15million ONLY if the project is subject to the Final investment Decision which is to SANCTION.

Let hope the whole point is mute and ENOG go with the Anchois-1/2 development, although not separately mentioned in the RNS.

What is important to remember is the also the fist part of the RNS

7 Dec 2023 07:00 RNS Number : 0120W

Project Development:

Leveraging their combined expertise to co-develop Anchois, the parties are aligned on the next steps for the project development, including:

Drill a further well, in the east of the Anchois field and conduct a gas flow test in 2024, with rig contract negotiations advanced. Multi-objective well:

Evaluate undrilled low-risk deeper sands, to potentially materially increase the resource base for a development above 1 Tcf

Optimise development scheme through a production flow test

Provide a future producer well

Expansion of the existing offshore development plan, to accommodate potentially significantly higher production

Finalise ongoing gas sales negotiations with focus on meeting Moroccan energy needs

Progress exploration together across Lixus and Rissana, including a 2024 seismic campaign

We may ALL (me included) be getting caught up in trying to read between the lines, but with CHARs BoDs its good not to make too many positive assumptions

Rgds Sft

OKAY ANSWER ME THIS: Is payment of the 15million as stated "on completion of FID" is that on a positive decision on completion of FID or also payable on a negative decision on FID?

BDC, In my comments I did not question the FID AND 15million did I? OR EVER HAVE I???

I have learnt that you have been consistently wrong in your interpretations, you speak with no authority or imo little experience.

Regarding the 85million it is detailed (as per RNS) as tied in to the drilling campaign it does NOT state cash if not spent.

Again as said before the wording of the RNS should be read carefully and does not included detail wording that a contract would include.

After all this time "WE" should have learnt to read carefully and not assume by now.

Good find Fernan.

Mathios Rigas came across very well, CHAR seems very minnow'ish and are only 4yrs younger by comparison. Interesting comments regarding Haliburton providing the TECHNOLOGY for reservoir evaluation to CHAR and listening to ENOGs relationships with them.

Mathios Rigas speach focused on ENOGs ethos; including when to purchase assets: Cheaply.

What are your thoughts on the remaining (precieved outstanding) aspects of the June 22 CHAR/ENOG farm-in deal.

I feel the RNS information, obviously not the full detail of the signed contract, is open to some interpretation but as written indicates there is a RNS/FARM INREQUIREMENT for more actions I.e. seismic to come.

Note: Disagree about cash in lieu of drilling, does not sound as a benefit for ENOG, and doubt that would have been agreed in a contract if it was it would be stated in RNS. ENOG gave NO free carry to CHAR in ANY way and paid a paltry 10million with option on 15million (FID) for the % 😂.

Rigas if you think about how he started and then dealing with the Israelis MAY know how to strike hard bargin deals AND as the farm in proved our BoDs do not.

Rgds Sft

Are we sure, contracts always carry fine detail and contingency clauses. Devil's in the detail as they say.

But it's a good discussion let's hope CHARs BoDs used good lawyers who wrote a good contract.

FID on what though is the Question BDC, does it mean FID on successfully flow tests of Anchois-3 or where we are now?

I can only assume it is down to the fine detail in the signed farm in CONTRACT, which SHOULD also detail contingencies?

None of which us (obviously) we are privileged too?

BDC that is exactly what I stated and supported by including the RNS date, number and extracts in my post at 14:28hrs.

Glad your in agreement.

If ENOG decided not to continue and hardback it increases CHARs value back up a bit again not to pre Farm in price but up some?

30% of Chariots has to be worth some, its just goes back to cash flow and Loukos....as per Fernans calculations, it will not cover BoDs wages (our largest of all our outgoings).

But I still think the Seismic is required AND there MUST, repeat MUST have been discussions during the very lengthy farm in discussions regarding "What if" Anchois-3 drilling was not as hoped....it would be unimaginable for a contingency plan not to have been inplace.....unless all the OnG directors are complete idiots (now be nice). ANY business manager let alone a director would have risk assessed this.

They even mentioned such a possibility in an RNS.

It all about the data and IMHO a need for the Seismic ( if there is to be NO requirement for Seismic (as they may have readjusted the actual findings /data with Duncan Wallaces "Devining Rod Geotechnicals" 🤔) then it's a different story.

But CHAR are working from a weak (cash flow) position....and possible ENOG are more important to Morocco's goverment now than CHAR?

Rgds Sft

Results of Anchois-3

27 Sep 2024 07:00

RNS Number : 9198F

"........The appraisal target reservoirs of the C and M sand were drilled deeper than the gas bearing sands in the Anchois-2 well and into the water-leg at this down-dip location. The Anchois North Flank exploration prospect was found to have well-developed O sand reservoirs, with associated gas shows, but also water wet. Both holes were plugged and abandoned, without flow testing the Main Hole, and the drill ship was demobilised......"

Question to consider: Reference to Anchois-1 & 2 both wells have (I am assuming this remains the same) only been "Temporally abandoned/ suspended" and what ever happens is there is a liability to return to either move forward to production OR return to abandon.

So who after the farm-in is responsible if the Anchois-2 project if not progressed?

Reference RNS 18 Jan 2022 07:00

RNS Number : 7348Y

".........· Anchois-1 operations will now complete with the well in a condition to allow for potential utilisation in the future development of the field.

· Anchois-2 well, drilled just prior to the Anchois-1 well operation and successful in its appraisal and exploration objectives with over 100m of net pay, has already been safely and efficiently suspended for potential completion as a production well in the future development of the field........"

CHAR will shortly need to look at financing again (as we have discussed) and from the RNS

Again reference 27 Sep 2024 07:00 RNS Number : 9198F

Corporate and Financial

Cash position as at 30 June 2024 of US$3.6 million supplemented* by a fundraise completed in July 2024 which raised circa US$9 million (gross)

*SFT Note: Previously stated 3.6mill from "unaudited accounts" Question is this deferred payments???

I am hoping that we either get some clarity over the EXISTING ARM IN DEAL (See below) OR a NEW FARM IN deal....BUT we should have some clarity (again see below on existing farm in deal (AS I SEE IT) over company financing moving forward rather soon and one good indicator is looking back at the farm in deal structure as I read it the first part was

7 Dec 2023 07:00 RNS Number : 0120W

· Chariot will receive:

o US$10 million payable on completion of the transaction (SFT PAID)

o US$15 million payable on Final Investment Decision ("FID") (SFT NOT PAID)

o US$85 million gross carry including:

§ All Lixus costs up to FID, including the additional Anchois well with a gas flow test (SFT PARTLY COMPLETED I.E ARE WE STILL WORKING UNDER THIS PART? )

§ Planned Rissana seismic acquisition costs separately capped at US$7 million (SFT OUTSTANDING)

Then it goes into the variable uptake: (POSSIBLE NOT GETTING TAKEN UP BUT DEPENDING ON NEW DATA AND SEISMIC???)

".... Following completion of the Anchois well, Energean will have the right to acquire a further 10% of Chariot's equity in the Lixus licence for:

o US$850 million gross development carry to first gas (including the US$85

Hello Surety, all valid points...except Christmas is only

Stena Forth Location:

Tarragona, Spain

ATA: Sep 28, 12:03 UTC ARRIVED

Navigation Status: Moored

I see no reprieve. Months of "Data analysis" ahead?

High wages, limited investment, no financing, water wet finds, still a flow test required at Anchois-2 and Loukos to yes/no on commercial viabilities, equipment selection, time on equipment procurement, time on development offshore (production trees, select a Rig, pipeline, pipelay vessel , build onshore processing facility, onshore pipelines???

Liquidity as ever for CHAR whilst Morocco and ENOG assess data and consider deal options.

If an RNS came out that ENOG were going to spend the 7million on the previously agreed seismic survey that is our only hopeful NEAR term good news option ( imo).

Just drop this in the bottom draw and prep the house for winter, save some money on energy bills 🙄

Rgds Sft

But first they will (imo) complete a share consolidation, THEN the BoDs will start the rinse repeat process again.

Rgds Sft

@ BDC, thank you for that post.

I found that VERY intresting from the RNS related to Vivo, Duncan seems to it the video (Post drilling) to state it was for enhanced learning for further onshore development...more spending?

NO mention of income generation????

Where as ever in any of this company's investments is income generation (apart from their salaries and free share allocations) stressed as a primary focus....they truly have deep pockets...mine though are empty...for CHAR anyway.

Or am I missing something...?????

@ Fernan thank for the costings if it does generate such it may just cover the BoDs salaries and office costs...if they cut back by 2million....its a (to late) worry...

Thank you both.

Rgds Sft

Hey Fernan we have been consistently aligned this though out.

We are where we are and due to the reasons we know.

Are we throwing the baby with the bath water, I can not help but hope Duncans evaluation are not totally off? After all they commenced a drilling campaign at Anchois-2 that proved successful (don't get me started on flow testing though 😂, CASH AGAIN 🙄).

That's why I saw (after details of farm-in were disclosed) /continue see Loukos as so critical not only for data validation, after the Anchois(-3) failure but KNOWN requierment for income:

That's why we could see they bought it i.e. following extended farm in private discussions but before the RNS disclosure of OFFshore detail I.e. extensions to FEED, FID, Sanction, procurement, development (Subsea installation, pipelay, build of a proccessing facility's and production, even if there was no equipment or contractor availability issues that's two years after sanction (imo)

The big question is, as we are all pondering, as ever cash...if Loukos is not commercially viable to cover the 1.2million (imo) per month out goings....

What will

ENOG must be in any mix and consideration obviously.

It is a sure thing with the data they have from the Stena Forth results they will be revisiting and rescutinising ALL of Duncans ( AND the contracted CPR) submitted data.

IMHO if it (Anchois-2) is deemed as remaining "good" a deal will be struck to develope on a appropriate scale.

This will have to come on the way of a drill rig, but do you load it with a production well and install on that trip but again A-2 needs to be flow tested, and they appear not to have want to spend the cash whilst on location? That is what concerns me.

Time and cash ( as we know) put CHAR depending on: LOUKOS : reminder extract from 24th June RNS

".......Chariot intends to sell initial volumes of up to *3 mmscfd to the midstream CNG business under a long-term gas sales agreement from potential future production from Loukos;

· Additionally, Vivo Energy intends to design, fund, construct and operate a CNG plant and virtual distribution network to transport natural gas from a number of sources, to existing and new industrial customers in Morocco; and

· Finally, this midstream CNG business would be operated through a special purpose vehicle ("SPV") in which Chariot can participate in up to a 49% interest.

The parties will now look to advance the gas offtake, midstream and other related agreements. Whilst there is no guarantee that this will be turned into fully termed documentation, the parties are progressing with this next stage and further updates will be provided as required....."

*Sft note: WILL 3mmscfd be there and will it be enough and how long to generate income?

Kindest Sft

It would be interesting if such an attempt was undertaken.

Even after AA came in there was a significant % reported still under private investor ownership as in via Nominee accounts like banks or online platforms (ii or Hargreaves).

Although many may have cut thier losses many may have just rolled the dice?

One intresting point to consider if there was a management take over or buy out as a direct result of their actions, inactions, incompetence, fiscal mismanagement, share holder dilution, share manipulation as Chariot is a UK registered company, is legal redress:

https://www.franciswilksandjones.co.uk/smes-directors-shareholders/shareholder-disputes/disputes-with-management/

I came in directly after the Stena Drilling on Anchois-2, it looked good for a small company to go forward with.

Then the BoDs started investing cash into the other pillars whilst still no income, coupled with a deeper look at the outgoings and where most of it was going...Director wages was a red flag BUT AP had invested heavily, although claiming it back later.

They were promoting the Anchois development on the scale based on Anchois-2...using the SS7/ Schlumberger alliance....they continued to invest in the 2 other pillars and it started to concern me.

Then the farm in was a shocker they went into a larger scale enterprise...this resulted in significantly enhanced risk, more time and more money. The market saw it and the vulnerabilities were clear to professional OnG brokers.

I had been banging the drum on RISK and Fiscal control much to the annoyance of many.

I should have jumped but could not exit with out (at the time) thinking the loss would be too much and got caught up on the HOPE Duncan Wallace's assessments were going to be right....now I am sitting on a really and significant loss.

I did not follow my own doubts in Management (AP's history with Petra, BoDs planning, transparency) Risk (Drilling), financial ( Primary requirment is generating a source of income to meet out goings, spending on long term unclassified/unquantifiable projects in renewable and Hydrogen and Water).

I accept its my own fault, but just could not exit as I was in too deep after the fall of the sp (post Farm in) and all that was left was hope 🙄.

Loukos remains crucial (especially since the farm in) and even more NOW! but again its all on Duncan Wallaces data....but let's remember the other directors have got us here because they did NOT go for the fast Track development of Anchois-2., wages and deluded long term low income renewable projects.

The market does not trust them, hence the sp value.

There is a case for Director culpability in significant miss management.

Rgds Sft

Lokous ENOG your our only hope...😂

https://youtu.be/zGwszApFEcY?si=qb9CSSneF9mVeKPq

Re media info, they done that on the Thialf once, when oboard but that was DURING ops.

A drone wiz around takes 5 mins, so not sure that speculation is applicable (imho).

Rgds Sft

Good post M3.

It's looking like a possibility that after the disastrous RNS and information dispersal they are saying absolutely nothing.

I have even heard of some ships being comm shut off to block outgoing info...although nowadays not sure if that would be possible, aloud or accepted ( young crew mutiny 🙄😂).

But with supply vessel moving too and from and the Stena Forth having not moved away....it certainly feeds our speculations.

GLA ( I belive its rather needed).

Rgds Sft

I suppose it does also indicate that they do NOT intend to go to port immediately either?????

With out the cargo manifest could be delivering and backloading (waste) anything from basic supply's, food, fuel, water or new equipment. Even doing a bit of crew changing could be possible?

VERY strange STILL there though.

Rgds Sft