Member Info for tonynorstrom1

Doc Jones,

No offence taken - I appreciate the quality data and insight you have brought. To clarify:

1) It is not my report - its a Mirabaud report which I have already updated on an excel spread sheet with the latest data I have so I can play about with different scenarios. Everything you said on the NOI expansion due to the increase in POO is spot on. The point I was trying to make was that I3E's latest guidance on NOI (and hence implied FCF) seemed to fall short of the Mirabaud report. I cannot rationalize the difference - it should be a straightforward calculation. Does I3E's NOI guidance meet your expectation ?

2) The report does not currently accurately reflect the Canadian Acreage / Reserves which I did not have the expertise or data to add. Now I can have a stab based on the information you have provided.

regards

before I get shot - A typo in the 3rd last line for Management Options - it should read 5000 boepd.

So thats 58m warrants + 75m options = 133m

The vesting criteria are clear and seem to indicate all the 75m will be issued against these milestones. If there is any doubt maybe DOC can ask when he meets with I3E next week. This being the case 25m are ready to exercise now and maybe another 25m by July. I suspect the reason for not hearing about them yet is to do with PR - we may well hear about them in the coming weeks after the announcement of the dividend.

Also interesting that the vesting criteria for Serenity is only 25mbbls 2P reserves. Seems like a lowball target seeing that Management are touting a potential 100 mmbbls recoverable oil.

There seems to be a bit of confusion over outstanding warrants and options. I'm not sure why because it is in black and white in the re-admission documents. The comments had me second guessing myself so I went back and re-read. The numbers are important, because if you are forecasting a 6 month or 18 month target - you want to use a realistic share count. So here goes:

Warrants : (refer to page 650 section 4)

58,694,348 still to be exercised (most at 0.01p and about 11m at about 33 -56p)

New Options (refer to page 661, section 6.3.3 & 6.3.4)

6.3.3
"The Company also intends to make i) awards over 43,248,832 ordinary shares to employees and directors of the Company and i3E North Sea; and ii) awards over up to 31,935,420 Ordinary Shares to employees of i3E Canada and employees of Toscana who joined the Group following completion of the Toscana Acquisition (together, the “New Options”). The new Options will have an exercise price per Ordinary Share and be granted under the terms of the Existing Share Plans."

So in summary over 75m new options at 5p.

6.3.4
The New Options will vest after three years, subject to accelerated vesting on the following performance targets being met:

a) For Employees of i3 North Sea (other than the executive directors and those employees in corporate roles) :

1) One Third Immediately
2) One Third at spud of next Serenity / Liberator appraisal well
3) 100 per cent upon third party reserve auditor attributing 25 MMbbls 2P post drilling of a Serenity / Liberator Appraisal well

b) For future employees of i3 Canada following completion of the Toscana Acquisition

1) One Third Immediately
2) One Third if July 2021 production exits at or above 9000 boed
3) 100% upon the addition of 5,000 boepd or 25 MMboe 2P reserves

c) For Directors and those employees of the Enlarged Group in Corporate roles

1) One Third Immediately
2) One Third on reaching either reaching the Spud on Serenity / Liberator or if July production exits at or above 9000
3) 100% upon a third party auditor attibuting 25MMbbls at either Serenity / Liberator or the addition of 5000 boed or 25MMbbls 2P reserves

No one mentioned it directly I don't think (unless I missed it). On the first page Doc had 6 month and 12-18 month price targets of 31p and 100p respectively (assuming that $0.55 & $1 referred to CAD).

These are pretty lofty targets and go to highlight the potential that DOC sees particularly in the Acreage in Canada. Majid did mention that he thought that the Canadian Acreage could have the same potential transformative effect as the North Sea. So as Graham once said - all to play for. Would be nice if DOC could highlight a couple of Canadian peers he thinks demonstrates the value that the Market is not currently recognizing in I3E.

Milan74,

Sorry to hear that - hope you had better luck with other investments. I'm still down - need another 3p plus to break even - had to average down many times to get me to this position.

Doc Jones seems to think that the SP can go someway towards getting back to the old highs - lets see - you may have to go back to that draw yet !

PiratePete,

You cannot be serious - of course I know the difference between the US and Canada. I worked for a Company that had operations in both Canada and the US as well as working in Houston for 6 months.

I try not to belittle peoples posts - who have I done that to ?

Milan74,

I see you dont post very often on I3E - are you a SH.

I remember BBN very well - people hung on his every word. Whilst I thought he was pretty smart - he did end up wandering off with his tail between his legs . His research though wasn't in the same league as Doc Jones. Also situation is a little different this time round - I3E is a producer with what appears to be rugged financials although it would be good to have audited results to look at.

PiratePete - I admit it here and now - Doc Jones has taken the Crown.

Does not mean you cannot test your own thesis by challenging the data / report. Its an opportunity to learn and also for who ever makes the report to update in the next issue if they have missed anything.

Piohc1,

Also interested on your thoughts so I can update my model - I dont want to be working with outdated information.

With respect - if you put it like that WTI is irrelevant:

i3 is approximately 57% gas (associated with AECO gas pricing), 18% oil (associated with Edmonton Light, which is roughly WTI minus the typically $4 and $6 per barrel Canadian Light Sweet Differential), and 25% NGLs and condensate (which are separated by stream (C2, C3, C4, C5, etc), and are associated with either AECO gas (in the case of ethane) or a differential/discount to Edmonton Light (in the case of condensate, propane, or butane)). See a description of GLJ’s relative pricing assumptions on page 234 of 574 in i3’s Admission Document of August 11th here. In all cases, these differentials are determined on a daily basis as an applied discount that considers both hydrocarbon quality and transported distance to a main processing hub (typically Edmonton, Alberta plus the onward US refining hub). There are 460 wells producing varying hydrocarbon streams, qualities and distances to those hubs, so the realized per-boe pricing varies on a well-by-well basis.

The brokers have had some time to discuss all this directly with I3E whilst making their models/reports. Until today it appears you have not read the re-admission document or talked with I3E. Whilst I think everyone hear accepts your research is several notches above anyone here - some of the people here have made and effort to try to research. The brokers notes report also covers S&G and finance charges etc which im not sure you have looked at.

You suggested that we took a look at comparable Canadian companies - I have asked you to kindly provide the names of a couple so we can compare. I have already taken a look at 6 that were mentioned on twitter - (Gear Energy, In Play Oil, Surge Energy, Petrus Resources, Cardinal Energy, Tamarack, Bonterra etc)

You also gave us a metric for EV/Flowing Barrel. Do you have a corresponding value for EV/2P. One thing I noticed is that most of the above Companies had considerably more Oil as a percentage of the mix. They also had significantly more debt.

kind regards

Piohc1,

Really - how old are you - 11 ? The reports I have referenced are the latest reports on I3E's website and issued by their brokers. Before you criticize anyone - please go back and look at your posting history and ask youself whether you would consider your input as quality research ?

Doc Jones,

With respect - your comments are not 100% correct - you have not read the report fully.

1) Mirabaud state why they have used Brent and then applied factors to get to realized pricing for both Oil & Liquids
2) The Production is variable and may well have been correct at the time of the report. The CEO made this statement in his December 12th Podcast and gave a different figure.
3) As far as warrant and options go and referring to the re-admission document:

Warrants
58,694,348 outstanding all at 0.01p except for about 11m @ 40 -56p (ref page 650 &651)

Future Options for Employees & Directors:
43,248,832 (Ref 6.3.3 page 661)

there are also awards and options per 6.2.1 and 6.3.1 but its not clear what is already included in the 700m outstanding. I can only get to the 840m number by counting all the above which may be double counting. But it does appear that there are a minimum 43,248,832 options (approved) to be added to the warrants i.e. a share count north of 800m.

which report ?

Mirabaud Report go to Investor Relations/Analyst Coverage:

https://i3.energy/investor-relations/analyst-coverage/

test

I'll dig it out from the re-admission document - from memory roughly 70m warrants and 70m options. Its also stated on the 1st page of the Mirabaud november report - top right hand side.

Heres the link:

Warrants Page 650
Options Page 660

https://i3.energy/investor-relations/admission-documents-circulars/

That's not right - nearly all the warrants were re-priced at almost zero in order to extend the terms of the loan notes. Then theres a shed load of options which are priced at 5p.

These are detailed in the re-admission document. This can be found on the I3E Website.

Investor Relations / Investor Documents

Doc Jones,

I assume you already know - you have considered about 700m shares. The number we should be looking at it 840 fully diluted.

test