Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
The costs connected to drilling don't include a sum for a new drill. A little before that, the prospectus stated this:
"The Company is seeking through this Document to utilise the majority of the Net Placing Proceeds for MOU-4 well costs and rigless well testing of MOU-1 and MOU-3 and MOU-4. The gross cost of this work programme for the next 12 months is estimated to be £3,802,804."
Basically testing then CNG development takes everything with some general working capital.
What was in the kitty before this given the quick MOU4 drill and the previous raise is another question. It does seem like there are unallocated funds there, but not from this raise.
All the money raised was accounted for in the prospectus with no space for it to be used for another drill *if* they stick to those plans.
That said, the prospectus seems to fully cover testing with the newly raised funds, so does that mean we have spare funds available from the previous raise that was going to do a lower-key testing? I've lost the thread of how much that was though.
We can be guided by the previous RNS proposing the placing though which confirmed an intention to place with institutional investors. That is the first time I noted that claim from a PRD placing RNS which implies that they have not sold to institutional investors before, so the new institutional support is likely from new institutional shareholders:
"Predator Oil & Gas Holdings plc (LSE: PRD), a Jersey based Oil and Gas Company with near-term gas operations focussed on Morocco, announces its intention to issue new ordinary shares in the capital of the Company (the "Placing Shares") to institutional investors at a placing price to be determined following the completion of an accelerated bookbuild process (the "Placing Price") (the "Placing")."
It may well be correct no institutional investors bought more than 3% but we won't know that until tomorrow. The deadline to file the Tr1 is two trading days after the uncertainty is settled and the shares are admitted, and they were only admitted yesterday.
We then don't know how many or whether any institutional investors bought in but under the 3% limit. On its face the existence of those investors was confirmed on the RNS so its likely they exist, the question is how many of them and how much they bought.
I know that Novum are typically a bucket shop that sell to PI's with deep pockets that flip shares . The requirements to take part in such things are not that onerous - half a million in assets may be enough to get yourself on a list.
This RNS, however, states that they are targeting "institutional investors". My understanding is that this is a term with a real and meaningful definition that does not simply refer to more than regular retail investors. That seems to me to be the first serious look in we have had at formally attracting institutional investors, and that would surely be a very significant milestone.
I also note that this is a very short window for a raise. That ties in with interest from real, sizeable institutional investors. The usual buck shop placees would need longer than overnight to call around and gather £7m from would they not? This exudes confidence - is an 11p start for the chance to entice this level of interest a price worth paying?
Girlse - you can also take a look here: https://www.reddit.com/r/PredatorOilandGasPRD/ - the sub reddit PredatorOilandGas - a lot of very useful posts have been reproduced there for ease of research.
actually we really ought to thank pofc for that rather half ****ed attempt at fud. he has provided two very clear examples of what it looks like when a drill is completed, but the wells plugged and abandoned. in each announcement we see that they were able to evaluate the results and identify that the gas was non commercial and so did not compete the well for flow testing.
as many on here have said, why would you spend so much on completing and flow testing wells if you did not have confidence in results, or could already see it had gone wrong. you would not, you would have done what was done in these rarb drills.
perfect example to differentiate prd when the fud crew allege lack of results in the drills to date.
It's not unprecedented in a region such as Morocco. The company is not the final arbiter of the contents of RNS, ONHYM is. The strategy of holding cards close to the chest might be Paul and Lonny. However, it is more likely that it's ONHYM being very cautious about anything being released before it's ironclad. They have been burned before in highly embarrassing events.
Reporting that two of four prospects ruled out? Specifically the sections where the closure had not been premapped and where there were borehole issues. That isn't how I read that announcement. It says both of those prospects are being assessed to determine next steps. That isn't ruling it out or why spend money on analysis?
Don't forget that there is was gas at MOU 1, but when they told the market what was there it reacted very badly. As PG said recently the conditions in guercif make analysing the well results difficult and it does take some weeks to do reliably.
Now in relation to MOU3 it was easy this ay there was 3% gas shows on the shallow formation, but no numbers on the rest. Either conditions were easier to measure in that part of the shallow sands, or there is an awful lot more gas seeping out there than it looks.
Testing awaits now and I look forward to the results