Member Info for TT-T

Does anyone have any views on why his posts might be considered spilling the beans? They didn't announce anything that I could see, they even seemed less enthusiastic than some of his from years ago.

What we know is that the sandjet equipment (and therefore likely team) was in place. We know the CTU was on site and we know the regulatory approvals were granted. From that, I don't see any likely source of delay to the start of testing.

We know that there were severe storms and flooding, so we can't discount a delay to the progress of the testing, but nothing so serious as to have warranted an announcement so likely not more than weeks.

We know that ONHYM are very sensitive about positive announcements having been embarrassed in the past. We know that ONHYM now require pre-approval of testing related announcements. We also know, thanks to CHAR's recent issues that ONHYM are quite happy for negative news to be released immediately. CHAR's water content in its drill was announced very close to it being known it would seem, and they did not wait to announce it bundled with the plug and abandon RNS of today.

That suggests to me that we have not had negative results from the initial rounds of testing. It doesn't tell me much about why Lonny has decided to leave or been asked to leave, but it doesn't look like it would result from negative testing. Remember Lonny jumped ship from his previous position at SDX energy to go to PRD with really very little notice. In that time, he has been paid fairly well at PRD, been awarded options and even bought £50,000 on the open market (figure to the best of my recollection). Lonny's share's remain, but if he is leaving, he won't be paid by PRD. There would be more motivation to stay at PRD being paid until he had somewhere else to go if the results were bad, and there were no pressing personal reasons for him to go - which I accept could include falling out with PG. On the contrary, its a lot easier to leave a paying job if you think the results are likely to be good and you can expect other sources of wealth in the near future.

As an aside, today is the first time I've seen an impactful RNS with the usual trolls in filter mode. Its nice to see the real potential concerns discussed without the yammering of the bozos getting in the way. Really do highly recommend it.

The only thing I'm fairly confident of is that he would not have been fired due to a failure in testing. Firstly, finding locations with flowing gas wasn't his job - he isn't the geologist. Secondly the last thing you would want is to spread panic before having to release poor results so it hits even harder. You'd announce both together at a time of your choosing (i.e. there is no need to fire him until you are ready to announce)

I've had an unfiltered approach for years, but really enough was enough. I've filtered these clowns myself and it has become so much calmer. I'm in something of a zen state now just waiting for results. I've read all that I can and taken my position. There isn't all that much benefit now in the positive or the negative.

I agree the 7th Aug RNS left some ambiguity in parts in relation to the First Extension Period, but the 8th Aug RNS was explicit without the same ambiguity. It says in terms that the Regulatory process is concluded and that planning re-commenced (past tense) on entering that period.

Black is white! Up is down! Pay attention to me because mummy doesn't love me!

I'll admit I'm a little in shock re Ireland and still processing.

That has always been an on the shelf idle 'wouldnt it be nice' part of the projects for me. But to have the potential farmin partner basically saying they will take anything we can get is a huge note of confidence. As the finances have already gone in, it also can't be dependent on Morocco or Trinidad which are as yet too uncertain. That suggests the farm in partner has agreed substantial contributions as part of the in principle agreement.

For anyone that hasn't had their coffee yet like these two corner facing hat wearing individuals.

The sandjet programme. Singular, has started. Once started this will see through to the end of testing. I suspect this is an important distinction for the licence having started before the amendment period so it can finish.

This element of the testing programme at mou3 is expected to last five weeks. This is the time frame for the well prep, all equipment arriving and the testing here. After that, it will move on to the next target as part of this single testing programme.

This is not complicated analysis of technical information. This is clear, simple and easy to understand.

So yeah casing - after just 2/3 mins easy checking:

RNS 27 June 2023 re MOU3:

"No logs were acquired over the shallow interval, the results for which were previously announced, which are behind 95/8" casing."

"Wireline logs were run as per the pre-drill logging programme. 41/2" casing was run to the casing shoe at 1494.5 metres TVD MD. The well has been completed for rigless testing."

Wikipedia - completion (oil and gas wells)

"Perforated casing

Production casing is cemented through the zone and the pay section is selectively perforated. Gas and water are easily controlled as is sand. The formation can be selectively stimulated and the well can be deepened. This selection is adaptable to other completion configurations and logs are available to assist casing decisions. Much better primary casing. It can however cause damage to zones and needs good log interpretation. The perforating cost can be very high"

Stephen Staley stepped down in March 2022 - it's there I. The 8 March corporate update RNS. Thomas Evans also looks like he stepped down about a year ago. So both must have had good leaver status, but neither have the current inside track either.

PRD need the extension if they want to pursue phase 2 as soon as is practicable. If they are willing to wait a couple of months, no, they don't need it. PG explained that the biggest obstacle is there would be a lengthy delay in transitioning between the current phase of the licence and the next one. If memory serves, a further payment/security is also required to move into that which we really don't want to have to do before the testing is completed.

We are not in the position whereby there is any regulatory requirement to get the extension to complete our testing, to take any other steps in order to qualify for the next stage, or any restriction on what we could do with the licence if we simply proceeded to the next phase.

In short, we don't need the extension, we want it. It is a PRD self-chosen pre-requisite to have in place to start the phase 2 testing.

I agree that PG should not have taken his eye off that ball. I would say I can understand it. Having processed all the other amendments smoothly, it is natural to believe the same would happen again. He did not know of the change of ministry staff or the effect it would have and he accepted that was on him.

Older and ... Wiser? Either you are too lazy to dyor, even to the extent of reading the reports of the present evening on this sight within the last few days. Or you are simply trolling and spreading FUD. By this stage those are the only probabilities.

Yes PG talked about the licence. No we are not facing the prospect of someone else coming along and taking it. Yes, we have already qualified for the next stage - as has been included in previous RNS's. No we don't absolutely need the extensions, but they are convenient including to allow the greater flexibility in working without yet more externally enforced downtime.

Time to find a new angle.

All signed off by ONHYM, just with the ministry to process which ought to be a a formality so its imminent. The staff that didn't know what they were doing last time have now done this before and PG is staying more on top of it.

Keith - the regulatory side of things was also given some more meat. PG said that ONHYM had signed off everything as usual, but there had been a change of staff at the Ministry and it took them a while to understand what they actually had to do and get it done. This was a point where PG confirmed he had taken his eye off the ball there a little too as he normally gets more involved to make sure it's all done.

Thinks like the larger guns does sound a bit odd. He said again that the larger perforating guns were being held onto by others. My impression from the way it was described was 'withheld' rather than 'in use elsewhere'.

Paul was properly a lot more conservative as to what the current round of testing was likely to establish. I believe that was 120 plus around 60 BCF. The larger TCF comment was a much broader, and likely a much longer term estimate.

My understanding of the Ireland point was he referred to the dept rather than any one individual. He had said that they were due to have replied to our application by the end of Jan. That didn't happen and the current deadline is by the end of Q1. So we should get a response within weeks but given we didn't hear in Jan we may not by the end of March either.

Another comment that struck me during the CEG presentation was general outgoings of 2-3 hundred thousand dollars a month. That seems a huge outlay and reflects auch larger team. Understandably a team of that size is better able to get things done, and stay on top of them.

Outside of big ticket testing we have a very different cash burn rate. With that in mind, I can understand how it's difficult to get everything kept to indicated schedules. Perhaps it would be worth taking on some.more staff but it's important context for our expectations of what they *surely* could have done in Amy given situation.

It was an interesting presentation.

Overall I remain confident that nothing has changed with the geology and the ultimate risks/rewards recently. The share price is unfortunate noise and what matters is whether or not what we are trying will work. I was reassured that we are in technically sound hands.

My take is that Paul did not really want to be there, and I can understand why. He did lose his temper a little when he was being harangued by a shareholder afterwards about managing expectations and giving time frames. However whenever he spoke about anything technical or procedural you could see he knew it inside out and was generally calmer and more persuasive.

Two key points that were clarified afterwards:

1) the regulatory extensions are a matter of convenience. There is nothing we have to to do keep earning extensions or get to the next phase. We are already approved for the next phase, but to shift from one to the other will require down time of approximately 5-6 weeks (so likely longer). The downtime or delay in the extensions should normally be lesser, and he did admit he took his eye off the ball of that process recently.

2) there was no technical obligation to test. It was essentially market pressure to test something when all good options had been taken away. It *might* have worked but in hindsight had insufficiently good odds. That said, silver lining it has helped them get a better understanding of the extent of the damage so that the odds of sandjetting should be better as a result.

Paul stood out to me as the only speaker who really understood the nuts and bolts of what their company is doing, but that comes at a cost. His presentations are not as slick, he does not do as good a job of communicating news to shareholders. That said, the market does seem to be very odd at present. CEG have a farm in all but finalised pending regulatory rubber stamp. That will give them a payout of £12.5m aside from all the benefit it brings to their operations, but their mcap is £15.5m still. They have definitely been a *confetti* company, but that does seem to be a disconnect.

There was also an interesting comment that the data in hand to date supported an estimate of 7TCF over the prospect. I don't recall off hand having heard anything estimate in TCF terms from Paul before. If that is just the data in hand to date that bodes well.

Remember that this is just a set of slides to accompany an oral presentation. This is not a purely written comprehensive update. I would never expect all details to be set out in the slides.

The last presentation was RNSd on 18 May, the day of the presentation. I've been expecting the same again here.