Member Info for TT-T

We don't know when that got tested - they may even not have sent those samples off until the extent of the formation damage was found to be so extensive and they tested what they had already. We may never know that.

I think the samples were collected during drilling not testing. So this will be at a time when a degree of damage had been caused, but its not clear how much and how 'bedded in' that damage would have been. I don't think this tells us anything about the pressure as of today.

There wasn't one in 2019 when there had been a project update in November. It may be that with our most recent update we won't get one unless there is more tangible news. Either way, it doesn't look to have been a requirement.

If anything a scandal like that increases the importance of being seen to do good for the constituents. There is damage repair work to be done.

It could be, but I don't know whether it would be. I would agree that the cap essentially means they have exclusivity on the "first" 50mmcfgd. As such, they should be free to negotiate for any production in a day that exceeds that limit. So 51 to infinity is theoretically up for grabs.

This would all depend on the actual terms of any exclusivity and any consideration paid for that, but it could be an implied or express limit to the exclusivity.

The RNS seemed pretty explicit that testing will begin in Jan 2024. I don't understand why you suspect it has already started anyway? Am I missing something there?

What was the point of this? There is nothing new here you haven't said several times over recent weeks now. What is baffling me is what you hope to achieve with this repetition.

This is pretty much the offer that PRD made to buy out FRAM in 2020. It was half what we had an option for but PG didn't want to offer that amount. The offer was rejected, CEG swooped in and here we are some years later getting more or less what we asked for at the time.

Snapple Dr Pepper special dividend of $103.75 in 2018 - Microsoft really isn't the largest ever special dividend, and there are also other options of returning capital to shareholders.

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.

They are entirely separate. Shares were loaned to the company and will be returned by the company. Market price for the shares is no relevent and no one needs to have bought them.

Do you know it's closed already or are you referring to the deadline of tomorrow morning?

Jimmy, what about the CNG study and long lead items. Any insight into what proportion that will take up?

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.

Sorry, clash of terminology there. That is when the drills reached TD, not when they completed. The point was they were plugged, abandoned and not completed for further testing.

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.