Member Info for ZENGAS

Yes happily for more than the 3rd time as i see 48 hours later this is still the topic.

Read slowly then let it sink in.

1) There is such a thing as a watchlist - you put the stock in your watch list if it perks your interest and it has been in that list for quite awhile.

2) I already said before on 8/3/23 17:26 - "For a further time I said in the past - I would be interested in investing on the back of Tilapia - didn't happen. I was interested when they said they were in for Seme"

3) The accounts came out on 31/7/23 and perfectly normal to comment on them at this time - but when i posted the actual numbers, debt, debt service repaynent timeline as reported in the document -someone took it upon themselves to have it removed - not my figures - the companies own figures ! Nobody discussed it.

4) I also answered 8/3/23 14:12 -"What's it got to do with being invested or not. Discussion on a company is open to anyone who has an interest in it or the assets it is interested in (See wtachlist comment). I CANNOT HELP IF THE ANSWER IS NOT TO YOUR LIKING full stop but quite frankly its none of your business !

LSE themselves " you are not to restrict or inhibit any other user from using the boards".

5) I have given an answer as before in the past and no doubt you'll ask the same a few weeks or months down the line again if i choose to comment !

6) Fact I have posted 11 times (now 12) on ZEN in the last 30 days mainly re-answering the same brain dead questions to some of you and shows Canary again for his false assertions -"you post more than i do" (well boo hoo !)

7) Canary = 19

4) TYB = 33 last 30 days and. running into hundreds

5) AJ 8/8/23 20:31 - Zengas why dont you answer canaries question.. why do you post here when you are not an investor?..

Canary 8/8/23 - "I asked you a question, which was: why, since you are not invested here you come in day after day spinning false and negative narratives. Discussion on a company is open to anyone who has an interest in it or the assets it is interested in. That is not an answer. Stop avoiding it and just answer the question asked,"

Canary 8/8/23 - "You post here more than I do and yet I am invested and you are not. "

Canary 8/8/23 "I have simply politely asked you why since you are not invested here you come in day after day spinning false and negative narratives about Zenith

Canary 8/8/23 13:27 "you still haven't answered the question of why, since you are not invested here you come in day after day spinning false and negative narratives"

I asked Canary a number of times to put up what i had posted was false - he didn't and replied by saying "I'll leave out the false info bit"

If you don't like the answer don't ask the question !.

AJ I have quoted all figures from last weeks accounts.

Are you therefore saying that the accounts passed by the board are wrong ??????

I firmly believe you may get your 3-4p here but not in the manner you expect.

Best of luck.

Be my guest AJ.

You know the argument is won when all anyone can do is threaten you, attack the poster but not debate the facts - even you too TYB with your labelling of posters as Norwegians.

Not one fact in the accounts disputed, the accountants remarks nor the cEOs letter and turn tale 4 days later.

You're like a dog with the bone - u see only the bone and nothing else no matter what your told.

For a further time I said in the past - I would be interested in investing on the back of Tilapia - didn't happen. I was interested when they said they were in for Seme and others said it was in the bag - but i cautioned against it too and eventually proved correct..

Now about the false info i've spread - you still cant answer.

Well let me tell you i was the first to question the discrepancy in the unsold oil and liftings and i asked how long they were prepared to wait in disclosing price sensitive news re the cash situation. I'm not going to waste cash in any company without doing my own research so if there is some ridiculous god given rule that someone like you thinks you need to be invested first before discussion shows you to be more the fool.

I went through the accounts in detail to see the very latest financial picture when they were released ***just one week ago which was the earliest opportunity giving a clearer picture of their current state.***

I'm sure lenders etc would have now been able to go through them in full detail when released to the market. Regardless - by the CEOs letter he said they were pursuing on with Benin (hey ho still on track according to the CEO keeping my interest alive that they maybe will get it) - then within 4 days and after hours they say after DD they are no longer going ahead with Benin. You can believe that but i do not. They can say whatever they like but number one fact is they don't have the money. That leads me to believe that they won't have the money for any other major asset such as S.Sudan or Yemen without a significant dilutive raise given their existing debt profile and meagre income - instead they are diversifying into small time consuming assets that are too far geographically spread using up whatever available cash resources they have. It continues their asset hopping which seems more reactionary than carefully planned imo.

When you get a chance Canary do please state the false info i've posted and stop lapping up just what you want to hear.

There you go again Canary. I give you a clear answer and you still want more. How do I know you’re an investor or not somebody at the company for that matter ignoring all the questions raised ?

Further you say you’re not attacking the poster but go onto say I’m spreading false info. I’ve asked you a number of times where is it false and you avoid answering it.

What's it got to do with being invested or not. Discussion on a company is open to anyone who has an interest in it or the assets it is interested in.

That's your answer.

Now can you answer the questions i put to you rather than attack the poster ?

What false info have i posted ? Are the figures in the accounts wrong ? Have the accountants not made those remarks on the pages i quoted ?

I think you will find the share price, valuation and diluted state of the company is not down to any poster on a bb but the performance by the company itself.

To drive the share price up, the company needs to improve it's performance. Therefore you need buyers who believe in the opportunity not random individuals on a bb who bury their heads in the sand because they don't like where they now find themselves. When you offer reasons why you think it's a buy convince people and not ignore the holes that people who do their research can find and question it. Therefore what is false and what is negative about anything ?

Was i wrong about Tilapia or Benin (that some who said was in the bag must still not have seen given their absence - as they slipped it out after hours on a friday evening).

If one of the reasons to pull out of Seme is the geo-political situation near Benin, then from that i believe Yemen and South Sudan could equally be off the table as the political situation is much worse by comparrison and therefore i view any reasons to go in there would be highly contradictory in light of what he said about Benin.

"Yuu do realise that South Sudan and North Sudan are an enormous distance apart don't you? It is nearly 2,000km between Khartoum and Juba."

Yes i do and you should realise South Sudan is entirely dependent on getting it's oil out of its landlocked country via Sudan - the only 2 pipelines that travel all the way to Khartoumn and the refinery there and onto Port Sudan in the North East for world export.

The war has been waging there since mid April in Sudan. Many of the oil workers have left Sudan and millions of people displaced with threats to shut the pipeline by the RSF without the worry of actual damage to any of it at any point by either of the 2 sides, pumping stations along the way or port infrastructure - so this makes Benin look like a different world away in terms of risk. This is what i completely find at odds re risk in what the CEO says re shareholder funds yet decides to pursue something in S.Sudan which could put a small companies light out.

How is it another example of me trying to spin all info to be negative. I've never heard you query one thing about debt and service, the sheer excess as i see it of travel and consultants and the spin re risk.

Can i ask you what is the false information i have spread ? Please print it !

You beggar belief for your own petty unresearched ignorant reasons and lap up only what you want to see as positives. The performance of the company speaks for itself.

Further - If Benin (laughably) is suddenly deemed risky on the geopolitical front on account of recent activity in the wider region, what took him to a conference in South Sudan in June or pushing into war torn Yemen ?

Canary

You can't get it or refuse to take it in.

The pipeline now built running from Agadem to Cotonu is an infrastructure project for the Chinese to get Nigers' oil out. It is not an oil industry for Benin.

Benin has no oil production.

If anyone can deliver on the Seme field on the exisiting and past infrastructure well and good where 22m bls were produced BUT it has never needed or depended on a pipeline running through the country which in itself doesn't mean an oil industry.

An oil industry is built on exploration, production and export of it's own resources not a pipeline that runs through its territory taking someone elses oil for which it earns a transit fee which is the major reason for it and an easy revenue earner for earner for Benin. The pipeline was originally planned to go via Chad to link into the Chad-Cameroon pipeline but the Chinese negotiated to go through Benin as safer even though vastly more expensive for this route.

3/8/23

Benin says Niger oil pipeline not impacted by regional sanctions over coup

The PetroChina-backed export pipeline project is expected to link Niger’s Agadem oilfield to the Benin port of Cotonou. Total investment in the nearly 2,000km (1,243-mile) pipeline, including a second phase development of the Adadem field, is expected to reach $4bn

“The current political situation has nothing to do with the execution of the project,” Alassane Kora, deputy chief of staff of Benin’s minister of mines and energy told the Reuters news agency. “This means that at the moment, the work is progressing in Niger and Benin. There may be just a delay in the schedule. Otherwise, under normal circumstances, by October or early November, the first drops, the initial tests, should have been done,” Kora said.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/3/benin-says-niger-oil-pipeline-not-impacted-by-regional-sanctions-over-coup

I have been through the accounts in detail and i find that as of 31/7/23 the accountants note Zenith is seeking to acquire funding but so far 'have not been secured'.

P37 -"The Group believes that this financial commitments will be covered by a combination of funding generated by operations, funds raised post year end, funds to be received from the national oil company of the Republic of the Congo (SNPC), ****as well as further planned fund raises within the going concern period. ****The Directors believe that the planned fund raises via the various sources of capital available to the Group will be successful.**** The Group’s ability to raise funds has been demonstrated in the year ended March 31, 2023. ***However, as at the date of approval of the financial statements, these funds have not been secured.***

P49 Going concern Management have prepared the financial statements on a going concern basis of accounting which, as stated in note 2, is dependent on the group being able to raise additional funding as required. This is considered to be a critical accounting judgement.

The Consultancy fees and travel expenses in the last 6 years are absolutely horrendous totalling over $16m alone. Both these items are excessive for such a small company and which is now working on securing a few hundred bopd in the US. This doesn't take into account salaries, admin etc.

Consultancy fees yr end 21st March

2023 $6.658m

2022 $3.028m

2021 $611k

2020 $629k

2019 $1.021m

2018 $1.135m

Total last 6 years $13m.

Travel for the same periods

2023 $762k = $14,600 per week.

2022 $617k = $11,865 per week

2021 $206k = $3,600 per week.

2020 $425k = $8,170 per week.

2019 $567k = $10,900 per week.

2018 $548k = $10,538 per week.

Total last 6 years = $3.125m

Shares in issue

2023 2.3 billion

2022 1.872 billion

2021 1.163 billion

2020 577m

2019 260.4m

2018 239.9m

It's clearly stated in the accounts that fundraisings are planned even in the event of winning their arbitration cases. If they don't win/or win within the period - funding needs will be much heavier.

Canary - you said "their interest in this project was all to do with the development of the Niger-Benin crude pipeline"

It has absolutely nothing to do with that.

When Zenith made their bid for the SEME field they were to use the existing facilities which by the way has already produced 22 mmbo from SEME.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/ZEN/offer-for-s232m232-field-in-benin-9ipqkv85a2cynli.html

How on earth can anyone link an unconnected pipeline for other producers in a different country as if this is going to influence Zenith or Benin is beyond me.

22/9/22 "Benin is a stable and attractive jurisdiction for foreign investment, and we look forward with great enthusiasm"

10/1/23 "We view Benin as an attractive jurisdiction for foreign investment and we look forward with great enthusiasm"

17/4/23 "Pleased to confirm necessary legal and tech work for finalisation of the PSC"

On the 28/2/23 they raised £2.3m from investors for planned finalisation of Seme in Benin as well as planned operations in Yemen and business development opportunities in Africa and the middle east. That was around $4m in canadian dollars - yet 4 weeks later they were down to CDN$ 1.442m (4.5 months ago).

In the CEOs letter of which he released in the accounts on 31/7/23 - "The company has energetically continued to implement it ambitious growth agenda with business development opportunities underway in Benin"

Yet 4 days later (after all that been done and said) on 4/8/23 - "The Board has taken the decision following a comprehensive evaluation of recent geopolitical developments in the vicinity of Benin, the significant long-term investment required to successfully develop the Sèmè oilfield, and the material progress made in other jurisdictions where Zenith now intends to maximise its technical and financial resources with comparatively reduced risk for the Company's shareholders."

It's nothing to do with geoplitical developments elsewhere - this would not stop them operating an oilfieild in Benin. They do not have the cash and without it unlikely to gain the field that 4 days earlier where happy to say they were pursuing.

Unfortunately It's nothing to do with the situation in Niger.

The Niger-Benin pipeline is owned and built by the Chinese for the Niger Agadem oilfields with companies there having an agreement with CNPC/Niger for export access. It's not to link the 2 countries.

Benin will earn a transit fee for it traversing their territory from landlocked Niger - much like the Chad- Cameroon pipeline which takes out crude from landlocked Chad - No Cameroon fields are connected to it. Completion is due Q4.

Oil from Seme was not going to get or need access to the pipeline - why would it ? Seme is already offshore with a supposed $100m of infrastructure facilities. It's already at the coast. The oil could go anywhere as before. It wouldn't connect into the pipeline which itself ends at Cotonou which is a major port for all kinds of shipping.

West Africa focussed Afentra announced SPAs with the following for 'non operatorship' in a number of blocks where Sonagol, Ina, Azule and other partners are present.

SPA with Sonagol for 20% of a number of producing blocks.

Announced 28/4/22. (Effective date 20/4/22)

19/7/23 Changed to 14% as a result of Azule acquisition and unchanged effective date).

Suspended for 2nd time (19/7/23) with completion expected in Q4 2023.

SPA with INA for a 4% non operating stake in same producing blocks in Angola

Announced 18/7/22 - Completed 10/5/23 = 10 months. (Effective date 30/9/21).

SPA with Azule Energy for 12% of same producing blocks in Angola.

Announced 19/7/23. Completion expected Q4 2023. (Effective date 31/10/22)

The small INA deal took 10 months to complete.

Sonagol ongoing 16 months and expected to take to Q4 2023 - maybe 21 months in total.

Azule expected to take close to 5 months.

Delays to completing the Sonagol acquisition which was expected to complete in March ie almost 12 months after announcement was the wait for licence extensions and improved fiscal term agreements and then after that with Azule withdrawing the terms were changed to allow Sonagol to remain operator thus AET reducing the stake in the original agreement while increasing overall with taking on Azule.

The above was for an overall 30% and the smallest deal taking 10 months to complete, all non operatorship and an overall near 6k bopd from being a non producing company.

Saves SPA for S.Sudan was 12/12/22 - and by end Sept will be 9.5 months. There's some 64 fields which i expect to be more complex re any issues on dd like pollution, legacy issues, possible licence extension terms etc (i think block 5A 2027 ??? which is only 4 years and something Afentra had to wait to get changed in theirs as mentioned above). There's also likely to be discussions/agreements with the other partners - have any of them changed their plans ?

It's never all down to government but the overall picture needs consideration which none of us are party to - but to complete by end of September for such a sizeable asset, nine and a half months isn't unusual as if it's somehow seen as the government holding things up whenever they are crying out for investment just as Angola are.

Agadem pipeline announcement today.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/8/3/benin-says-niger-oil-pipeline-not-impacted-by-regional-sanctions-over-coup

RR - My post on 21/7/23 12:45 i gave no mention to Niger in it and unaware of the Coup which was to happen a week later.

That post still reflects my main concern at the moment and also closing the next deal.

On Niger i was consigned to at least a further year of waiting after they said at the agm no new exploration drilling until self funding or a partner.

S.Sudan at 55k bopd on $70/b oil = some $1.4b + $300m from Nigeria = $1.7 billion.

Reaching a full 5k bopd in Niger even at that rate mid-late next year when fisrt commercial oil is up and running (different to test oil) is roughly $128m revenue using the same $70/b oil so would have brought us to around $1.83b.

In all Niger at 5k bopd would be 7% of total revenue and i didn't envisage that kind of revenue kicking in until H2 next year - so at most perhaps represents 3% in Q1 2024 so right now it's no major concern to me. I expect if the next hyrocarbon asset is closed this year it may be 1-2X that of what Niger would be bringing on stream.

It's in that context i am not worried in the next 6-12 months re Niger and i'd rather see ECOWAS sort it out and take whatever strong action is necessary as it may render them pointless.

Temper that with no spend being made in Niger in that time if things can't continue as normal. That would actually mean net debt reduces all the more in the meantime if those renewable deals can't be sanctioned as the cash wouldn't be spent. We were to put up an expected 25% of the costs thereby incresasing net debt.

Renewables this years a/ report P34

Windfarm Niger expected to sanction in 2024 generate first power 2025-26 window (P72)and therefore revenue. Cameroon Hydro sanction sometime in 2024 with first power in 2027-28.

My worry isn't Niger or the renewables that can be pegged back - it's completing on S. Sudan and the following hydrocarbon acquisition.

The renewables team aren't much of a drain in context. The staff numbers were built up for hydrocarbon and potential renewables acquistions. Weigh that up to with the added gas contracts that came on along with Amocon in late May.

RR -

On the 14th July 2023 post at 15:44 I was using a net debt figure range of $1b - $1.2b for Save and was getting 71-82p against Tullow.

'If' it were to be as low as $700m by year end it would increase my basis to 87p - 98p.

It was much more against KOS. which today has a m/cap of £2630m f/diluted + £1.650b net debt = £4.28 billion EV.

Save at £1 = £1420m f/diluted + £530m net debt = £1.95 billion EV - so is still discounted by 55% versus KOS (and which i don't expect to equal any time soon).

I would see fair value north of 85p on South Sudan if thats the case on net debt.

If the net debt is that low by year end it might explain why a further (at least one) material acquisition is on the cards by year end.

On the basis of all the other deals mentioned by us and others re cost - we should be able to realistically add 20,000 bopd production and 100 mmbls 2P for another $400m - less effective date discount.

The really outstanding possibility i see for substantial share price advancement beyond the above is that it could become possible that we could add that amount of production/reserves (after effective date discount) purely from cash. I don't think PIs have thought of this potential scenario. These in turn throw off cash flow and its just possible that we would be an ultra low net debt or net cash company by comparrison to those mentioned.

So as i see it imo, definitely exciting times going forward.

(Re watching for gas contracts - we should see some income flowing in from the Amocon one that started on 31/5/23. Also the gas compression project is underway page 83 - Roger Wilbrew head of operations - completes next year).

Reflecting on that end of April analysis by Shore Capital and if they are close to their Accugas and COTCo assumptions

They show net debt of $257m end 2023 on those assets.

The headline figure is 'UP TO' $1250m for S.Sudan.

The oil price has been $100/b average for 2022 and $80/b average for 2023.

If FCF is an average $20/bl minimum x 55k bopd x 30 days = possible $33m/month.

If the 1/1/22 were to be the effective start date that would be a discount of $33m/month or a reduction of $600m+ by end of Sept 2023.

Further If $150m is based on contingencies in that 'up to' price - it just could mean we need $500m to complete the S.Sudan deal.

If $500m were to be the amount to complete the Accugas deal along with $257m year end expected net debt on Accugas - it's possible overall $750m net debt by this year with at least another $50m+ to knock off for Oct-Dec 2023 production from S.Sudan.

Therefore could Saves' net debt be as low as $700m overall this year end based on 55k bopd S.sudan oil/23k boepd at Uquo and circa $1.8 billion revenue.

By contrast Shore Capitals anaylsis 3 months ago on 27/4/23 used $260m for an arbitration award on top of their $200m Chad-Cammeroon ETS valuation.

The paragraphs below suggest Save owed no more than $100m for the deal - not $170m as they have $70m of that cash on their balance sheet (can they use this for S.Sudan?).

Overall that would indicate a value if that award amount was successful along with the pipeline interets less $100m owed to Exxon max = about 19.5p overall net.

"The headline acquisition price for Chad was $407m, although we estimate that the final completion amount was less than $100m due to the presence of effective date and completion adjustments.

Assuming that Savannah drew down an amount apprroaching the maximum $170m under the Exxon facility, this would imply that a significant proportion ie >US$70m continues to sit on Savannahs balance sheet. This would seem consistent with the $217m of reported gross cash held at the end of March 2023. "

On the above basis re Accugas/Cotco revenue - they estimate closing net debt in 5 months (yr/e 23) of $257m.

Saves initial cost for the Exxon assets was put at $372m & up to $50m contingent.

This was for 40% of the Doba Oil project which was approx 12,000 bopd + 55.4 mmbo 2P + 44.1 mmbo 2C. Pipeline interest of 40.2% in TOTCo & 41.1% in COTCo.

Save said they were going after what they had lost and would lose as a result of the nationalisation.

At the minimum in the relisting presentation - Saves 9 year free asset cash flow was estimated at $76.5m/yr average = $688.5m and when added to the purchase price = $1060m before contingencies.

The FCF without re-investment even if it was all profit and taxable at 30% leaves an overall 9 year figure along with the original purchase price coming down to around $850m .

Separately FinnCap on the 27/3/23 had a valaution of $368.2m for the 2P, $297.3m for both pipeline interests, $131.8m for the 2C and $41.2m for pipeline upside = Total $838.5m.

Given Save were prepared to sell 10% of COTCo for $44.9m - strip out a pro-rata 41.06% in total for COTCo and 90% of the upside figure - in total $221m - it should leave some $600m to chase (not counting the 41.06% of COTCo or $221m stripped out which should never have been in doubt as it's not part of Chads remit).

On the basis of 1420m fully diluted shares £1/$1.30

$600m compensation = 32p/share.

COTCo 41.06% valaution pro-rata based on currently intended 10% sale $184m = 10p/share.

$170m owed to Exxon ?? = less 9p/share..

If successful, how it's paid is anyones guess but with access to bank accounts and the country being landlocked it should be possible to recover the cash some way.

The announcement is to 'advance the various workstreams' - so it's not solely down to receiveing ministerial consent imo.

Maybe ministerial consent can't be given until some or all of those are completed.

As far as i know, you can release an RNS to the LSE 24/7 7 days a week and they publish it next business day.

As the interims this past four years have all been on the 30th September, and this years 30th falling on a Saturday i'd go for the interims and a further S.Sudan update on either Friday 29th or Monday am 2nd October.