Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
I will remain invested and Accugas must be kept sound with a 45p valuation on debt reduction or more with new contracts.
Gas contracts are increasing- should lead to increased revenues.
Also what happens post compression completion - possible new gas contracts signed pre or after that ?
Transaction costs gripes - yes agree and fair enough but given the prize of an asset(s) that were non recourse debt and capable of $200m+ FCF i'm not put out by these increased costs in trying to land them. Be different if we were doing it all from the original 3 contracts and revenues we had in place but we weren't. They end when the acquisitions end and heavier when your revenue base is lower - less so if we had 1-2 successfully under our belt ie higher income.
What's the REAL negatives/dissapointment here today ?
1) A large $56m hit for the currency devalution - pushing net debt up in the short term but to compensate we have to take into account the Cotco interest.
2) No real info on S.Sudan and relisting.
3) Both only added to the Chad issue all adding up to an outpouring of negative sentiment .
--------------------
I don't expect those costs to re - occur. Keep growing the Nigerian revenue on the space we have.
News on S.Sudan should be short term.
As Chad ICC nears - SAVE wait and see outcome - then if not in our favour surely the COTCo interest is not benefically core to us - though on the remaining 31% we own supposed to give us north of $25m/yr FCF on current throughput (but currently in dispute with the Chadians though not on their territory).
So sell the interest pro-rata and reduce the net debt in turn reducing the finance costs along with the principal ?.
DON'T refinance Nigeria - pay it down on the envisaged timeline and it's own growing revenues (Sell Cotco)?. Saves us $100m/yr what could be going to us as Shareholders or a future asset. In saying that we don't know what kind of additional contracts could be being considered with the spare pipeline capacity and buying in 3rd party gas, there could be $50m -$100m+ of new business potential so we're not party to future thoughts?.
If we land an acquisiton well and good - it should be able on it's own merit to entirely repay it's own associated debt. So again - i don't see the point in refinancing Nigeria unless there are fairly significant new gas opportunities on the horizon.
Reconsider/slow the renewables if an acquisition does not come through - or seek a separate listing for it down the road when the projects are ready to be sanctioned .
Niger oil - a lot of groundwork done so absolute worst case as said last week could offload for $100m region imo and knock the n/debt down further - doubt it, but it's there and think Niger situation will resolve. But if not, i'd want a producing acquisition at some point of 20-30k bopd to replace it and bought on it's own merits and debt.
From the SAVE website investment case at the start of 2021 we have through to 2037 - 'Contracted Cumulative Revenues' of around $4.3 billion based on the Take or Pay basis of the 3 customers which are Lafarge (Unicem), Ibom Pwr & Calabar.
-----------------------------------------
F/yr results in June - "At end 2022 we had over US$3.8bn of future contracted revenues with contracts having average weighted remaining life of 15 years" ie to Calabar, Akwa-Ibom and Unicem.
We are looking to refinance from the 5 year term (now down to about 2.5 remaining) but about $350m figure i think - its about 10% of the contracted revenues.
How much additional revenue (not long term fixed) is able to come through from the additional contracts beyond the 3 cornerstone ones ?
Mulak still too small but DCQ up to 2.5 mmcf/d variable but im not including this figure.
Post period end contracts (both renewed extensions & new)
CHGC up to 10 mmcf/d.
Notore up to 20 mmcf/d (though July -September 2023 ran at 26.3 mmcf/d).
FIPL - (Afam, Eleme & Trans Amadi pwr/stations) up to 65 mmcf/d.
Supplying 80% of the gas for those extended contracts = 68 mmcf/d and if you add that to the fixed contracts it just exceeds 200 mmcf/d on a TOP basis. Now not all of that gas isn't always taken, but invoiced and it has to be available but it's why i think we are at our limitations on contracts until the compression project is completed next year.
In addition -
SPDC also extended - i can't find the original mention or rns of this ?
New agreement with SHELLs SNG started August last month - size not stated.
We have a contract to buy in up to 20 mmcf/d from Amocon and i think we've been using 18 mmcf/d so given the area AMOCON is in - is this what we are supplying to the Shell contracts (SPDC & SNG) ???.
In real terms we are still reducing the net debt as said in my previous post (taking into account COTCo interest) but i'm getting to the stage of really just thinking it would be better paying off the existing finance debt asap in the original timeframe for Nigeria. (Perhaps this may have been considered in the projections from the oil acquistions and put on hold but Chad ran into problems barely 8 months ago).
Instead of financing costs and debt for Accugas/Nigeria -it would turn in to an immediate additional $100m+ net positive per year on top of growing revenues at a time of limited capex once the compression facilities are completed next year. That's cash that could pay down oil assets when combined with their cash generative power at $65/b+ or instead pay a very significant dividend.
ShoreCaps net debt profile was for end 2020 $408m, 2021 $370m, 2022 $404m, 2023 $257m.
"Net debt at the period end" (30/6/23) "admittedly increased to $443m compared to $405m at the end of last year although this appears to reflect in particular the unrealised foreign exchange losses associated wit the Naira devaluation."
It does fluctuate mid year somewhat positively or negatively over the course of the full year but this half year was a tougher one but hopefully and from i can see a short term hurdle.
The FX loss was $54m from the Naira devaluation - which is said to benefit SAVE post devaluation going forward. This has been accounted for in H1.
The payment of $44.9m from SNH in COTCo has been accounted for as recieved as i can see.
The net debt stands at $443m 30/6/23.
Full year end i think with the one of FX devaluation hit it should be below $400m based on the Nigerian/COTCo assets
We gained the Cameroon asset and the remainder of the COTCo interest pro-rata value imo should account for $135m.
Without that COTCo element we would be still on track for about $257m year end - perhaps in time sell it post resolution if no strategic importance without the Chad oil assets.
All in, I still believe we are on track to be net debt free in 24 months as the original envisaged timeline on Nigeria.
Accugas is performing very well and it's fortunate that they added those new gas contracts over the last 18 months and continue to do so.
There's costs that have been added for the acquisition strategy so if these aren't successful, those won't be re-occurring along with the increased head count which could be cut back imo.
On reflection and balance i'm fine with it but i do want to see a a significant acquisition completed to move us up a gear.
RR I’d like to see a presentation and a view from the analysts as well going forward.
The refinancing delays had been put down to the naira dollar issue and now seen as no longer an impediment. So let’s see where they go on this and I’d like it elaborated on. Still need to take a detailed look but there’s costs that can be cut. We’ve been set back by 6 months on the net debt reduction and I’d like to see this back on track by year end so until we know what the position is on the next transaction I guess we’ll have to wait. A talk through presentation definitely needed for clarity imo.
Still going over the accounts from 7am. The one off devaluation of the Naira accounts for about a $54m hit.
While the going concern statement may look worrying. The notes to this are more upbeat further down on rescheduling term or the actual refinancing.
Staff costs have crept up and if the transactions for the acquisitions don’t go through, then they could take the decision to cut those back. A lot of savings could and can be made but we have to wait to see how S . Sudan or any other acquisition pans out this year.
There’s a fair amount of one off costs with the transactions which hadn’t given any ongoing benefit. At least one new net contract and increased gas amounts added in the last 6 weeks. Plenty of income and increasing so hopefully this will overcome last reporting period given we are virtually in Q4 now. If those acquisitions don’t materialise they could cut the bloat for them along with interest savings under a new refinancing agreement.
Just looking at those vacancies you reffered to Trustilie
Saves 3 Nigerian office locations are Lagos, Abuja and much further away in Uyo.
The vacancy for a senior HSE co -ordinator
'Job Purpose/Objectives - To establish HSE culture in Savannah Energy work sites, by ensuring elimination of accidents and injuries' 'to deal with contractors, work sites etc and supervise 3rd party contractors'
Full job role - https://careers.savannah-energy.com/job/Eket-Senior-HSE-Coordinator-AK/956490655/
But It's based in 'Eket' and about 35 miles from UYO
I haven't looked at all our contracts but i don't think we had any in or around Eket ?
New additional supply contracts being developed ???
And I posted this on the AET thread 12/5/23 12:52
"Panoro were only a minor producer in 2020 before buying the assets for up to $140m including contingency payments in early 21. Panoro https://www.panoroenergy.com
3/5/23 Trading statement https://www.panoroenergy.com//wp-content/themes/hello-elementor/cision/releasesingledetail.html?releaseIdentifier=8B5CA8DE5DA30EF0
£241m m/cap $27m net debt. 6320 bopd Q1 2023. (Current 8,500 bopd)35 mmbo 2P.
3 analysts with an average 68% target higher than current valuation which is £400m m/cap if achieved (NOW £281m today 28/9/23).
If AET get a 2nd deal by year end /Q1-2 next year and have parity on production to Panoro's exit expectation for year end, i can see AET being easily worth Panoro's current valuation if no dilution on the 220.5m shares in issue.
If oil stays $70/b+ it could grow quite rapidly on a 12-18 month time frame even on a modest acquisition.
With the current acquisitions practically paid for, there should be decent leverage for paying down the next assets quite quickly above $70/b.
Panoros quarterly dividend is $3m ($12m/yr $70/b oil)
Also " Panoro intends to pay out a USD 20 million core dividend in 2023 on a quarterly basis in cash weighted towards H2 and subject to average oil price realisation remaining above USD 80 per barrel"
If AET were to introduce a similar sized $12m dividend in the next year - 18 months it would be a yield of over 20% at these levels or 4.3% if the share price equalled 100p and a m/cap of £220m which would still be lower than Panoro"
----------------------------
28/9/23 doing what they said on the tin - AET have since acquired Azule interest. Production also up about a net 15% since effective deal dates ( (9k+ bopd possible on existing assets alone plus further significant reserves replacement/upgrades due to production data on expected improved RF ).
Reported in Upstream early Sept re 7 different unlicenced fields within tie back (too small for majors) with discoveries and 1-2 wells on some with 1-2,000 bopd flow rates.
Widely mentioned as more operated & non operated assets to be acquired. With these assets almost paid for - they will along with a further asset pay the next down rapidly in a $70/b environment - so with patience i see an opportunity for a major re-rating and similar analyst projections to Panoro as each milestone met along its deve;lopment path.
I posted this on AET back on 8th March 2023 14:41 'Looking Multiple tens of thousands' bopd
' Panoro Energy just 24 months ago was a small Norwegian operator in Africa and then bought 6900 boepd/25 mmbbls 2P for $135m at $5.60/per P2 barrel in Gabon & Eq Guinea on top of their existing Tunisian production.
Ex Dividend today of 0.2639 NOK ($3m being paid 16/3/23).
35.82m P2. Production 7,500 bopd for f/yr 2022.
Net debt $46.5m/£39m.
113.69m shares @ 29.68 NOK/£2.35 = £267m m/cap.
https://www.panoroenergy.com/about-panoro/
-------------------------------------
I added more AET yesterday and today. On current oil prices, P2 of 28 mmbo and not far off 5k bopd along with a small net debt profile, should be worth around £150m+ m/cap or 70p is reasonable when you compare against Panoro (under CEO John Hamilton who used to be at Imperial Energy some years ago). It won't take long for AET to be nearly or completely debt free.
I think the next growth step for AET will be greater reserves/production and in time a possible short suspension if deemed an RTO. '
5/5/21 - 'Former Tullow Oil executives have launched their Afentra venture, focused on production up and down West Africa. Paul McDade, Afentra CEO, explained the company is focused on opportunities arising from the exit of majors from the region. “That transition is based on maturing assets becoming marginal for the majors." Afentra has big plans. “The primary focus is on material production. We don’t want 1,000-2,000 barrels per day, we’re looking for multiple tens of thousands". https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/africa/ep-africa/320392/afentra-mcdade-esg-producing/
How the heck does net debt exceed m/cap and it's not a constant ?
Seriously. Go and study what is going on. This has been laid out before for you but you refused to acknowledge it and continue to show complete ignorance and any understanding on what you're posting.
When you're taking net debt into account, take into account the bls produced but unsold in coming to the projected net debt figures due to the 'timing of liftings'. If you can't support your argument, at least try and learn.
Not so long ago you were going on about the oil price in the mid- $70s when these deals are based on $60-$65/b oil yet the oil price has risen into the $90s while we also recieve a premium to Brent - yet we don't hear you when that has gone substantially the other way. That will affect the figures/projections not witstanding that production has also risen month - on month now to some 6,600 bopd which is about 15% higher than when the deals were signed.
I suggest you check Petronor with an identical set up which was doing 6k+ bopd Q1, 35 mmbo 2P and similar net debt and was trading at a £270m m/cap which i highlighted at the start of the year (equivalent to a £1/share price here with £50m m/cap to spare).
It is acheiving it's growth projection with 7.2k bopd for H1 2023 and now in Q3 has touched on 11k bopd. The m/cap is £281m today, higher net debt due to timing of oil liftings (650k bls lifted last week) where as AET is already substantially tracking Petronor on equivalent reserves, lower net debt but most of all on growing production as shown in the August figures of 6.6k bopd but at a fraction of the valuation which i fully expect to start playing catch up once the deals are ratified.
You could say what took Petronas, Exxon, Chevron, Sinopec, CNPC, ONGC, Sonagol and others to these places and sunk billions in developing fields and pipelines and running these assets until they were mature when they were already so called 's' holes 20+ years ago and made money from them.
If Chad wasn't worth chasing for over TWO HUNDRED MILLION FCF yr at $65/b oil what was. Have you seen the number of other companies that chased deals there and got whittled down to preferred bidders not to mention others that have arrived ?
Family owned Perenco made their cash in so called s.holes.
There's others chasing assets in both S.Sudan & Sudan alone never mind Niger which didn't seem to be a concerning s/hole up to the latest coup.
If you can't understand when you read a strategy to expect ups and downs you shouldn't be complaining later. Whatever happens re S.Sudan doesn't change our underlying value regardless of emotional sentiment about S.Holes and why are we there.
M&P acquiring Assala during a Gabon Coup - fools ?
Meanwhile Afentra is doing exactly the same in West Africa in creating a 'west african independent' - 'opportunity for new, credible and responsible operators' on transition assets. All on a buy and build strategy. They too are chasing similar to what they have negotiated so far as well as larger operated/non operated being evaluated across West Africa.
Maybe they all went to the AK school of thought or maybe like many other CEOs they seek out assets relevant to cost, risk and non recourse debt financing. I didn't buy into SAVE or a few other African plays hoping to be a UK/Norwegian north sea operator.
The new finance minister was appointed early August - is that the Presidents doing just before these Caltech discussions kicked off ?
I think the President himself has business interests or connections.
New finance minister said in that interview they have been discussing this with Caltech since about 22nd August - that's late in the day.
He said they had a 3 minute meeting in New York - seems quite, quite ridiculous not withstanding they want $3b including $1.25b to buy Petronas assets.
First 5 years as repayment holiday on a term of 13 years at an interest rate of 1.5% - never mind inflation.
Risk would be incredible on future oil prices never mind a future government and risk of not being able to repay with the economy predominantly dependent on oil, landlocked (for now) and a war raging on your only export route.
Seems somewhat very underwhelming for a US firm that their website is pretty poor.
Has the govt not approached oil traders who are fairly awash with bumper cash this past few years ?
I could be very wrong but i don't think they have said NO or YES to SAVE but trying to find a better deal that gives them more interest if they could get the money and maybe up against a deadline. The govt seems pretty broke.
One thing which i think is important - we DON'T KNOW know how the oil contracts, clauses etc are structured - sellers rights etc?
Perhaps the govt knows that SAVE/Petronas can complete on whatever laws/rights are in force and if the govt doesn't have that cash by a specified date then maybe a deal can be close depending on what the original contracts are ???
Either way, i would expect a mention in the next few days.
Exactly Trustilie. And that’s on top of all the difficulties in Sudan at the minute to ever consider it I would think. The Chinese have pumped billions in already. Glencore got caught out on their loan to Chad so plenty of lessons to be learned. My point is on my belief on a possible protocol of govt approval coming last in the queue.
We do see acquisitions agreed between buyers/sellers in the west and UK where sometimes for strategic or important matters need government clearance later.
UK Gov - "The government will review your acquisition. It can either clear your acquisition, impose certain conditions, or block or unwind it" - from the national security and investment act.
It looks like in all cases the deal is made first as we see what AK and any of the other countless CEOs have and are doing - ie sign the SPA, get shareholder approval and wait for government ok. I can't see an African gov 'OK'ing a deal because they may say your own shareholders haven't even approved it yet (don't waste out time going through all the processes until you have yours in line first so to speak) - so again i feel it follows a protocol. I think Petronas used Jefferies to handle their African asset sales (from AI). You only have to look at the amount of companies vying for the Assala assets - its unlikely they all sought government clearance first. It was the selection process by the sellers advisors to reach preferred bidder status, then in agreeing the deal which then in turn goes to the governement for approval which can take months or longer.
By comparrison to the West - some of these African countries have absolute miniscule GDP compared to the likes of the UK etc so you can see how a country like S.Sudan (and others) that get about 80%+ and in some cases all of it's income from oil - therefore will view them strategically and of national importance.
The danger is of course in governments borrowing to buy these assets making them more and more reliant on the oil and all their eggs in one basket come a downturn in the future.
From Fenikso today 26/3/23
' Fenikso is the restructured holding company that used to be called Lekoil Limited. The Company holds one main asset which is a US$51.9 million loan made to Lekoil Oil & Gas Investments ("LOGI"), a wholly owned subsidiary of Lekoil Nigeria.
Net assets of the Company at the end of the Reporting Period were $19.3 million. Cash balances as at the end of the Reporting Period were $1.09 million.
PERATIONS REPORT AND ASSET SUMMARY
The principal business of the Company is to manage and ensure the full recovery of the LOGI Loan. The Company has received payments under the LOGI Loan as at the end of 30 June 2023 amounting to $2,615,472. A further $1,543,240 has since been received post 30 June 2023.
Outlook
The Company intends to repay all creditors as well as the first instalment of the Savanah Energy loan repayment before the end of the year. Once these steps have been taken the Company will look to build its cash position before deciding how best to deploy the cash it builds up.
Following the Settlement Deed, the Company entered into a loan agreement with Savannah Energy pursuant to which the Company agreed to pay Savannah Energy certain upfront payments together with 25% of all amounts received by the Company from LOGI pursuant to the LOGI Loan, subject to a maximum total payment of approximately $16,256,159. '
https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/rns/fenikso-limited--fnk/interim-results/7777271
Might be something to consider but after the number of gas contracts already signed and operating are we constrained in anyway given that there is always the possibility at any time that customers who are taking 80% TOP say they want to take more or all of their DCQ.
I say this on the basis that if you add them all up they mightn't be able to supply the contracted demand ??
They supplied 145 mmcf/d last year all from UQUO - that's the average and we know that 3 contracts didn't start until June last year and 1 more signed in August 2022 - so capacity could be tight/tightening.
Also the compression project is to complete next year so undoubtedly that's needed for expansion.
Then If you think about the AMOCON deal signed just there in May and operational - SAVE is buying the gas from them ie up to 20 mmcf/d and perhaps in trying to understand the points i make above - " Gas purchased from AMOCON does not require processing by Accugas and therefore does not utilise available capacity at the Uquo CPF" (which is to 200 mmcf/d and following compression up to 240 mmcf/d potential).
Is this a sign that they are buying in that gas so as to be able to make sure they have that gas to fulfil their existing contracts as well as have capacity for new ones - otherwise just sell our own Uquo gas.
In light of the timeline of those contracts having started it will be interesting to see this years full average compared to the average sales of 145 mmcf/d last year.
Worth adding that as far as i'm aware customers pay for their own connections so who knows there could be deals afoot.
I've no doubt the gas opportunity for SAVE is huge.
Heard it before - but the expansion and near doubling of Stubb Creek oil is sheduled next year - so this could be viewed short term as replacing Niger income re the1-1.5k bopd there which was expected Q1-2 2024 ?
I said a few times that judging from all the other deals that other companies are involved in, all i can find from the time of a SPA, it appears it's adm doc, put to shareholder vote and then wait for approvals in due course as timeline of doing things. Whatever went on over the weekend it could be viewed that the govt keeps it's options open ie approval not yet fully given until the last, otherwise i don't think that what was announced yesterday would have been allowed to happen in the first place.
The adm doc and relisting could well come anytime from SAVE but i'm still not convinced it will come with govt approval at the same time - personally expecting it in the order of above (unless the whole thing is unfortunately not proceeeded with).
I think Cplloyd has a valid point in that chasing acquisitions has cost us in terms of share price - but i view that in the light of the debacle over Chad where if it had went smoothly the reverse would have happened ie share price would have been much higher and we may not have been suspended now at all for this past 9 months.
Let's say we had stuck with just Accugas and on the 996m shares it would be more like 62p instead of it being around 45p on the present f/diluted number based on an $800m net valuation for the Nigerian asset net debt free. We were playing for 80p-100p f/diluted with Chad and i still see that with S.Sudan if it goes through regardless of wining arbitration over Chad.
We shouldn't lose sight of the importance of Accugas. They've ramped up on the number of contracts and thus income that should really kick in versus everything else that has happened. If they hadn't those new deals, uplift in revenue then i would question it if it was any good in the 1st place. So the extra income even from 1 year imo can be justified in paying towards negotiating those new deals. I don't view it as costing us on such a narrow timescale given the size of the deals/potential uplift. Over the longer term we will get a decent return on the Lekoil involvement - thats paying for somthing. I'm only looking at a fairly static value of $800m net for Accugas/Nigeria but think it will be worth a fair bit more in due course.
I just wonder will the net debt be paid down even faster if there is no immediate committment to spend in Niger. I think our interests are fairly safe and will be respected and there's a minimum if i recall of $100m back costs and 33 mmbo 2C which on a sanctioned dev plan will convert to reserves - so minimum all round i'm leaning to at least $100m all in worst case for Niger overall or 5.5p - so i still think as we stand SAVE has a value of about 50p to come through just letting Accugas perform/edge into net cash from a net debt position in the timeline stated and everything else not in the share price picture.
AIM listed Wentworth Resources reference - 5 December 2022, the boards of Wentworth and M&P announced that they had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended all cash offer by M&P for the entire issued, and to be issued, share capital of Wentworth (the "Acquisition"). The Acquisition was approved by Wentworth Shareholders at the Court Meeting and the General Meeting which were held on 23 February 2023, but remains subject to the satisfaction or (where capable of being waived) waiver of the other Conditions to the Acquisition.
These Conditions include, inter alia, (i) consent from the Minister responsible for petroleum affairs in Tanzania under the Petroleum Act 2015 (the "Act") and any other applicable laws; (ii) the waiver of any right of first refusal or pre-emption right to which the Tanzania Petroleum Development Corporation is entitled in respect of the Mnazi Bay asset; and (iii) approval from the Tanzanian Fair Competition Commission ("FCC"), in each case on terms satisfactory to M&P, acting reasonably.
On 11 July 2023, Wentworth was notified that the FCC has issued a decision notice that application for FCC approval shall not be determined at this time and that this application will be marked closed by the FCC.
Following this, there have been a number of discussions between the parties to the offer including recent meetings in country between the CEO of Wentworth and relevant Tanzanian government stakeholders, as well as the CEO of M&P and relevant Tanzanian stakeholders, to seek to bring the Acquisition to a successful conclusion before the agreed 31 December 2023 Long Stop Date, including at the highest levels of government in Tanzania.
There has been positive progress in these discussions, although there can be no certainty that the Conditions will be satisfied or (where capable of being waived), waived by M&P. The Company and M&P are working towards the satisfaction or (where capable of being waived) waiving of the Conditions in Q4 2023.'
As for Perenco - BLVN etinde for reference https://www.bowleven.com/system/files/press/agm-presentation-08-12-2021.pdf
No not suggesting that SAVE are after Etinde - although we do know that they said they were evaluating other hydrocarbon deals in Cameroon.
What i'm saying is that all these deals are difficult to wade through and i've always said not unique to SAVE. On the other board i've seen the CEO lambasted for bringing us into this. If we want the same kind of deals that everybody else is trying to build and grow from in moving their companies higher up the value chain, it's the price we pay on the emotional swings. Some others think that we are the only company doing this or somehow learn a lesson from it. I'm sure SAVE and its negotiating teams and their advisors who specialise in asset transactions are well versed in these matters. As far as i can see SAVEs net debt on its Nigerian asset will be eliminated in 24 months or less - so we are left with an $800m minimum asset (45p) still able to grow in value. This doesn't affect what happens re S.Sudan but peoples emotions will never think of this in the short term re value.
Perenco is a 270k boepd producer with about 85k in Cameroon - so i wonder why a deal for them is taking so long to get approval there especially when they are such an established operator in that country.
This only adds to my recent posts on the timelines and delays for not only SAVE in various countries but for other companies that i highlighted in August and September from when SPAs were signed.
Afentra - 3 in Angola - 2 pending, Save - Nigeria (how long was that), Chad completed with issues, - S.Sudan pending. Seplat a very long established operator in Nigeria yet from 25/2/22 Exxon Nigeria still delayed. M&Prom Assala Gabon pending. Now Perenco deal in Cameroon long delayed. Even AIM listed Wentworths takeover by M & Prom was turned down first time around by relative safe haven Tanzania. These are only the deals in the last 12-24 months.
Re Cameroon contd -
'The Company notes that SNH's approval, the next key milestone towards completion of the Transaction, has remained outstanding for a significant period and it remains uncertain when a decision will be made by SNH whether to approve the Transaction, if at all.
Whilst Bowleven is not a party to Transaction discussions, the Company understands that, although the formal long-stop date under the agreement between New Age and Perenco passed on the 30th June 2023, both parties continue to seek to progress with the Transaction. The extended delay, with no established timeline to closing of the Transaction, has created uncertainty as regards potential additional risks associated with the Etinde project and the Company is currently considering a fundraising proposal from a shareholder which contemplates the shareholder providing equity capital at a very substantial discount to the current market price of Bowleven's ordinary shares.'