Hello, everyone, and welcome to the Jadestone Energy Investor Call. My name is Nadia, and I'll be coordinating the call today. If you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. I will now hand over to your host, Paul Blakeley, CEO, to begin. Paul, please go ahead. Thank you, Nadia. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning, and thank you for joining this call to discuss the new financing arrangements, which we announced late yesterday, U.K. time. I'm Paul Blakeley, Jadestone's CEO, and I'm joined in Singapore today by our CFO, Bert-Jaap Dijkstra, and in London by Phil Corbett, Investor Relations Manager. In this call, we'll run through the presentation, which has been uploaded on our website at www.jadestone-energy.com. It's on the Investor Relations section, or you can view it via the link on the webcast. After that, let's open the call for a Q&A discussion. Slide two outlines our standard disclaimers, and in particular, the cautionary remarks regarding forward-looking statements and non-IFRS measures used in this presentation. With that, we can get started, reflecting first, that the announced financing arrangement may have taken some of you by surprise, but is the result of a series of events which we'll explain and which moved very quickly upon us and for which we needed to take fast and decisive action. On slide three now, I did want to just offer a brief reminder of the objectives of the business and highlight that this equity raise and standby debt facility, following closely on the announced reserves-based lending facility of up to $200 million, which together now establishes a full funding solution for all our currently planned activities going forwards and with the additional buffer of the standby debt. This funding covers the Akatara project in Indonesia, which remains on schedule, the drilling of infill wells in Malaysia, due to commence in Q3, and follows on from Stag drilling late last year, three acquisitions recently closed, and with further opportunity emerging from our participating interest in the PNLP licenses in Malaysia. Moving to slide fpur, gives a reminder of how we're continuing to broaden the asset base of producing fields, which in turn places less reliance on Montara and events such as the recent extended shutdown that occurred there. With portfolio expansion in multiple jurisdictions and the addition of gas streams at Sinphuhorm and Akatara, this increasing diversity provides far greater resilience for the business. Furthermore, we're also reducing concentration risk in assets with high decommissioning security and providing greater portfolio protection from volatility in commodity prices. Note that we continue to be very selective on what we invest in, seeking high returns and value in everything we do, and focusing M&A only where follow-on investment opportunity in the asset has been clearly identified and verified. It's this activity which can generate exceptional returns, such as drilling infill wells, for example, at Montara, Stag, and in Malaysia, and concentrating on early cash flowing activity, which leads to rapid paybacks. Now to slide five, where I'd like to put some background to the financing arrangements announced today and then let Bert-Jaap fill in the details. We're responding to an unusual set of circumstances, which, of course, originate from the extended shutdown at Montara, an isolated incident which has been fixed and with routine operations now restored. This incident occurred during a record cycle of investment, comprising both organic CapEx, overlain with M&A activity, which, of course, included CWLH and Sinphuhorm. There's added complexity due to the RBL debt capacity decreasing temporarily, a feature of RBL structures, and which triggers a partial repayment in early 2024, reducing the borrowing base, while until Akatara comes on stream, when it then returns to $200 million. There are many moving parts to this, which I'll leave to Bert-Jaap. Suffice to say, that this uncertainty has created a need with certain stakeholders to resolve it immediately rather than during the next several months, as we had planned. In a very concentrated period, we have worked with Tyrus Capital, our largest shareholder, to put in place a financing package in two main components. The first is an equity underwrite facility of $50 million to ensure this amount was raised and which, given the earlier outcome that we've just announced, will no longer be required. The second element is a standby working capital facility, the headline terms of which are laid out on this slide. This provides a buffer with no intention to draw down, but in the event, a reasonable worst-case downside scenarios is immediately available. This financing package underpins our growth as we look to increase production next year by 50% once Akatara is on stream. Without further acquisitions assumed, it provides funding certainty for our shareholders, and we're grateful for their support. Slide six really emphasizes what we've already discussed, but in a simpler graphic. The growth trajectory is clear, with follow-on options, which could make this exceptional. Note the shift from a very limited asset base on the left to a much broader portfolio on the right, with further potential from a strategically targeted opportunity, which should fit well within the borrowing base and the redevelopment of PNLP in Malaysia, as well as the potential for some movement in the Vietnam gas development. Overall, we firmly believe this financing initiative, together with the RBL, gives us a strong platform to take the business forwards, moving production beyond 20,000 BOEs per day and rising further into the future. This is a key inflection point for the business, and the cash generation from the expanded production base is very accretive. With that introduction, I'll hand over to Bert-Jaap to provide context around the financing package, some detail on the structure, and the business outlook that follows. Bert-Jaap. Thank you, Paul. Slide 7. The projected growth in production that Paul just presented on the previous slide is the main driver for the operating cash flow growth forecast. In the base case, from around 0 this year to around $160 million in 2024, and around $190 million in 2025. The forecasted operating cash flow is after G&A tax and working capital. The $120 million operating cash flow in 2022, which includes exceptional income of just below $20 million from last year's skew insurance claim settlement, decreases to nil in 2023, mostly due to lower forecasted revenues by around $80 million, caused by lower oil, lower oil price realizations across the three scenarios in this chart, relative to the $96 per barrel Brent average across our oil sales in 2022. On current assumptions, we also expect to lift 200,000-250,000 fewer barrels at Montara than last year, primarily reflecting that the first lifting of the year from Montara of around 250,000 barrels only occurred in recent weeks. The $160 million operating cash flow forecast for 2024 is based on a $75 per barrel oil price, the recovery in 2024 is driven by a $130 million growth in revenues from increased production with a full year of contribution and listings from Montara, the positive impact of the Penara infill wells, and of course, the start of production from the Lemang gas field early in the Q2 of 2024. Into 2025, operating cash flow is projected to increase further to around $190 million, mostly due to the full year contribution of Lemang, which brings high-margin production and incremental production from the forecasted Stag infill drilling campaign in the second half of the year. You may notice that the projections are not very sensitive to oil prices. This is due to two reasons. First, we're hedging oil volumes under the RBL from Q4 2023 to Q3 2025, so for two years, for 50% of our liquids production. Second, the portfolio also benefits from the natural hedge that Lemang brings on fixed gas prices. These operating cash flow forecasts, combined with the impact of our record investment program in 2023, are the main drivers of converting our 2023 net debt position into a net cash position on the next page in 2025 in the base case. On Slide 8, we show the history of the company's financial position and forecasted evolution of the company's net debt and cash, which illustrates that we are expecting a short-lived funding requirement to finance our operations, and more importantly, our record investment program. Under the stated assumptions, we project a return to a significant net cash position in 2025. Looking back, we see the resilience of Jadestone's operating model. In 2018, Jade stone was carrying an RBL for the purchase of Montara, which was quickly repaid across 2019. During COVID, the company took active measures and successfully managed to remain in a relatively constant net cash position. With the increase in oil prices from June 2021 to June 2022, the company showed its cash generation potential and arrived in this $160 million net cash position at the end of the first half of 2022. In the period from first half 2022 to year-end 2023, Jadestone moves from a net cash of $160 million to a net debt position of around $100 million. This $260 million variance over the period is mostly driven by the company's $300 million investment program. The main elements here are a total of $190 million CapEx, with $70 million from the second half of 2022 due to stack drilling and the Lemang project, and $125 million CapEx for 2023 in the midpoint of guidance, mainly due to Lemang and the Malaysian infill drilling this year. The other $110 million is acquisition-related and includes around $80 million for all the CWLH abandonment fund payments and the Sinphuhorm acquisition for around $30 million, completed early in 2023. The total is leading to the forecasted net debt position at the end of this year at around $100 million, depending on the oil price scenario. Note that this net debt position is before the transaction announced yesterday. Following the successful equity raise and all else being equal, this net debt in the base case is projected to be around $50 million. Additionally, we expect to stay well within our RBL covenant of consolidated net debt of less than 3.5 times EBITDA. During 2024, the company expects to reduce its net debt by around $65 million, to a position of $35 million net debt at year-end, on a $70-$75 per barrel oil price. This is driven by operating cash flow of around $160 million, as explained on the previous slide, partly offset by planned CapEx. This is most notably Stag drilling and the last Lemang expenditure, projected interest on the RBL and other. Into 2025, the net debt position is forecasted to improve further to a net cash position of around $120 million at year-end. This is again driven by the operating cash flow for 2025 of around $190 million, combined with significantly lower CapEx projected, leading to a forecasted free cash flow contribution of around $150 million, to arrive at that net cash position of around $120 million at year-end 2025. Over to slide 9. First and foremost, we are very pleased with the recent closing of our RBL, with four international banks for a total of $200 million. The facility represents a strategic stepping stone in support of Jadestone's longer-term future. The banks regard us as responsible operator, likely taking a role in consolidating mid-life assets in the region. AIM listed enhanced transparency and governance to high standards, the unique competitive advantage in operatorship, especially in Australia, combined with additional regional growth options in Southeast Asia. The RBL forms a flexible tool in support of Jadestone's growth. The company can use the RBL to fund its capital investment, and the RBL supports funding of acquisitions of producing assets. Sinphuhorm, for example, generated more debt capacity than Jadestone paid in cash consideration. This demonstrates that the deal was very attractive, but also shows how the RBL can support inorganic growth. The total debt capacity is established in biannual redeterminations and is initially $200 million. This capacity is projected to decrease to around $90 million at the start of the Q2, 2024. Early in the Q3, in 2024, following successful completion test, Lemang will be integrated in the borrowing base as producing asset, and the borrowing base increases again to $200 million. Until this happens, Lemang's contribution is constrained at 40% of the total producing assets contribution. The RBL closed later than we planned, due to the continued slippage in the restart and stabilization of Montara, which was required by the banks to be able to close the RBL. Montara restart and handover to operations occurred significantly later than we originally anticipated. Closing of the RBL with this final banking model, occurred days before the annual report was due. The RBL was important in support of the going concern conclusion. In the run-up to closing of the RBL, oil prices had come down, which increased the forecasted liquidity shortfall in our final liquidity model. This liquidity shortfall was not unexpected, and management believed and still believe that we have mitigants to close this gap. I will explain in more detail on the next slide. However, executing these mitigants will take time for assessment, and some will involve working with our banks to obtain consent. Work, which could only start after closing of the RBL. This shortfall was stress tested in a downside oil price and a negatively impacted operating performance scenario. Although this downside scenario is a low probability event, the board took the decision to be proactive and raise financing now to safeguard the company's position for the future. The company prioritized equity over debt to avoid over-leveraging the balance sheet. To ensure protection against the tested downside scenarios, which could potentially disrupt the company's growth plans, in addition to the $50 million equity raise, we have also put in place the up to $35 million working capital facility, which we don't expect to draw. This combined equity and debt funding, in addition to the existing RBL, puts the company on a solid footing and provides financial flexibility to bridge across the temporary availability shortfall into the fast improving liquidity position following Lemang's first gas. Finally, on hedging, the RBL facility requires that we hedge 50% of our liquids production over the Q4 2023 to Q3 2025 period. To date, around 64% of the required barrels have been hedged at a weighted average price of around $71 per barrel, and at the assumed forward curve in the RBL banking model. We expect to finish the program in the coming weeks. Over to slide 10. The chart on this slide illustrates the debt availability over time from our current banking model. This banking model calculates present value of future cash flow using third-party verified production profiles, reserves, OpEx, CapEx, and ABEX estimates. The oil price currently used in the banking model is $67 per barrel for 2023, $62 per barrel for 2024, and $58 per barrel for later years. This is well below the current forward curve. This brings forecasted field abandonment in the banking model, much closer than we anticipate, as we look at life- field lifetime extending activities. A 33% discount is applied to the end result to arrive at the borrowing base. Going forward, the present value reduces with production and the abandonment timing coming closer, mostly for Montara and Stag, using the banking oil price deck. As referred to earlier, we have options to mitigate the dip in Q2 2024, which I discussed on the earlier slide. As said, all need time to assess, and some need bank consent. Up to now, our priority was signing and closing the RBL first. Measures to manage the liquidity dip, which mostly stem from the decrease in the borrowing base in 2Q 2024, are the following: acquisition of producing assets has the potential to bring incremental borrowing base. As mentioned earlier, our recent acquisition of Sinphuhorm was more than covered by debt capacity in the RBL. We have additional hedging, which we would look to implement opportunistically if we experience a period of higher oil prices over the next six to nine months. The facility agreement has a CapEx add-back feature, which allows the company to add back the forecasted next two quarters of CapEx spend, subject to intended use of the CapEx and bank approvals. We can look at phasing of significant expenditure in OpEx and CapEx and working capital management. For example, accelerate listings from Montara and Stag. The work program can be optimized to generate incremental borrowing base, for example, by utilizing the CapEx add-back mechanism mentioned earlier. Finally, we've started assessing the option to ring-fence Stag, which is an asset which has a negative contribution in the borrowing base due to the conservative assumptions in the banking model. The assessment of the feasibility of this option needs time and work, and it also depends on bank consents. The main conclusion from this slide is that Jadestone is looking at a temporary borrowing base dip in its RBL, which we believe can be improved going forward, using various measures with progressively more certainty around outcomes in the future. In summary, the $50 million equity raise and up to $35 million working capital facility, in combination with our RBL, form a solid foundation to bridge Jadestone into a period of operating cash flow growth and significantly increasing RBL debt capacity. Back to Paul for an operations update. Well done. Thanks, Bert-Jaap. Okay, let's move on to slide 11. Turning to Montara, where after securing tank 2C, we have completed an early phase of tank restoration, completed an extensive four-yearly maintenance campaign, and now see operations restored to pre-shutdown levels. You can see on the top left, that production is settling in a range around 7,000 barrels a day, with a further 500 barrels available once we complete some minor wellhead maintenance on two Montara wells. This reinforces our guidance at Montara and more broadly, where group production has settled at around 17,000 BOEs a day, even while we have a well on Stag, which is under workover, a spool changeout at the Cermerlang field in Malaysia, and a few other minor well work activities. The tank reinstatement program, shown on the bottom left, signals a slow and thorough close visual inspection program, tank by tank. With phase one now complete, we're focused on a water balance tank, then tank 1C, and systematically working our way to returning to a six or seven-tank operation, which will restore full-size parcels of crude for offload. In the meantime, we're selling smaller volumes, and we're using a standby shuttle tanker as a host storage facility to ensure no disruption to production operations. The goal for the operations teams is clear: a constant focus on safe production operations, along with high uptime and a ruthless control on costs. We will do all we can to support them in this. Slide 12 provides an update on the Akatara project and a summary of the economic return of what is our first new development within Jadestone. The team has many years of experience of this type of activity from past Talisman Energy days. It represents an exciting milestone for this company. We're firmly on schedule at 35% complete and on budget, with costs largely constrained through a fixed price, lump sum contracting strategy. With over 700 personnel on site, progress is good, and we've just achieved over 1 million man-hours of safe working. Long lead items, such as compressors and generators, are usually the high-risk items that impact schedule, but I'm pleased to report that all have passed factory acceptance testing and are in dispatch to the region. The economic summary on the left emphasizes the significant early cash generation, which, under the PSC regime, allows for recovery of costs, both past and current project costs, on an accelerated basis. This drives high IRRs and is a big contributor to a very rapid deleveraging of the balance sheet, as Bert-Jaap has already shown. We're excited by subsurface upside in the Akatara reservoir, well beyond the current contracted volumes, and we're already working towards incremental sales contracts over the first five years. This is truly a good news project. Touching on key activities and catalysts in the coming months, let's turn to slide 13. The Montara tank reinstatement following restart is high priority, but drilling in East Belumut this year and further drilling in Malaysia and at Stag next year are catalysts which help offset declines and are important value adds to the business. We're also preparing to work over the four wells at Akatara early next year for first gas, and with more to follow. We're also in an exclusive arrangement to assess the future redevelopment of the PNLP assets in Malaysia, in which we currently hold an operating interest, and are increasingly excited about the potential. The next step requires us to make a bid submission to the regulator around end June. We also hold a view that slow but steady progress on gas sales in Vietnam may move ahead to a potential for signing a gas sales agreement and an FDP submission next year. FID would come later after the Field Development Plan is approved, but it would be nice to see Vietnam moving forwards. Finally, we're looking to advance small tuck-in opportunities, which can be absorbed into the RBL if they exhibit the right cash flow characteristics. As Bert-Jaap said, CWLH and Sinphuhorm met these key criteria and will be equally selective to ensure near-term opportunities can also be debt-financed. Slide 14 now, which provides guidance for the year. It's worth emphasizing that unit OpEx is likely to reach a high watermark this year. This, of course, is due to only a partial year of production at Montara and some one-off costs around shuttle tankers in what has been a very volatile market. In other areas, logistics costs are up, and drilling activity is likely to see inflationary pressure next year, though this year's program is holding the cost base firm. The good news is that 2024 should see much of this OpEx pressure reversed due to stable production operations, and we expect tanker usage to return to normal. This is in combination with a fall in committed capital program, which is likely to soften in our business next year as Akatara wraps up. Just to conclude, and to be clear, we retain guidance for the year as we laid out, and we believe we're in good shape. Slide 15, with our balance sheet and liquidity underpinned by the placing and standby working capital facility. Montara operations restored within an increasingly diverse production portfolio, and Akatara moving ahead on plan. With all this, the Jadestone equity story stands at an inflection point, with a clear line of sight to significant cash flow generation and a rapid deleveraging of the balance sheet. I want this point in time to be seen as a relaunch of the business, which sees us return to healthy cash generation and a strong balance sheet, which has been a hallmark of this company. Ladies and gentlemen, we've been through a difficult period. No company of our size comes out unscathed from an extensive period of key asset outage. We've sought every avenue for solutions, managing stakeholder speed bumps on the way. However, we now find ourselves with a tremendous opportunity, baked in short-term growth from an expanding and diverse portfolio, an environment with opportunity to further deepen the business with high-quality assets, and a significant financial capacity, largely backed by the highest quality international banks that have stamped our business as meeting their very highest of standards. We now draw a line, committed to delivering our work program, including safe and efficient operations across the portfolio, Akatara on schedule, adding 50% more production in 2024, and restoring the balance sheet and shareholder returns. We'll communicate this to the market effectively and with the aim of seeing this delivery reflected in our share price. With that, I'll hand back to the operator, and we'll take your questions. Thank you. Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. If you choose to withdraw your question, please press star followed by two. When preparing to ask your question, please ensure your phone is unmuted locally. Our first question goes to Matt Cooper of Peel Hunt. Matt, please go ahead. Your line is open. Thank you, and thank you for the call this morning. Starting off with hedging, is this planned to be entirely via swaps? Also, is the $71 per barrel average price to date, is that inclusive of field-level premiums? Yes, thanks, Matt. It's inclusive of the premiums. It's indeed run by swaps. ...The reason why it's $71 per barrel is clearly for the period that we're hedging, which is Q4 2023 into Q3 2025. This hedging is actually done very recently, and we tried to cover the front end of the curve. We've tried to use the OPEC decision recently and to pick up a little bump on the front end of the curve, and we were reasonably successful in picking it up, although it slid away relatively quickly, as you know. On the front end, we're now covered, and we're using, to give you a bit of a flavor, again, Matt, we're using, the time that we have. We have under the RBL until roughly the end of the month. We're using that time to see whether we can optimize the overall hedging program, because at the back end, it's not so volatile, and we're hopeful that will bring some additional versus the RBL. We're sitting at the RBL level now, and we're, you know, we're looking forward to trying to improve on that. Okay, thank you. Just thinking of the, obviously, the high premium, particularly at Stag, is it fair to kind of assume that on a pro rata basis, the hedging is split roughly equally between the assets? So if it's 50% of group production, you'd be looking at roughly 50% of Stag, 50% of Montara, or will there be a difference between the assets? Yeah, it's really total volumes. I think in the end, the premium, I think we presented that in Q2 last year. I think we see a correlation between the premium and the underlying. We believe there is some correlation, although it's not a direct link. The underlying hedging is done on Brent, and of course, that Stag premium is pretty volatile on top of that. The hedging really covers the underlying, if you will, and there could be still some, call it, positive volatility on the premium, where the banking model is roughly following our forward-looking assumptions on the premium, on the back of, you know, what we think is going to transpire. It's slightly correlated to the underlying Brent, as stated. Okay, understood. Thank you. Just turning to the new acquisition that you mentioned, I don't know if you can say whether this is a new asset or an increase in interest in the existing asset. Kind of related question is around, would the equity raise likely have been materially smaller without this acquisition, or likely to have been the same size? We won't identify specifically on M&A activity, if you don't mind at this point, Matt, thanks. You know, however, as we touched on, you know, everything we're looking at must really fit strongly within the criteria of the RBL financing model, and this will do that. What was the other part of your question? Raise. Raise would be small. Oh, the raise. You know, as Bert-Jaap touched on, I mean, this is all directly in response to a requirement placed upon us in terms of the size, and we couldn't adjust that at all. You know, it's a facility that was deemed to be needed for, you know, to meet the needs, of a clean statement. Do you wanna add anything? Which is excluding the mitigating actions, Matt. The mitigating actions, as I mentioned before, they're not certain. We are around these very, you know, the probability of us getting, for example, CapEx add back, just to take one example. The probability of us getting incremental borrowing base is 99%, we can't bank on that now, which means that we couldn't, let's say, stick it in the forecast as a given. Same for the hedging. We tested an additional year of hedging, just to come back to your hedging question, maybe, Matt. Another year on top of the two years that we have now for 50% would bring an increment of $10 million on that dip in Q2 2024, and $10 million for 50% of the volumes hedged. We said: Look, we're not even gonna propose this to the board. It goes to show that, you know, it's almost like the minimum you would expect, I think. Okay, we don't know what the oil prices will do going forward, but that $10 million could be, you know, is expected to be an increment on the base of what we know today. Again, given the uncertainty, we couldn't bank on it, and it's an uncertain outcome. I think it's, you know, more than reasonably probable, but that's not a given. Just a few elements here of mitigating factors that were not taken into account, you know, when reviewing the base case and when we were looking at the $50 million stop gap. Yep. That was called and put upon us, as Paul mentioned. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's useful context. Okay, Matt? Just, Sorry, just final question, if you can give any more color on the PNLP redevelopment from your slide six. It looks like the production out there could be pretty material. Yeah. Of course, you know, it was an asset that was in production, was shut in prematurely, contains a production stream that was, you know, non-equity to our participation. It was a sole risk. All of that, you know, added together, becomes, you know, quite material production. The reinstatement is all about the refurbishment of an FPSO, being put back on the facility, on the fields. Us, you know, assessing the quality of the remaining opportunities and any incremental activity that the previous operator, you know, wasn't going to carry out. You know, that's core business to us, and it's pretty exciting, and the reserve adds could be quite significant. It's one that we are working very hard with a view to a compelling submission to the regulator, by the end of June. That's great. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. As a reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. Our next question goes to Mark Wilson of Jefferies. Mark, please go ahead. Your line is open. Thank you. Good morning, gents. The main question for me is, You show very good color on Montara and the production so far this year. There has been outages. You've had Cyclone Ilsa, compressor trip, and... Obviously, the assumption is that the facility will continue. At the same time, the, as we've seen, there's potential for uncertainties. Can we just talk about the contingency plan that is in place, should Montara see another unforeseen outage? I imagine that working cap facility is part of it, please. Okay. As a part of the analysis, we ran a reasonable worst-case scenario. Yeah, why don't you just define what that looks like to answer Mark's question? Yes, thanks for the question, Mark. Ultimately, I think we picked a scenario which I think may sound reasonable and may sound worst case as well. $60 per barrel oil, we picked that as a reasonable worst case, and on top of that, we estimated, let's say, the impact of a 3-month additional shutdown of Montara, in front of, let's say, the liquidity dip period. Cumulative, it would be, you know, hitting that dip the most. That would need to have cover, and we have cover for that, which would be the $50 million equity. Indeed, like you said, Mark, it was on top of that, the $35 million contingent facility. On top of that, there would indeed be credit for management mitigations, which we've been, I think, reasonably conservative in estimating. We would live through that period on the basis of the, you know, of course, on what we know today. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. The second point, just so we understand, you explained it well, but the main criteria to increase the 2Q 2024 borrowing base reduction would be if you can place those additional hedges. Am I right? Or do they require the production- No ... test at Akatara anyway? No, Mark, Well, look, you are right. There's a few things here. First, the dip is sitting right in front of Akatara coming into the borrowing base as producing asset, and it's constrained at 40% when it's a development asset, so it cannot contribute more than 40% of the overall total, which will switch into a 100% contribution the quarter thereafter, when the borrowing base jumps back at $200 million. Akatara or Lemang is very small, let's say, 40%, in the ultimate number before it goes on stream, in, and, contributes to the full $200 million borrowing base in the quarter after. On the dip itself, there are various ways of managing it, and this is how I explained it in the presentation, but maybe just to rehash it a little bit, if you don't mind, Mark. Yeah, of course. One is a CapEx add back. It's in the facility agreement. Sorry, what's that, Mark? I'm saying yes, please, go over that. Mark, sorry, what was that? That's good. I'm just saying yes, please. Yeah, yeah. It's fine for you to explain. In the facility... Here we go. CapEx add back is written in the facility agreement with the banks. We benefited from this CapEx add back now. At the initial, when we have $200 million borrowing base today, we have CapEx add back active, if you will, which is crudely saying it's the next two quarters of CapEx. It needs to qualify, and banks need to approve, but they've done it on day one. We didn't bank on it in the, let's say, the dip of the borrowing base because, of course, phasing, we could accelerate long leads, we can accelerate the program, things may be a bit later. You know, there's, of course, there's always shifting panels, a drilling rig, when is it available, et cetera. We couldn't bank on the CapEx add back in that period. The CapEx add back on the dip is currently assumed at 0. It'll be higher, and we have a conservative estimate for that in the mitigating actions. Second one is M&A. Sinphuhorm delivered more debt capacity than the cash consideration. That's not obvious because, of course, the consideration comes out of, you know, the borrowing base because the vendor needs to be paid. On Sinphuhorm, there was incremental borrowing base over and above what we paid. So it could be incremental. Nothing is currently assumed, of course, in that dip. Working capital management, we can of course work that in temporary liquidity constraints. Phasing of expenditure, we could of course try and match a bit the expenditure with the borrowing base calculation, if you will. What I always find is that finance needs to follow the business and not the other way around, there's always some room to maneuver and see whether there's some optimization that can be done. You know, we're counting on that to, you know, stay very close to this and see whether we can optimize. Coming back to the hedging that you mentioned, Mark, the additional hedging, we could have taken a, you know, another year, which would bring $10 million relief, if you will, in this dip in the borrowing base. For the obvious reasons, we didn't want to do that. Which also means that Paul and I are hoping that number of $10 million today will be hopefully substantially larger when we get an opportunity to roll in some opportunistic hedges. That's really how we're looking at the hedging. We're looking forward, we may go opportunistic on this, when the oil price has a, you know, a patch of elevated prices. Of course, this would need to be, you know, again, at the back end of the curve, we need to be pretty structural, let's see, right? Finally, this is important, I think. Paul and I just came off the phone with three of the four banks, we started working already on this, you know, the potential solution on Stag. All banks are constructive. They're supportive. They wanna work with us. That's not a guarantee, from a legal point of view and securities point of view, you need to cover all of your bases, there's always, you know, the devil is always in the detail. At the same time, all the three banks, and I'm expecting the fourth to do the same, they're very constructive on helping us on that Stag ring fencing, as I mentioned before. That's a substantial block of potential borrowing base that we could bring back, because Stag has a negative contribution in that dip. We flagged it to the banks and say, "Look, we're going to come to you guys with proposals, and we're going to be, you know, as creative as we can be to improve this borrowing base." All of this package, again, I mean, we said it a couple of times, Mark. All of this package, it comes with some uncertainty because we don't have certainty yet. It comes with bank approvals required, but the banks are very constructive, and we couldn't bank on it now. In the end, on the liquidity forecast where we believed we could manage it, we were thinking that we would manage it over a period of six months for the banks, right? Because we just signed the RBL and closed it on the 22nd of May. We didn't have the time. We had to sort this solution, you know, within a week, because it's linked to the annual report and the underlying going concern conclusion that is embedded in the annual report. It's really, I think, the lack of time that drove us to go into the structural solution, which I think, okay, painful from a shareholder perspective, I understand, and maybe a surprise to many, painful as well, but it gives us a very structural solution going forward on the equity front and supplemented, if you will, with a small working capital facility, which I think are at good terms. I hope you agree. Is there any Ts and Cs to access that working capital facility? Just to help us understand that. Sorry, Mark. The access. Any Ts and Cs. To access the working capital, does that need approval? Okay. That's very helpful. No. Thank you for. It's immediately available. Okay. All right. I'll hand it over. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. As a final reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad. We'll pause for just a moment. Thank you. It appears we have no further questions. I'll now hand back to Paul for any closing comments. Thanks a lot. Ladies and gentlemen, thanks for joining the call and for the questions. You know, I just want to say now, I'm really grateful to the shareholders who provided their support in this financing, and of course, particularly to Tyrus for its key role. Now it's time for us to look forward. I honestly believe that the business looks bright. There's significant growth and diversification. We see production rising to over 40,000 BOEs per day. In turn, we can deliver significant cash flow growth and to restore the balance sheet strength. We look forward to your support as we work to achieve this, and thank you very much indeed. Thank you. This now concludes today's call. Thank you so much for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.