Good afternoon, and welcome to the Pantheon Resources plc Investor Presentation. Throughout the recorded presentation, investors will be in listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged and can be submitted at any time by the Q&A tab situated in the right corner of your screen. Just simply type in your questions and press Send. The company may not be in a position to answer every question received during the meeting itself, however, the company can review all the questions for today and publish responses where it's appropriate to do so. Before we begin, I'd like to submit the following poll. I'd now like to hand you over to David Hobbs. Good afternoon to you, sir. Thank you very much indeed, Alessandro. Good afternoon to everyone. Thank you for joining us. We're going to be updating you today on progress since our last update, and talking about upcoming activity. We'll be reiterating why we're pursuing the strategy that we laid out just over a year ago and continue to work on that with a single-minded focus on turning our assets to cash flow. We'll be describing two initiatives that provide exposure to optimization of that strategy. First, the drilling of the Megrez-1 well to appraise the Eastern Topsets of our pool. And second, moving the gas sale forward. However, as we'll explain, these are options that give us a chance to retain more of the value for shareholders rather than being the only path forward. We're gonna lay out a conservative view of the timeline to get to the oil production. I know that there are a lot of participants who are interested in the technical underpinning of both the Megrez-1 and the reservoir quality question overall. We've arranged for Roger Young to present his work and address any questions that you may have in that regard. I'd ask you to note the disclaimer, but not to spend time on it right now. Just to reiterate that our primary core focus for the company is developing the 1.6 ± billion barrels of independently verified resource, bringing it to cash flow as quickly as can be achieved, and in as non-dilutive a fashion in order to retain as much value for our existing shareholders as possible. We've made a lot of progress since we last updated you, including the fundraise to cover the cost of the Megrez-1 well. That pad is under construction. It's more than 50% complete as we sit here today. Preparations are beginning to mobilize the rig in line with the expected timeline. I don't think anyone requires to be reminded that it's bigger than 600 million barrels. Bob and Jay will talk about that more in due course. We announced earlier this week that we had appointed Philip Patman as our U.S.-based CFO, which is part of the continuing consolidation of our activities here into the United States. We've agreed the appointment of advisors on a success fee basis to move forward with strategic funding and ultimately to an IPO. We'll talk more about that in due course. The investment case that we are laying out and have laid out is competing for capital in an environment where the big four basins, those are the basins that are most active in the U.S. Lower 48, have been attracting most of the capital. We need to be competitive with that in order to achieve our strategic goals in terms of raising the funding to develop the Ahpun field and subsequently out of the cash flows of that, the Kodiak field. We have done a lot of work on benchmarking and engagement with investors, both potential and existing. What this slide lays out for you is that the investment case is competitive, both against the companies who've been focused in those big four basins and also against half-cycle cost of activity in those basins. Our core strategy, as we said, remains developing the resources that we've discovered. What we've said is that anything we do that appears not to be aligned with that must pass the test. Does it help us to achieve that value faster, at less dilution of value or at higher value? The two initiatives that we're going to focus on today are enhancements to that core strategy. The first is drilling Megrez-1 well to secure the development timeline for Ahpun rather than start having a stop-go on that development timeline. Success in the Megrez well will enhance the start-up ramp-up cash flows because the wells are going to have higher initial production rates, and therefore reduce the size of the cash sink to get to cash flow self-sufficiency. In terms of the engagement with the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation, that is because it provides us access to non-dilutive funding and reduces the expected value dilution in our overall financing strategy. We can address that in more detail in due course. Those two initiatives, if they work, expose us to a higher upside for investors. Our development of the core resource is not influenced in any way. Geologically, there is no reason why a result of Megrez would alter the underlying assessment of the Ahpun and Kodiak fields. In terms of access to funding, we will have to pursue other options in the event that we don't ultimately see the AGDC project move to progression. I'm gonna hand over to Bob and Jay at this point to discuss Megrez both in terms of the prospect and the activity. Well, thanks, David. This well is really truly a collaboration between Bob's group and the engineering and the operations group. As David said, we're targeting 609 million barrels over three TCF of gas. Roger will show you and Bob will talk about these sands are the Eastern Topsets, east of the Dalton Highway. Our pad is along the Dalton Highway, so we're drilling a directional well. It's a relatively simple well. It's about 10,400 feet measured depth, about 8,400 feet total vertical depth. The maximum angle is about 50 degrees. We've worked with Bob's group and with Roger, with SLB, with US Coring, and Bob, jump in at any time, to ensure that we can get all the data that both we and Bob and his group want to get out of the Megrez well, including coring, sidewall cores, and E-Logs, et cetera. Thanks, Jay. I was, like, kind of anxious to jump in there and just say, look, I've been in this game for 50 years. This has gotta be one of the best prospects I've ever seen. I think the team agrees with that, and we're gonna discuss it in more detail with Roger in a few moments on why we believe that. It's a huge prize and, you know, we will get into the details. It is a great prospect, world-class, and, you know, we're testing an excellent reservoir here. Again, those details in a few minutes, but, you know, I was just anxious to step in and make that statement to everybody. Yeah. A- We're gonna use oil-based mud, which is a little more expensive than water-based, but that reduces the swelling of the clays, which is what has caused us some issues in the past, and reduces the drag. We just believe that we have a really great plan for this well. As we said, taking full core sidewall cores, logging while drilling, and the E-Log. As David said, success for the Eastern Topsets yields us less capital per 1,000 barrels a day of oil flow rate. That's good for everybody. Also, as David said, more quickly to self-sufficiency on cash flow. I'm confident that there are gonna be questions about what constitutes success. Before we get onto this slide, which is mainly to remind that, regardless of the outcome of Megrez, the Ahpun and Kodiak developments will proceed. Bob, do you want to talk a little bit about the difference between the threshold and the expectation and what success for that, how we would judge success? Sure. Right at the moment, our expectation, and again, we'll show you the work that is the foundation for that expectation, is we're expecting to see reservoirs between, you know, 20%-25% porosities, five-35 millidarcies. That is significantly better than anything we tested at Alkaid-2. 50-200x better in terms of the permeability. However, we have a good result. We have, you know, good reservoir in the Pikka lease well at the Western Topsets. Hasn't been tested yet in that zone. So if we could find that kind of quality reservoir that we've already seen in the Western Topsets, that would be a good result. We're expecting significantly better than that, but that in itself would be a good result. Thanks. To summarize, until we have drilled the well, until we've got the cores and understand the reservoir, success is gonna be measured in terms of the quality of reservoir we encounter. The geometry of the well will determine what flow rates one would expect from that geology. That's the reason that we won't be today sharing target flow rates or anything. The critical point I just want to bring home is if the Megrez well encounters reservoirs that would yield flow rates that are commercial, whether they are as good as our expectation or not, that would constitute a success in the case of Megrez. Moving forward, as we said, we think it's as good an exploration shot as anyone has drilled in a long time, and certainly we think it's the best well being drilled this year. In the event that it doesn't proceed, we think we've got a very attractive core development benchmarked against the competing uses of capital. We will pursue alternative funding pathways in the event that Megrez doesn't deliver as expected. In terms of the gas sales initiative, many of you will have seen that AGDC shared the first phase report, the draft from Wood Mackenzie. The overwhelming conclusion of the report was that the pipeline makes sense for its phase one domestic or in-state gas demand. Secures the optionality for a really much, much better outcome in the event that the full project moves forward. We will be continuing to engage constructively with AGDC on moving this forward. Again, just to stress, if this project doesn't come to fruition in terms of the gas, our base injection plan, all the metrics that we've shared with people, have been on the basis that we will be reinjecting gas. Initially, that requires one injection well for every three production wells. In due course, you begin to reuse old production wells for injection. I just don't want people to think there's a one-to-one correlation. In addition, we will need to have injection capacity for more than the potential gas sales offtake, as well. Gas reinjection continues to be the base case that we're assuming, and we will only move to a different plan when that has been secured. In terms of the overall timetable, the timeline we've shared is assuming that it takes as long as we can imagine for the Environmental Impact Statement, allowing for 12+ months overrun on the expected schedule. The Corps of Engineers has recently adopted regulations requiring it to actually process in 18 months. We don't want to presume that we're going to achieve the fastest EIS that has been done. This is a conservative timeline. You'll see that, subject to funding, we have plans for additional appraisal, the three wells in Kodiak, and a further one in the Western Topsets. The precise timing of those to be confirmed. What is firm in our planning is drilling the Eastern Topsets with Megrez, continuing the development planning and regulatory approval work, with a view to having FID late in 2027 and being able to begin drilling production wells, installing facilities, and undertaking the pipeline connection for oil exports. In terms of the gas project, as you see along the bottom there, that is an optimization project which will add appreciably to the value of the project, will significantly reduce expected dilution, but it's not the base case in terms of moving the project forward. At that point, I'm going to pause to address some questions. There will be an opportunity for people to ask questions related to Bob and Roger's more detailed presentation on Megrez and the reservoir quality assessments and the work that Isais has been doing. For the most part, we are going to respond to questions by aggregating them and answering them in writing where that is the most efficient way of doing it. But there are two or three questions that have been put both before and during the course of this presentation. I just want to address those first. The one relates to plans for a U.S. listing. I just want to clarify because I know it's a question that a number of investors have been asking over the last several months. You'll recall that Pantheon first talked about exploring a U.S. listing back in 2020, so it's not a new topic. But what was clear was that we were at least a year away from being in a position to act on any market window that related to a U.S. listing, because there's background preparatory work in terms of building the controls and documentation, et cetera, that would just be good governance for a company in any case. Certainly, that's work that whether we were pursuing a listing or not, Pantheon would be undertaking. What we're aiming to do is to get that work done to a point at which we have between three and six months maximum runway to get to an IPO. We're not going to proceed with an IPO unless there is good reason to believe, based on the market testing, that it will be enhancing a value for shareholders. There is limited money being committed to that process because the vast majority of the costs of an IPO are, A, they're back-end loaded, and B, they're based on success fees. There has been a minimum level of money spent doing work which is predominantly required for the effective management of the business to put ourselves in a position where we have a realistic prospect of an IPO should the market allow it. In terms of what specific form that will take, that will be subject to the detailed advice of the investment bankers, of the lawyers, of the accountants who will be working on the program. It's not a commitment that we are going to be a foreign issuer on a U.S. exchange or a U.S. issuer on that. That will be a decision that's taken at the time based on the regulations and the tax treatment at that time. Similarly, I'm not going to be definitive on anything that isn't decided, but what I am gonna be definitive on, we are not going to be delisting the shares that people currently own on the AIM market in London. We will continue to have a listing for as long as it makes sense, on both the US exchange and the UK exchange in the event that we do conduct the IPO. I hope that that's as clear as it can be. That firstly, there is not a fire and forget cost associated with an IPO, that we would only move forward having shortened the runway by having done the preparatory work which the company needs to do in any case. Secondly, that we are not going to be canceling shares that are listed on the AIM market. In the end, the market will determine where the liquidity moves to. Right now, it's clear the liquidity is on the AIM market, and it would be madness to be forecasting the end of that. In terms of, there are some questions around Megrez. I'm gonna leave those for later in the presentation. In terms of timeframe for moving forward with the gas project, that is in the hands of AGDC working with Goldman Sachs and potential funding partners. I think everyone's aware that the WoodMac report was requested by the legislature in terms of providing some backstop funding to help ensure that the decision on moving forward with front-end engineering design could be made as quickly as possible. The precise timing, though, of that process completing, I'm not in a position to share anything other than to say that we are engaged in a constructive way with AGDC and the other stakeholders in the project to help ensure that it moves forward as quickly as can be the case. The final question I want to address now before we move into Bob and Roger is why should we have confidence in the ability to arrange alternative funding given that we have been working on this for the best part of a year? The answer is that we've been working on it for actually somewhat less than a year on the basis that there was a lot of preparatory work that had to be done before we could begin that initiative. That we took an active decision to favor offtaker financing over vendor. You'll remember when we started out, we said there were a number of strands that included vendor financing, offtaker financing, and potential mezzanine and other ventures. We chose the one that we think has the best chance of delivering the best outcome for investors. We have other activities ongoing, which we're not gonna be providing a running commentary on, but I know that the board is aligned and engaged on ensuring that we deliver certainty around our ability to move forward with the underlying development of the Ahpun and Kodiak fields as quickly as possible and not taking any risks on not having that funded. With that, Bob, I'd like to turn it over. There are some additional details in appendices which you can read at your leisure. Let me turn it over, Bob, to you and to Roger. Thank you, David. I'm gonna move this to the first slide, which you've already seen. I just wanna say something before, you know, kind of before we jump into this. This is gonna take just a couple of minutes. You know, I've been thinking about this over the last couple of days and I've been in this project since the very beginning, and it's now 16 years. I think I can honestly say that we are in the best position that this company's ever been in. I'm talking to a lot of investors who've been either in Pantheon for a long time or Great Bear for a long time. You know, we you know, as David has presented and Jay's alluded to in the beginning of this, we now have certified reserves by the largest, some of the most prestigious auditing firms in the world. Some of these resources are not only certified, but they are valued. I've noticed over the last month or so, having conversations with people that they do not understand that these different groups, independent experts, have actually given us a value for some of these resources. I just you know, this should give confidence to people and our shareholders you know, on the value of our company. You know, we're about ready to embark on this this well, Megrez. As I stated, it's a you know, world-class exploration project. We don't-- we're only doing it because it enhances all of our, you know, attempts to get the Ahpun field onto development. It's clustered. These are a cluster of resources that are around the Dalton Highway and, you know, Megrez or Ahpun East is part of that project. It's, you know, we're testing 600 million barrels, very low geologic risk. We're looking at a very high-quality reservoir. As stated, this is the best reservoir we're gonna be testing. Roger is gonna be spending time, you know, explaining that, how we get there. We are drawing this along the Dalton Highway. On this, the object of the first well, obviously to find light hydrocarbons, but also maximize the amount of data that we're gonna collect. You know, we've had this slide up a couple of times in the past. I'm not gonna talk in detail of it, but you know, I will say one thing, it does show we have found a lot of hydrocarbons already in the Kodiak field. We found a lot in the Ahpun Western Topsets. We're drilling up there to the shallower, the next set of Topsets, which are Megrez. I just wanna say something about the amount of hydrocarbons we've already found. The 2.5 billion barrels of hydrocarbons we've already found, explored for and found. I'm pretty proud of the team. Everybody, the geologists and the engineers who've done this work. We're moving over and we're testing Megrez, which is, again, shallower, just the next set of topsets, younger and really, really excellent reservoir. I'm not gonna talk in detail off of these two slides. In a few minutes, you know, I'm gonna turn it over to Roger, and he's gonna explain to you what these mean. For the geoscientists and the people who are knowledgeable, and we're looking at it. The slide on the left, the color displays with the, you know, particularly, you see where the well plan is where we're targeting, and what we've already hit at Ahpun West, in the topset over there. The reds and the yellows where we're drilling are telling us we're going into some pretty good reservoir. When you look at the next slide on the right there, which is another amplitude display using what we call the AVO display. You see all these greens. That is telling you something. You can keep these two slides. When we're drilling the well, you should have these two slides just kind of looking and saying, you know, this is, you know, the expectation from these two, these data is we're gonna be hitting some very good reservoir. Just as a point of interest, we've brought it up in the past and at other webinars and other talks, we have intersected this reservoir already. But there have not been intersected where we see a trap geometry for hydrocarbons. If you look at the line on the left at Pipeline State above the Ahpun Topsets, we have sidewall cores that are telling us that already hard data that this is good reservoir. 20%-25% porosity, and in one of the sidewall cores, 35 millidarcies permeability. Significantly better than anything that we've intersected, but importantly, tested over at Alkaid-2. I think with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Roger because he's gonna explain all this, and I think that's what most people are waiting for. Roger, over to you. All right. Thanks, Bob. I'm gonna first explain what AVO is, amplitude variations with offset, and then when you're all experts at AVO, we're gonna go exploring. Seismic data is shot. It's shot with lots of sources and lots of receivers. This results in some ray paths going vertically and also some ray paths that are at angles. The ray path that goes vertically samples the physics. It samples the rock in terms of its compressibility and its density. Whereas the ray paths going at an angle, they sample the rock in terms of compressibility, density, and shearability. So we have. The physics are different. We have two different sets of what's going on here. In fact, we can actually take one seismic survey and turn it into two different volumes of information, so we can play one off the other. You know, it's not all that different from when you're in the medical industry when you get an MRI and you get a CT scan. Sometimes you need one, sometimes you need the other. Sometimes you need a combination of the two to be able to assess what's going on. When we're using these two different data sets to understand our rocks, you can understand how a shale is very layered, therefore, it will be very shearable compared to a sand that is not layered. In terms of fluids, water is not compressible. Oil with gas in it is compressible. Gas is very compressible. So these two different data sets, if you wanna call them that, these two different volumes, can give us a lot of insight into what's going on in the rocks. But the We have to learn what it is when we compare one data set to the other data set, what is it we're really looking for? What we do is we cross-plot the two data sets. The two important things about the cross-plot are, firstly, how far do the points move from the origin? Secondly, which direction do the points go? Every point in the dataset falls somewhere in this cross-plot space. On the cross-plot on the left, you'll see where the arrows emanate from. That's point 0,0. That's when the data sees nothing. Then when the seismic data starts to see something, the point will move in some distance and some direction. The distance it moves is very important 'cause that's very much a function of lithology. It's a function of fluids. It's a function of thickness. The direction it goes, which is also called AVO type, gives us a lot of insight into what the rock properties are, whether it's more porous, whether it's laminated or blocky. It often can help infer depositional facies. It's a very interesting data set to have, especially when you have the two to work together. Discoveries we've made already, the current Ahpun Topsets and the Kodiak basin floor fan, fall in the area circled there. These sands are harder than the shales. That's why they fall in the direction that they do. That means if the sands are falling that direction, the shales fall in the opposite direction. Now we're gonna change and go to the Megrez play. Megrez is younger. It's shallower. It's more porous. The sands are certainly going to be softer than the shales rather than harder than the shales, so the whole AVO story flips and turns the other direction. The circles that you see now are where the Megrez sands will fall. It's not much of a speculation. That is where they'll be. In fact, these zones encircled there are where the sands fall for Horseshoe and Pikka and Willow and Alpine. That's where the Alpine field falls. Within those zones, we're looking for the bright on the left volume, the distance from the origin. We're looking for the points to get to red. That would signify that they were anomalous. On the right side, we're looking for the areas where it says three, two, and one. Those are the AVO types of three, two, and one. Those are gonna be the best rocks. Within those best rocks, the AVO type three, they're gonna be the best of the best. Now that you're all experts on AVO, let's go exploring. To set the scene, we're gonna look in the area of where Ed Duncan has previously talked about how we have these two shelf margins prograding, and the confluence of those two has created this area that we call the Funnel. All the explorers in Alaska call the Funnel. Ed Duncan calls it the Super Trap. We're gonna look at this arbitrary line. Starting on the west side of that arbitrary line is where the Talitha well is. Continuing down the arbitrary line, we go to Pipeline State. Yes, sir, Bob? Before we do this, I wanna make a point that Roger just blithely passed through when he said Alpine. He's very modest. Alpine is a billion-barrel oil discovery on the North Slope, and it's the last truly known billion-barrel oil discovery on the North Slope. It's producing. Roger is one of the people attributed to making that discovery using these techniques. I just thought I would just point that out again. Sorry. He just kind of jumped over Alpine there. I thought I would just chuck that in. Go ahead, Rog. Oh, Bob, thanks. The arbitrary line goes from Talitha to Pipeline State, then to the end of the shelf margin, then we're gonna jump over Super Trap to the shelf margin on the other side. To continue setting the scene, the HRZ, the high radioactive zone, as it's called, that's our prolific hydrocarbon source. Right here on the left, I'm enhancing what the Talitha well looks like. The first track in that Talitha well shows the lithology, the sands, green. I mean, the sands are yellow, the shales are green. The second track is a blow-up of the porosity. The green in that porosity is oil. As you can see, it's filled with oil from HRZ all the way up to the seal. Every sand is filled with oil. That's billions of barrels of oil in place. Just a testament to what a tremendous hydrocarbon source we're sitting on top of. This is the area we're going to explore today. This is the Funnel area. What we're looking for in terms of AVO is distances from the origin, meaning in this it's anomalous. In other words, we're looking for the reds. As shown in the cross plot and the seismic section, this is the seismic section of that cross plot. The color bar on the cross plot is the color bar that's used in the seismic section. We're looking to see where the reds are, and the first thing you'll notice is, well, there's a whole bunch of reds there. That's a very anomalous horizon. Something's causing that to happen. We're gonna click on it and see what, how it maps out. The map on the left is showing what the contiguous body looks like that the computer has pulled out. The color of that map on the left is the color of AVO types shown in the cross plot just below it. The greens are type three, the reds are twos, and then there's some very light reds that are ones. Greens are the best. That's the best of the best. What's even more impressive is that this map does not contain type fours and fives. I often see when I'm using AVO to explore, which is what I do every day. When you have a map that is threes, fours, and fives, it tends to not work. When you have an anomaly that's ones, twos, and threes, it tends to work a very high percentage of the time. In other words, there's a difference between a type three and a type three. A type three that has neighbors of fours and fives is something else, probably. When a type three has neighbors of ones and twos, those are the ones that work. Continuing down, we pick the next horizons. Another map, ones, twos, and threes. Perfect. It doesn't get better than this. The next one below it, there's another one. Ones, twos, and threes again. The next one, ones, twos, and threes. You put them all together, you see how nicely it all falls together in that trap. This is a spectacular set of stacked anomalies. What could possibly be causing this? These are just anomalies. I'm a great believer in Occam's razor. You see Occam's razor playing out over and over again. In my words, Occam's razor states that the simplest solution to explain a set of circumstances is likely the correct one. Simple. That's what works. Here we are with these prospects sitting on top of a prolific hydrocarbon source that has put billions of barrels into the rocks above it. We have a trap that's set up above it that's caused by the Funnel. We have numerous, not just one, AVO anomalies with AVO signatures that are the type that work. How do we best explain what's going on? It's not one, it's multiple. These anomalies are consistent with what's found at Horseshoe, Pikka, Willow, and of course, Alpine. My opinion is that the simplest way to explain all this is that we are sitting on a trap that is another elephant. We have a new elephant by the tail here. When you look at the management explanation or prediction of 609 million barrels and 3.3 TCF of gas, that is from three of these horizons. Pantheon has mapped nine horizons in this, and we're just talking about three. This is really, really exciting stuff. It's tremendous. The simplest way, always remember that, the simplest way to explain something is the one that's right. You wanna say something, Bob? Go ahead. I wanna point out that, you know, Roger, in using Roger's technique in the tighter rock, we've already found, again, 1.6 billion barrels. This stuff is the classic seismic attribute work that you use around the world for looking for conventional good reservoirs with hydrocarbons in it. That's what we're seeing here at Megrez, at the, you know, at the Megrez location. We're gonna hit a number of zones and, you know, we're gonna test out the idea. You know, I'll turn it over to, I think, yeah. There are no specific questions relating to the technical case, but there are a couple that I know people got before. The first is, can we reach all of the nine horizons that we've matched from the west? No of the river? No. The answer to that is no. I wanna point out that because of the nature of the trap that we're testing, which is actually a structural trap, there's a big structural nose that's associated with it and a fault that gives us some of the trap. We have the ability to test several zones stacked on each other. If this was just purely a stratigraphic trap, just a simple, very simple stratigraphic trap, that could be a difficult situation. It's not the normal situation. We do have the ability to test probably three zones. David, ultimately, with a larger rig, we can. I have looked at every one of those, but we can reach the majority of them with a larger rig. Oh, we can reach- Longer reach, you know, to get Well, that. ... Yeah, I think that's what the question was getting at. You know, I recall when we were determining how far to lease across the river. It was based on what could we reach from a development perspective, recognizing that the development wells are slightly more complex than the simple 45-degree exploration. Yeah. Looking at that, we thought we'd get to the extreme eastern edge, and if we got to within that edge, we'd probably drain all of those sands marginally outside of that image. Yeah. The second question is slightly you know it fits into the talking about it stage. If we got a success at Megrez, I think my guess is that the hardest thing in the world is gonna be to keep Bob quiet rather than that we're going to be reticent about promoting it. Over the course of the last 12 months, we've definitely encouraged him into the industry discussion. There have been a number of papers related to our rocks that have been presented at various conferences and stuff. That activity will clearly step up. You know, in general, you know, there's a lot of engagement that Jay and Bob and I and other members of the team are having with industry. I suppose it shouldn't come as a surprise that a lot of those discussions don't happen in public. They happen privately. There is certainly no shortage of making sure that the relevant people are aware and introducing a broader community of people to it. I think there are a few more questions that are sort of more specific. They relate to IPO process and that kind of thing. We'll address that in the written answers that we'll eventually post. There are two outstanding questions though that I think we should answer. The first is, it looks like we've got no drilling timetables for 2025. I'll kick off, but Jay, I know you may want to say a bit more. Clearly the drilling window outside of using gravel pads is winter. You know, any drilling that we haven't got currently funded is subject to funding. In the event that we were to be drilling further appraisal of Megrez, for example, that could happen any time during 2025, subject to funding. Yeah. In terms of the other wells, they would all require, I suppose, Jay, do you wanna talk a little bit about, you know, how quickly we could get that together? Well, yes. We certainly could get together drilling for the winter of 2025-2026. You know, as David just said, that would be either Talitha B or follow-up wells at Theta West, or possibly if we had the funding, both of those, have a nice road that goes to Talitha B pad and on out to the up dip Theta West. That could certainly work subject to funding, and those would be pretty exciting wells, obviously. Go ahead, Bob. Can I make a comment? One of the things that I think that people take for granted is what they should understand is with Megrez, we're again drilling off a gravel pad, which means that we're collecting whole core, sidewall core data, and we're getting that data. You know, and I fully believe we're gonna make a discovery. And once we do, once we've logged the well, we release the rig, and there will be a short period of time in which we will analyze that core data, and as David has said, to make our decisions on how we're gonna test the well, but we will go out and test the well probably early in the winter. You know, kind of in December, we've collected the data. Ed Duncan has already talked to the different labs to expedite the data, such that we can make decisions on how we're gonna test the well. Up in Alaska, that's not the normal process. In Alaska, you have a winter, you drill a winter well, you go out, you collect your data. Next winter, you come out and test it. We have the advantage of actually as a continuous process with short breaks to test the well and maybe even later in the year, you know, with pad, maybe even do a slightly longer test, production test. We will have a continuous process of evaluation and testing of this well if it's successful. For many people, that could be a drill season and then a test season and then another test season, particularly if you have multiple tests and you wanna do it for more than 15 minutes or a day. We have the ability to expedite that process. That is gonna be. That's the way I see it over the next 12 months, just on Megrez. I mean, it's a fantastic thing that we again have the gravel pad and gonna have the ability to do that. If we wanted to drill an additional well to probe other parts of it, we'd have that facility. It would be- Sure. It's simply we didn't want to put down plans that we didn't fund it. Actually because of the gravel pad, we have the opportunity for activity throughout next year in a variety of different ways. Jay, there's a question about timing for completion of the pad mobilization, expected spud. What do you want to Yeah. As David said earlier, the pad is actually more than 50% complete. We've targeted a 1 November spud. We think it is easily achievable. It would be great to actually spud a little bit before that. We're not promising that, but that would be a nice thing to have. It's not a long well. We think the well will be completed by the end of November, there or thereabouts. We will have collected our data, we'll turn it over to the experts for analysis. Once we get that data back, we will have collected some PVT data, lots of logs, cores, sidewall cores. As David says, we will analyze that and determine, do we do a small frack, small acid frack, whatever it might be to complete this deviated well. It's not gonna be horizontal, it's not gonna be a vertical well, but a deviated well so that we get the best completion possible. If we're thinking of intersecting three different zones, that's why, again, you know, ultimately in development one may well be combining what is the geometry and whatever else. That's the reason. Until we actually see what it is we're intending to test, it's just not possible to be definitive about what the expectation of the test. Roger, I think it's probably one for you about can we tell anything about the phase risk in terms of, for example, is there free gas? Are we seeing a difference between oil and water? Is there a chance that it's gonna end up like Alkaid-2? Trying to determine separate gas from oil on seismic turns out to be really quite difficult. It sounds like it should be easy because gas is far more compressible, but if the amplitudes that we have here are really not consistent with it having free gas. Free gas should get a lot brighter than we're even seeing right now. No, I don't see evidence of free gas, even though it's not Bob, C an I add something? Yeah. We are in terms of geologic distance, we're a stone's throw away where we've tested light oil from the same source rock. It's in the same part of the generation window. It's a light. All these things are light oil reservoirs with a certain GOR bang. That's the expectation. That's what I think overwhelmingly what the seismic attributes are telling us. Roger's key point is in this reservoir. What we are looking at, we can now individually see individual reservoirs, something we couldn't see to the west, but we're seeing these stacked individual reservoirs and being able to identify and get a feeling for thickness, get a feel for and what, you know, what is the fluid type. It's a good question. How thick do we think these are? Are we looking for 10-100 or 1,000-foot sands? Okay. In the geologic environment that we're in, these sands are gonna be somewhere between each individual one will be 75-125 feet thick, stacked on top of each other. That's what we're looking at. With the best part of the reservoir at the top. You know, you can look at published stuff at Horseshoe and Pikka, it's gonna look very similar to that. Yeah. I'd just like to remind everybody that we're six for six using Roger's AVO on finding. Yeah. Hydrocarbons, f lowable hydrocarbons. Okay. One final thing, and maybe I wasn't clear earlier. When we're looking at the different initiatives, we're not doing this sequentially, we're doing this in parallel. We've got ongoing activity relating to alternatives that don't rely upon either Megrez or AGDC activity coming good. It's not that we're focused solely on those things, hoping for a good result, and then we'll pick ourselves up and dust ourselves off and go to the next plan. We're running everything in parallel. A number of things are not mutually exclusive. If we're in a position to monetize the gas, that doesn't mean that we're not interested in a strategic transaction with a potential partner, et cetera. The full attention of the board is on running all these processes in parallel along the way. As I say, there are some other specific questions that have been asked, and we will group them together and post the answers. I just want to thank everyone for investing the time to engage with us. Thank you, Roger and Bob for sharing some of the detailed under the hood science. To leave you with one clear message, which is that we are working together as a team to deliver the cash self-sufficiency from developing the resources we've already found, that nothing is going to distract us from making sure that happens, and anything that we're doing fits clearly into boosting the ability to deliver on that. We will over the course of the next several months be providing specific parts of the project, not in terms of corporate webinar you know talking about the company so much as talking about processes, because it's clear that investors have concerns, for example, about the regulatory approval and how we get there. They have questions about what the potential gas market may be. We will seek to make sure that we provide the information to help investors to make informed decisions around what level of risk they're comfortable with. I can tell you that in terms of the Pantheon board, we are very comfortable that we have a development plan which we've sought external validation, not just of the resource, but also the development plan from people who've developed these things in Alaska before. Project assurance work that we'll be hopefully in a position to share and bring investors to the same level of understanding of the risks and the potential of this as we all have from inside the tent. With that, I'm gonna pass you back to Alessandro for a few administrative details. Thank you once again for joining us. Thank you, Bob. Thank you, Jay. Thank you, Roger, for your time. David, thank you very much for that, and thank you all for updating investors today. Could I please ask investors not to close the session, as you'll now be automatically redirected to provide your feedback in order that the management team can better understand your views and expectations. This will only take a few moments to complete, so it should be greatly valued by the company. On behalf of the management team for Pantheon Resources plc, we'd like to thank you for attending today's presentation, and good afternoon to you all.