Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc corporate update. Throughout this recorded meeting, investors will be in listen-only mode. Questions are encouraged and can be submitted at any time using the Q&A tab situated on the right-hand corner of your screen. Please simply type in your questions at any time and press send. Given the significant attendance on today's call, the company will not be in a position to answer all questions submitted today, but the company can review all questions submitted today, and we'll publish those responses where it's appropriate to do so. Before we begin, we'd like to submit the following poll, and I'm sure the company will be most grateful for your participation. I'd now like to hand over to CEO Paul Griffiths. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everybody, and thank you very much for giving up your time to join this presentation. If we start here at slide 3, the first comment is shareholder-aligned team. That's quite a cynical comment for some companies, but in this case, I wanted to tell you why we are aligned with shareholders and our history basically of where the company came from. Those who founded Predator are still directors and senior management with Predator. We developed the Tendrara opportunity that was then subsequently gifted to Sound Energy, whose shareholders enjoyed a spectacular result after drilling my planned well, for which I raised GBP 13 million for. That loss of potential value was a direct result of the public markets. We'd been a private company up until that point when we had brought Kosmos into Morocco, for example, and then when we reversed into a public company, things changed. We never forget, and we never forgive. That's our motto. If you don't like it, tough. That's why we'll do whatever it takes to start drilling MOU-5 next month on what is the best risk-reward opportunity any of us have ever seen, and we've been in the industry for 40 years each of us. That's why we're doing it. We want the opportunity to go a second time round and create another investment success, which Tendrara was in the initial stages, after it went to Sound Energy. Why are we so excited about, if excitement is the right word to use in this business and in this market, about what we have as a company? We have a risk value of GBP 1.36 per share, and that was independently assessed by Research Tree last year, and that's simply on Titanosaurus, MOU-5. We are the first mover on helium in Morocco. Helium was analyzed in MOU-3. We didn't realize at the time the significance of it until we heard about the helium discoveries, for example, in Tanzania and East Africa and elsewhere. MOU-5 may provide the volume and concentration for a very good helium result. We have an extended program of testing to unlock the compressed natural gas contingent gas resources. Sure, everybody is frustrated about the speed and the difficulty in meeting our targets on the testing program. I don't apologize for that. We have to do whatever we have to do on our learning curve to get the CNG development underway. We don't give up on resources just because the going gets tough. When the going gets tough, we get going, and we continue going until we get a result. That's not forgotten about. It's still there on the table for 2025. There's the opportunity to add the high-pressure zone in MOU-3, which we encountered while drilling. That has contingent resources and potential flow rates that could kickstart an immediate CNG development plan. That's important because we have to go to an exploitation concession relatively quickly in order to secure isolation, if you like, of any MOU-5 discovery from proven resources around the contingent resources around MOU-3 and MOU-1, so we can secure that under an exploitation concession, which leaves us free to divest any elements of the MOU-5 success in the future without divesting the whole block. That obviously makes a lot of sense to do it in that direction. We also have cash flow and production in Trinidad. Yes, it takes time to ramp up that cash flow and things come along that are unexpected but also can add value to what you're proposing to do in 2025. We've also scaled up our acquisitions. We've acquired, announced recently, an acquisition in Trinidad, and we're working on a second acquisition that will help them, again, with the production profile. Most importantly, during the latter part of last year, we negotiated the MOU for the wax treatment, which is a patented wax treatment that can increase flow by up to threefold based on Saudi Aramco examples over the last five or six years. In Ireland, we're still at the table after eight years, seven years. Well, it'll be eight years in May. We are still at the table with our successor authorisation. Right now, security of energy supply is the most important element of policy in Europe and Ireland. It's not renewable energy anymore. It's security of energy supply when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, and finally, they're getting the message. We have no debt. After eight years of building this portfolio and operating it in three different continents, we have no debt. We have our running costs at GBP 950,000 a year. These are the running costs for the company at corporate level and include something like GBP 230,000 for auditors and company secretary and accountants. These are the costs that you have to be faced with as a public company. This is the public market. We're regulated by the FCA. We are not an AIM company. We're a main list company integrated on the main list now after the reorganization last year, and we are regulated by the FCA, which means there's a different set of controls for us compared to AIM, which is regulated by NOMADs. Lastly, we have experienced technical managers, over 40 years experience, most of us. Our job is to make sure our assets are in a condition where we can look at a divestment program. That's very different from the market valuing our assets. The industry values our assets based on legal title, funds spent on developing the assets and resources, exploration potential, all these other good things that the market currently gives no value for. The market only gives value for, "Oh, you flowed 100 barrels a day today," you know, or, "You flowed a million cubic feet of gas." That won't get us over the line with our divestment. I make no apology whatsoever for focusing on securing the assets in a way that allows us to divest them. Anyway, that's the introduction. A long introduction. You have all probably had a chance to read the presentation. Next slide is just where the assets are, and then summary of investment. We are called Predator, and the name arose out of the inability to stay in on the Tendrara opportunity back in 2014. One thing is about scale. Scale of MOU-5, we're looking at a structure that is 187 square kilometers. That's Greater London for perspective. You're looking at vertical relief on it, which is like 20 times higher than a Titanosaurus rex. You're looking at 2P gas resources of 4.4 TCF net to Predator. You're looking at $1.3 billion unrisked, the undiscounted annual gross revenues net to Predator in a success upside 2P case at a gas sales price of $7 an MCF. You're looking at 2P helium resources net to PRD of 74.6 BCF. You're looking at $30.5 billion gross unrisked, undiscounted 2P helium revenues, because helium is priced averagely at $400 an MCF. That's a conservative 136 pence per share with a 12% risk factor for gas and 6% for helium. Much discussion in the questions about the risking, and I'll deal with that in the questions. Q1 2025 is fully funded work program, and that's aimed also at de-risking the MOU-3 gas flow. Again, that can deliver in 2026 cash flow. 300 barrels oil a day production by Q2, Q3 2025. That's fully funded for production startup. Complete the farm out divestment of Corrib South. Well, that's subject to award of a successor authorisation, and I'm not sure, but as of yesterday, the Irish government was still arguing over the procedure to, in the Dáil, to elect the Taoiseach. Acquisition of production and monetizing these assets through divestment is an important part of the policy. Let's not forget the top-line bullet points. Where else in the world onshore at present can you have this kind of risk-reward ratio for a $2.4 billion well where Predator has 75% and the ONHYM state 25%? Vast potential prospective gas resources and 3 km from infrastructure linked to Europe, linked to the Moroccan power stations, which is completely underutilized at present because Morocco only imports about 100 million cubic feet a day at present from gas from Europe. When Europe is crying out for gas and we're sitting on one of the best structures to be drilled onshore this year, without a doubt, and in the best fiscal regime, no corporation tax for 10 years. A gas price lower than European prices, but sustained to, for example, the gas to power at $8.67 an MCF. That's what's been mooted and averaged in the last 18 months. Don't tell me that this isn't worth a run, and that is the reason why management is totally aligned to delivering MOU-5, no matter what anybody else says, by our deadline, which we've quoted in the recent RNS. Everything is in place to do that, and that's what we're working towards. I don't understand why people think that we simply say that, "Oh, we're gonna drill MOU-5," then we don't. There are reasons we can be firm on commitment times, and there's reasons where we can't because of variability in the supply of equipment and services. In Morocco, everything has to be imported. Morocco is not like Trinidad. It has a tiny oil and gas industry and very little services, and the demand for services is not great. The international companies don't want to bring things into Morocco unless it's a longer-term contract. That always hits us when we're trying to plan a program and trying to plan schedules, and that isn't gonna change in the short term. We are the only company drilling at present in Morocco onshore or actually even offshore, and that isn't likely to change for the next 6 to 8 months. Okay, moving on, hopefully. This is the news flow over the next 12 months. Q1, we're drilling MOU-5. Q2, we're evaluating the potential for divestment in a success case. We want to retain the helium rights, and we're gonna do some more work on satellite remote sensing to see if there are any other additional helium opportunities in and around the MOU-5 area. Divestment can only occur if we have a successful well and the results are unambiguous. There's a good chance that will be the case, and therefore, we've got to be prepared for a divestment. We will continue with perforating the shallow high-pressure gas in MOU-3. This is easier, believe it or not, now to produce because it doesn't have the same reservoir character as the character of the reservoir that is causing us problems in MOU-3 in order to find the best way of evaluating and producing that reservoir. You have to remember that of all the entities operating in northern Morocco at present, we are the only entity that didn't inherit an existing gas discovery. Everything we do is creating a new learning curve. We can't rely on. We thought we could rely on, for example, Rharb Basin, but in hindsight, after the drilling, it's not possible for us to rely on their mud systems and the way those wells were drilled. It's a plus and it's a minus, but in the end it's an overall positive because the volumes have not gone away. The potential to flow the reservoirs have not gone away, but it takes time, and that time has to be spaced out because it's not easy, despite what some of the questions seem to think or imply, to bring equipment in at the right time for when you want to develop a potential asset or operation. We will also progress and are progressing the workovers in Trinidad, and the target there is up to 300 barrels a day, full production by the end of Q2. Now, the reason why some of that has been delayed is because last year we entered into an MOU with a wax treatment, a patented wax treatment used by Aramco in Saudi Arabia through a local company, Earth. It's never been rolled out in Trinidad before. It meant that one of the chemicals had to be effectively approved by the Environment Ministry because it had never been used in Morocco before. That delayed things a little bit. On the other hand, we also progressed the acquisition of Caribbean Rex, the 51% controlling interest in Caribbean Rex, which gave us access to the oil tanks that we need to store oil. We can't just produce oil and truck it every day to the end of a pipeline somewhere else because the costs are significant. You have to store the oil and truck it in a bigger truck all at the same time to reduce the actual cost per barrel of oil of moving that oil around. The wax treatment is vital. If that proves successful, it can increase oil productivity for up to threefold. If we'd started earlier in terms of the workovers, we wouldn't have been able to carried out the wax treatment. We would have not known fast enough whether the wax treatment was going to be as successful as we fully expected to be. There's a question on the wax treatment which I'll answer. We completed the first acquisition of Trinidad field, and we're working on a second acquisition that again could increase our production over and above the 300 barrels a day to 330 barrels a day. We're evaluating undeveloped field also, which is 400 barrels a day, tested 400 barrels a day from two existing wells. That would be potentially towards the end of the year, an application for a new license. It's not a case that we sit back, as some people seem to imply, and do nothing. We do everything that we have to do to move our projects along. We have three core areas or two core areas, which are Morocco and Trinidad. We have, if you like, the candle on the cake, which is Ireland, which could bring us value that we would not have anticipated a year ago. The key catalyst for near-term growth, obviously it's Titanosaurus, the testing program, and Cory Moruga workovers. The only reason to dwell on this slide is in the research note, there was the 12% chance of success is based on a certain gas price, for example, $7 per MCF, which is conservative because industry is $12, but gas to power for Titanosaurus is about $8.67. For helium, the 6% chance of success depends on your helium concentration. Now, we can't give you a helium concentration that would be anywhere near accurate at this point in time, because we found helium in MOU-3, but we weren't looking for helium. It was in a gas sample that we had analyzed, and we were very pleased that that gas was biogenic gas, and it had some bit of helium in it, which we didn't register with us at the time. We can't be absolutely certain what that percentage is, but what we can be certain of, that was the only gas sample that found helium. It wasn't as if this was, like a renegade value over the entire well. This was concentrated at a point in what we call the Moulouya Fan, at one point at the top of the fan, not even in the best part of the fan. There's plenty of upside in terms of de-risking this. If we were to de-risk it to the 50%, the numbers would be for a pence per share. The numbers obviously would be much larger. Some people also forget that we already have 2C contingent resources of 1.4 million barrels in Snowcap-1, and we have over 12 million barrels of additional prospective resources in Cory Moruga. Our value is also underpinned by our production, our oil assets in Trinidad. Our corporate strategy is, one, we're fully funded to drill MOU-5, and we're fully funded for production enhancement onshore Trinidad. Production is important because it forms a safety net so that we don't have to go to the market for corporate overhead, for example. It also means it's a hedge for us. Right now, sterling is relatively weak against the dollar, whereas we get paid the equivalent of U.S. dollars in Trinidad, and Trinidad's currency is linked to the U.S. dollar. It gives us some protection against raising money in sterling and the exchange rate risk that might exist going forward under the new administration in the United States. We've always maintained a debt-free status for the last few years, and that's unusual for a company of our size with our breadth of portfolio of assets and the fact that we've drilled already four wells, made at least one acquisition and kept all our assets intact 100% in terms of our equity, original equity, percentages. We always maintain cash balances, GBP 4.35 billion as at 24/9/2024, and another GBP 2 million in November last year. People say, "Oh, what did you spend the GBP 10 billion on?" Well, we haven't spent the GBP 10 billion. Someone said we spent GBP 10 billion on testing. Well, we haven't spent GBP 10 billion on testing, otherwise we wouldn't be drilling MOU-5. The other thing is people say, "Well, why do you need to raise money for this? Why do you need to raise money for that?" Well, at the end of the day, it's all about having the money on the balance sheet, because at the end of the year, you have to go through a company audit. That audit has to demonstrate that you're a going concern. For a company of our size, and other companies smaller than us, it's a critical item to tick. If you don't get through your audit, you can be suspended, and that has happened quite often in the last year, companies being suspended. We are not going to sleepwalk into a situation where we get suspended because our auditors say, "Well, you don't have enough working capital for 12-18 months," even allowing for a Trinidad production, which, you know, some auditors will take into account, others won't. That's the reason we're maintaining healthy balances with the flexibility to do things. It's no good to shareholders if we're not trading. You don't have a, you know, an asset to trade. There are plenty examples in the last 12 months where you can see that. Someone said that, you know, practicing financial discipline, we didn't do it. Well, I can assure you every single item that we spend has to be approved by me. We do practice financial discipline. That's why after 8 years, we have no debt. That's why after 8 years, we still have all our licenses intact at the same equity interest. That's why the governments we work with welcome us in their jurisdictions. That's why the Ministry asked us in Trinidad to contribute to COP28 in November, which we did. We do whatever we have to do in terms of financial discipline, and I won't take any argument whatsoever that we don't practice financial discipline. Go and invest in some of the companies that are in the situation they are at present because they did not practice financial discipline. Managed Forex risk. We have explained how we are going to do that in Trinidad by getting alignment with the United States dollars and production revenues. We have no employees. Someone asked whether I was an employee of the company and why didn't I take a pay cut because I was an employee of the company. I don't live in the Victorian age. I founded this company. I brought every single asset into this company. I financed this company in the very beginning, and I'm not going to be treated as an employee by anyone. You don't like that? Call an EGM, remove me, and if you've got so much experience in this business, appoint yourself as the next CEO of the company because you obviously know more about us, this sector, than I do. Europe and U.K. We don't invest in Europe and the U.K. except for Ireland, which is a special inherited asset where the security of energy supply gives us a competitive edge. Frankly, the energy transition policy is flawed in Europe and U.K. They've downplayed the importance of gas. What happens when the wind doesn't blow and sun don't shine? They have to rely on gas, and they end up paying astronomical costs for gas-fired power electricity because they're buying gas in the peak demand period of the market, normally the winter market. Gas storage is dwindling in the U.K. Trump coming in is going to flood Europe with LNG. Well, great. You know? Europe then becomes a puppet of the United States. Operatorship of assets. We have always maintained operatorship to control our costs and to accelerate, believe it or not, accelerate execution of strategic decisions. If we were a minority partner, we could still be waiting years to get projects off the ground and moved along. We control our projects. We control the timeline. Sometimes they're attractive for shareholders, sometimes they're not. Tough. That's a fact of life. That's a fact of our business. Project equity. We maintain undiluted asset prior to divestment. No point in diluting your asset down to 10% and expect people to come running to your door because they're a material asset. Choice is either dilute at shareholder level or dilute your assets, which in turn dilutes the value, potential value in the company, and makes it 10 times harder to look at divestment or farm out. You don't have enough interest to offer. It's a choice. You make the choice. No, you don't. We make the choice because we know the industry, and we know what the assets are worth to a potential buyer. They're not worth the same to traders. Of course, they're not. Yeah, because they're trading in the shares. They're not trading in the assets. We are trading in the assets, and that's a completely different model to trading in the shares. Corporate structure. What we've always done is wholly ring-fenced all our projects. Just simple thing. Amazing how many companies don't do it. Which means if we want to divest, we can divest a subsidiary and change the share structure of that subsidiary to give control to an incoming party, and that's the change of control consent, and it doesn't involve any more complex regulatory approvals if you're selling an asset. If we were selling an asset in Morocco, we'd be taxed on that sale. If we're selling shares in Jersey, there is no capital gains tax. That's why the sub companies are structured in the way they're structured. Okay. Pause for breath. I won't go through this, because everybody, I hope, knows why Morocco, why gas, why Guercif. Fiscal regime, very benign. No signature bonuses, unlike many places in West Africa. Fantastic infrastructure. Not many places in the world where you can have an open pipeline to Europe, which is completely underutilized. Morocco needs to replace coal with gas, so the government is very supportive. Despite some of the questions that have challenged that, the government is extraordinarily supportive of the gas industry, and they do help us. They are limited by their bureaucratic structure which all government agencies have. We can work within that structure, and we've done that very well over the last six months by working with our partners and not working against them. Guercif is unique. It's never before was explored in this particular part of Guercif until we came along, and the prospect scale is unique. The biogenic gas potential is unique. The CNG transport to industry is unique. The generative potential of biogenic gas is unique to Morocco, 70 TCF potential. We have all the elements for a big discovery. If anybody thinks Morocco is like the North Sea, I say it's more like Ireland, that the geology is right, the infrastructure is right. Fiscal regime has got a little bit sour in Ireland, but it has all the elements, but it will not reveal or release multiple fields like the North Sea. Ireland, Kinsale Field, 1.7 TCF. Corrib Gas Field, 1.1 TCF. Morocco is going to be like that. It will yield one big field, at best two big fields. It will happen. A bit like Ghana before they discovered Jubilee. Morocco is that kind of environment. It's not a North Sea environment where you just move along, drill an appraisal well, boom, you put it on production or you make another discovery. That's not the same geological environment. Trinidad, you know, a lot of people say, "Why Trinidad?" You know? But at the end of the day, it's proven oil. They produced over 1 billion barrels onshore, and the beauty about the onshore is that it's ripe for new technology like the wax treatment, like applying improved up-to-date petrophysical analysis, like applying different geological vision, like singling out the low-hanging fruit plus the bits and bobs of wells that have been neglected. The difference we have in Trinidad is twofold, basically. One is we went in and acquired Cory Moruga because it was a near virgin undeveloped field with initial discovery from just one of the eight potential reservoirs on the block of over 1,200 barrels a day initial IP production. Two, we had created a situation where we had $47.9 million worth of tax losses to offset against production. The problem in Trinidad is that they couldn't get the production up mostly fast enough in the older mature fields to utilize all the petroleum profit tax losses or relief. We can do that. The wax-based treatment is potentially a game changer. I don't say that lightly. It hasn't been done in Trinidad before. What it does, and I've seen the experiment on the desktop and I've seen the numerical modeling, it fits all the boxes of what you would geologically expect this new treatment to do. I'll answer a specific question on that in the question and answers. Okay, why Ireland? Well, Corrib South is 18 km from the Corrib Gas Field. Corrib Gas Field resources are dwindling. Throughput is dwindling. Ireland is becoming almost 100% reliant for gas in the winter on the interconnector eventually through the U.K. That situation is not going to be redressed unless more gas is found. Ireland has no gas storage facilities. It's sitting there. The last storm, next storm is due to hit any second now. At this time, if they had to increase gas supplies from the U.K. in an emergency, I don't think those gas supplies would be available. Corrib offers us a security of supply option. It also offers us the ability to put our Mag Mell FSRU concept in place at the end of the Corrib gas pipeline instead of a Ram Head. It also offers us, or Corrib South offers gas storage facilities as well. It ticks all the boxes for security of energy supply, which is going to be the number one priority of the new coalition government. We have already met over the last 18 months key independent TDs who are the equivalent of our MPs. I'm pleased to say that several of them will be in the coalition government. I'm meeting them in a couple of months' time to resurrect FSRU concept and Mag Mell with them, which we discussed with them over a year ago. They were very, very supportive of, but had no position of power or authority then in a coalition government. We're not sitting here saying that we're starting to go into big business on LNG imports and FSRUs, et cetera. We're putting together the concept. We'll secure the minimum case, the gas storage facility at Corrib South, and in the positive case, up to 1 TCF of gas, prospective gas resources. Corrib South is a lookalike for the Corrib gas field. Of course, President Trump is going to flood Europe with LNG. Bad luck, Ireland, they've got no LNG import facility. FSRU is the quickest way to get an LNG import facility. If you try to build it onshore, it's like Shannon, it's still going to take several years. We're in the right place at the right time. If we can sell the concept on as a business with all the approvals, or some of the approvals at least in place, and with Corrib South awarded, that has value. We already have one of the owners in the Corrib gas field have already made an outline proposal to farm in, not just to us, but also notifying the Department of the Ministry in Ireland that that's what they wish to do. We have to get the Successor Authorisation awarded first. Outlook 2025, Moroccan gas, near production, Trinidad oil production, Blue Sky, Titanosaurus, and not listed here, but an energy infrastructure play in Ireland. To summarize, MOU-5 is the higher risk, higher reward proposition being drilled end of February. Well will take maximum 10-12 days to drill, already funded, ready to go. Then everything else is a layer below that in the sense that CNG production, CNG development rather, potential gas flows from all the wells that we have drilled to date, where we think there is the possibility of gas flow and the high-pressure gas. Also gives us the opportunity for either partial or full divestment in the event that we, our preferred option is to go down that route at the earliest opportunity. Trinidad, we will continue with completing acquisitions of producing assets. I should add that we acquired an asset that we announced for zero cost consideration. What we did was put up $170,000 effectively by the oil tax that we needed to store oil up to 400 barrels in Jacobin-1. We also bought some other equipment that would help us with not just producing the oil, but obviously moving the oil to where the point we want to sell it. A neutral transaction, we had that money already in our working capital forecast for the facilities that we would have to buy. Not often that you can buy a field where we have already restored three of the seven wells to production, and there's four more wells to restore to production, and you can buy that for zero, basically. Next slides all refer to the appendix. The only one I'm going to look at now is MOU-3 rigorous testing. Firstly, SandJet rigorous testing with tools were deployed, and they successfully perforated the reservoirs that we initially wanted them to perforate, TGB-4 and Ma Sand. Pressure buildups reached 246 psi and 159 psi, and then became static. There was no flow of any reservoir fluid or gas to surface. Nothing got to surface. But certainly nothing came out of the formation other than mud filtering. The well hadn't cleaned up enough because what we had to do, effectively what we now know we have to do, is to draw down the pressure on the back pressure, if you like, on the reservoir caused by the fluid column in the well, so to increase the drawdown pressure. That wasn't possible to do that swabbing at the time because we didn't know at that time what the problem was till we analyzed the data and looked at what the possibilities were. We had an independent study done by John Tingas, who did all my reservoir engineering work incidentally for Tendrara, and Tendrara came on stimulated at 40 million a day. Proved the value of working together with a reservoir engineer. He concluded that the wells will flow, but we have to increase the drawdown pressure, which is the next step. To do that, we have to do a safety case. The reason why we have to do a safety case is because if we increase the drawdown pressure too much, then we could have a blowout at surface, and nobody wants that, least of all our insurers. We have to be very careful in what we do, painstakingly slow process, but I don't care because at the end of the day, I need to sell an asset that is de-risked. I can't sell a blowout to the industry, I'm afraid. I can't jeopardize all the other reservoirs in that well that have been safely secured behind casing just to, as one question put it, taking time to reach the finishing line. Sorry, we're not in a 100-meter race. This isn't the Olympics. We're not there to run 100 meters to try and get to the finishing line so that we get a little bump in the share price for the next fall. No, we're here to do whatever we have to do to sell the assets. It's not a finishing line for us. We're not racing against Usain Bolt. He's retired. I'm not gonna retire anytime soon. Last point then is that the volumes here are significant. We still have 61.9 BCF 2C resources. Just in the TGB-6 and Ma Sand, which is what we're concentrating on at present. Now, people say, "Well, why don't you test MOU-1? Why don't you test MOU-2? Why don't you test MOU-4? Why don't you test more reservoirs?" Our priority at present is to test Ma Sand to make it work and to get that result de-risked, and then to perforate the high-pressure sand. The high-pressure sand doesn't have any of the problems, reservoir problems or mud problems of the deeper sand. The problem with the high-pressure sand is we couldn't stop the gas coming into the well. You know, that was how pressured that gas was and how connected that gas was, even though it's at such a shallow depth. Many examples in the North Sea where you get shallow gas, that some of it is produced, for example, in the Netherlands. That turns out to be the easiest option, but we couldn't take that option until we had, you know, completed, you know, a safety review of how that gas could be produced safely without causing us again to lose a well. The why you would produce that shallow high-pressure gas first is because you don't wanna back out all the other reservoirs in the well, and that is one of the problems that we've been wrestling is how to flow test potentially the Ma Sand, but potentially co-mingle the high-pressure sand. In that instance, you could have cross-flow, all kinds of things. What we want to do is to separate out the two operations, and our priority would be to produce the shallow most sand first, then the deeper sands. We don't need a lot of gas to kickstart the CNG project. In many ways, a smaller project is easier to manage and gets us to our objective. Our first objective is to apply for an exploitation concession to secure the acreage, to separate acreage out, effectively the different license from an exploitation license, for a potential divestment. Because we can't divide up the acreage if we want to divest, say, MOU-5. We have to give away the CNG gas at the same time, or even if we give away shares in the company, which is in a subsidiary, which is our intention. Despite what a number of questions ask, you know, are we fit for the job or why am I personally fit for the job? Well, you wouldn't want to know what I did after I read that question because I was disgusted, quite frankly, quite disgusted. If that person wants to come up to me and say that to my face, I will give him chapter and verse why he was absolutely wrong in what he said. Obviously, there may be other reasons, but I won't tolerate any of that kind of abuse. Okay. Next slide is perforating the A Sand. We've talked about we can perforate the A Sand. We have 21.1 BCF of 2C contingent resources in just the A Sand alone. That is sufficient for us to kick off our CNG project. Even a moderate case of 3 million a day, which is being conservative. We believe we can get at least that out of the reservoir, but we have to have a profile of 4, 5, 6 years for CNG while we get everything going and deliver, you know, an FID and an exploitation concession. That would generate us over a BCF annually, which for argument's sake is more in the order of, well, $12 million-$13 million gross revenues, anywhere between $6 million and $8 million net revenues, depending on the arrangement for the gas offtake. Contrary to speculation on questions as well, we are still collaborating very much so with Afriquia Gaz. They were texting me after the RNS announcement. We're going to meet up again in Morocco ahead of the SPUD for MOU-5. The only, I'll say issue, the only thing we're considering internally is what we do with the helium, whether we put that into the overall package of collaboration with Afriquia Gaz or whether we try to get a look at that separate. There are Middle East entities who are looking for helium and have a lot of experience in helium. It would be good of us to have a couple of options for helium, not just Afriquia Gaz, but another bigger option if the helium proves up to be a viable option for us, because helium would be very difficult to develop. It's produced in a gas field, Hassi Messaoud in Algeria. We don't, you know, we'll be honest here and hold our hands up. We don't yet know how to process out helium from natural gas and the economics of that, et cetera. It will be a nice problem to have at this stage, but it will require a huge amount of work to get it into a development situation, which is why divestment is obviously an easier option. People talk about, well, how are you going to fund this? You know, it's the age-old thing. You get a bit of success and then, oh, how are you going to fund it? In this instance, the obvious way for the CNG development is that you would pre-sell gas, forward sell gas, not huge amounts because development costs net to us at most $2 million. An arrangement with Afriquia Gaz, who would potentially lease and buy the trucks and just buy the gas at the wellhead means all we need is a compressor, very little processing because it's 99%, the intervals we want to test produce are 99% methane, dry gas. If it was a case of appraisal development on gas to power, well, that's why we're going down the divestment route. Now, you won't sell that for $1 billion in day one, but what you then do is structure a deal whereby you get significant back costs, significant costs, opportunity costs for getting the license interest, for getting into the project, and also then milestones as various things are ticked off. Like, for example, an appraisal well, development, first gas, et cetera. That is the structure agreement. Nobody in this planet is going to give you maximum value, maximum resources value after one well. You have to structure it in a way, hopefully better than some farm-outs have been structured. That's why it's very important to maintain debt-free status and cash in the bank. That gives you much greater leverage with someone coming in on a divestment process than if they think you're a wounded, sick animal that basically needs an injection of cash before, you know, you can even, you know, get up in the morning. Well, that's not us. That never will be us. We're called Predator for a reason. We'll never give an inch on values in terms of what we can realistically achieve for a divestment. The key word there is realistic. Being in the industry so long, people who look for absolute values, absolute timescales on a divestment or whatever, they don't understand the industry. It never works that way. You always try to achieve the best possible result in the shortest time framework. That is normally after a discovery. As the cycle grinds on, the value of that discovery starts to unwind. Okay. I think I've talked enough now. Just on Trinidad, one last thing here. This is what we're looking at in terms of primary depletion and cash flow. For example, looking at a full quarter, the quarters there, Q2, Q3, and Q4. The bulk of the production just for 3 workovers without any stimulation is for the first quarter because naturally in Trinidad all fields decline quite rapidly in the first 12, 18 months, and there's all kinds of technical reasons for that. In the first full quarter of production, 300 barrels a day, we can net back up to or just over $1 million in cash. That's after taxes, after field OpEx, et cetera, after royalties to the government or whatever. It's very cash generative. The trick is to arrest that decline that you see there in the second and in the next quarters, and then the year afterwards. The reason for that decline is because you don't have the same energy in the reservoir because the wax content, because the oil is waxy, viscous, and because the gas content which drives the mobility of the oil and allows it to flow into the wellbore. If you can find a mechanism that allows you to reduce the viscosity whilst at the same time bringing gas into the lift, then you've got a winner potentially, and you could maintain certainly for two or three quarters, maybe a year, maybe two years, all that cash flow that you see there in the first quarter. That's why I say or we say that the wax treatment is a game changer. We don't know whether it's gonna work in practice. What we do know, it's worked in Saudi Arabia and in different circumstances for heavy oil and also waxy oils, but it's not been tried in Trinidad. What we do know geologically is there's a very good reason why it should work. It ticks all the boxes. Then rolling that out is a very small risk for us. The costs are all included in our working capital forecast. The investment is small. The reward for increasing the productivity of the well is tremendous. Now bearing in mind Snowcap-1 flowed 1,200 barrels a day. We think a stabilized rate of 200 barrels a day is achievable. A wax treatment could increase that a little bit more. The reason why we can't go full-blown on reservoirs is that we don't wanna be producing the gas cap, for example, in Snowcap-1, and then you've got management issues with trying to control the oil production. There's a neat way to try and find a balance. That's enough. That's the last slide. There are a couple of other slides, but I think we should move to questions now. Okay.