What the ????, page-43

Dear sky
My grave concern pursuing this shareholder path is highlighted in your very first paragraph. Your very basic facts to support this action are just simply not correct. This is understandable given the amount of "spin" the board has placed on this psc to complete CR's, combined with what appears to be your very basic knowledge of the real O&G environment, but please consider the following facts before veering off into your blue sky picture, which quite frankly does not exist for TEG and pase.
The 119bcf
This public data is from years back its Exxon data, no new study has been completed. Of course there are remaining reserves, that is exactly what TEG has been living off for these past years. But Just look at the production reports, they had been producing more and more water every month, every attempt to increase production has failed. Eventually each well has died until the field is shut in.
To reserect pase production and tap into the remaining reserves TEG estimate in their work programs it will cost at least an INITIAL 46 million $USD. This work is estimated to take at least 2years. So the reality is TEG require a funder who has the capability to seriously invest without return for a minimum of 2 years WITHOUT production revenue! Can you provide that in these current economic climes?. Every investor I meet has fixed criteria, show me " production and revenue", or I'm not interested.

You mention another prospect with 540 bcf "in place" Now you are really misleading the good folk from hot copper.
As TEG clearly state this is a prospect, nothing more than a geological model developed on a pc, from very old seismic data. You cannot quote gas in place until you have hard production evidence and known production values which include structural characteristics. That takes multiple wells a development program and in this case more seismic surveying. Notice TEG latest budget, it has a large seismic plan, I have no doubt this has been a compulsory skkmigas requirement to achieve the psc. it is worth noting at this point that another very large national O&G company tried to drill a similar gas well next to pase last year. They did not complete the well and walked away facing a final cost of 75MM USD just for one well! Maybe now you get some more of the picture and the investment numbers, to even commercially realise this "540 bcf in place", quote as being a carrot to entice shareholders to remain in the block.
So let's get a little more detailed here to realise the 540 bcf. You would require at least 3 wells plus facilities, now you begin to see the entire picture why TPI required 240MMUSD, go back to their 2011 presentations and check.
So in summary we have the following, no production revenue for at least two years, if we require to develop pase further we have estimated expenditure of 46MM plus seismic to just commence the 540 bcf ( 10MM). Plus at least I would say 3 years of opex running cost (6MM) That's a huge task, way beyond anything TEG can possibly manage, they can't even raise cash to keep the doors open!

So how long will this new shareholder driven investor team have to recover their hard earned investment?
Once again sky you are misleading the folks who join this forum.
Yes the contract has been extended for a 20 year term, but when did that term start? Have you taken note of the details in the release?
The contract has been extended from the end of the initial Exxon contract, which in effect gives only a remaining 17 years, this may sound like a lifetime to the non sophisticated O&G investor, but the reality is its a little over just 50% of a normal award of 30 years. Please consider that curtailed psc lifespan when encouraging your fellow investors to take action. Your commercial model has just been axed by 50%, the economics must look so marginal
Maybe that's why TEG quote they have investigated several options, finally this group are all that's left?

Finally your greatest faux pas "pase is capable of production right now"

This comment is blatantly misleading the group. The final production figures TEG released are 0.8 mmscfd. That wouldn't even fill a flow line to delivery. Going further you omit to mention the LNG contract has expired, there is no point of sale.
So now to get revenue you require a gas sales contract. There is not a chance in the world that anyone would negotiate a gas sales contract for just 0.8 mmscfd. Now you have completed the full circle, which I guess is what the TEG board have been round. Revenue has gone, finished. not only will it require the huge investment as previously detailed, but you also require a gas sales contract , which you cannot negotiate without confirmed longstanding firm production commitment. Why do you think gas sales contract are typically for 20 years?

You cannot seriously support your stance against this offer while presenting poor misleading data. I am in the significant shareholder bracket, given the facts as disclosed and being a sophisticated O&G investor my best advice to all involved would embrace this offer, and then push for a board restructure to take TEG forward. That way we have operating cash and a new team to act in the very best shareholder interest.
I totally support your stance for the shareholders, I am in that very same corner. But I seriously doubt you are going down the correct path to achieve the best result for all.
Anyway sky that's just my comments to your first few sentences, it's all very generally misleading, you are not adding clarity to this at all.
Rgds.