Central Petroleum Limited (CTP) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, and welcome to today's webinar covering our fiscal year 2023 annual results. My name is Leon Devaney, I'm the CEO and Managing Director of Central Petroleum. I'm joined today by our CFO, Damian Galvin, who will present our annual results. As usual, we'll open the webinar to questions at the end, which can be submitted by selecting the questions tab at the bottom right of your screen. Let's start with an overview. We had a very active year with what I would call mixed results. Our operating results were solid. We had good sales revenue and a strong underlying EBITDAX compared to fiscal year 2022 on a like-for-like basis. We took advantage of strong gas markets, which saw our average sales prices increased by 17% relative to last fiscal year. The Palm Valley 12 well was successfully drilled, brought online, producing more than 10 terajoules per day from late November 2022, which helped us increase our 2P reserve base by 5.9 petajoules or 8% before production. On the flip side, we started the year with a very difficult Palm Valley 12 drilling program that experienced substantial price pressure and was ultimately unable to reach our deep exploration target due to very difficult subsurface conditions. Whilst we had a production well option as a backdrop, not getting an exploration result was disappointing for everyone. We also completed a farmout with Peak Helium during the year. However, the recent default by Peak and the subsequent termination of the farmout has resulted in the suspension of our planned sub-salt drilling program with Santos. Again, another disappointing outcome for exploration. I'll provide an update on these and other activities later in the presentation, but let's start by handing it over to Damian to cover our fiscal year 2023 annual results.

Thanks, Leon. Look, yes, it's been a relatively stable year from a financial perspective, and there's 50-odd pages of financial information that are available now in the annual report. So today, I'm going to focus on some of the key metrics. We recorded revenues of $39.2 million for the year, and that's down slightly from the $42 million last year. But remembering that for the first quarter of last year, that is FY '22, we had double the interest in the production assets. It does make it difficult to compare the gross numbers year-on-year. So for comparison purposes and to give you an indication of the underlying performance of the assets themselves, it's more useful to look at the historical performance using our current ownership interest. So on that like-for-like basis, sales volumes are down about 3% on last year, which was largely due to the temporary interruptions to the Northern Gas Pipeline during the year, offset obviously by production from the new Palm Valley well, which came online about halfway through the year. Revenues, however, were higher on a like-for-like basis as illustrated on the chart at the top right of the slide. So that increase is due to the higher realized average portfolio price, which was up about 17% on FY '22 at $7.90 per gigajoule equivalent. And the upward trend is displayed in that chart on the bottom left of the screen. Stronger gas markets have contributed to that increase. But the sticker price isn't entirely comparable from year-to-year, some of the new sales include delivery costs and older contracts tend to roll off progressively over a period of 2 to 5 years. So to cut through that distortion I think a better measure of profitability and performance of those underlying production assets is to look at the operating margin. So that is the difference between the sales price and the cost of production, excluding depreciation. Now $3.95 per gigajoule equivalent. The operating margin is up 18% on last year. And the chart on the bottom right of the screen shows us increased steadily average over the last 3 years. So while the much publicized $12 per gigajoule gas price cap was introduced in December last year, Central will be actually be exempt as a small domestic only producer from December this year. So even if the $12 per gigajoule becomes a price anchor across the market generally, there's still plenty of upside for Central average realized sales price could increase by 50% before it reached that notional $12 cap. So I think they are the key themes for the underlying assets to take away for FY '23. EBITDAX that is EBITDA before exploration costs was $15.7 million, down just $1 million from 2022 due to those lower ownership interest for the full year. But after accounting for exploration costs of $13.1 million plus depreciation and finance charges, the statutory loss for the year was $8 million. Now the balance sheet is still relatively stable. We've got cash sitting at $14 million at year-end and net debt at $14.3 million, and we still got up to $11 million of debt available to be drawn down should it be required. Now the good news story for the year was the successful Palm Valley 12 well, which was brought online in November and produced it over 10 terajoules a day in December. That new well has more than doubled the Palm Valley field production rate, and this led to a 31% increase, improved 1P gas reserves at Palm Valley, more than replacing production from the field for the year. So additionally, the well's performance opens up opportunities to drill more wells at Palm Valley in the future. So overall, we recorded 2P reserve upgrades of 5.9 petajoules across 2 fields, Palm Valley and Dingo. Palm Valley we've already talked about, improved that is 1P reserves increased 12.6% and 2P reserves rose 8.8%. The Dingo upgrade resulted from new modeling of the strong ongoing fuel production performance. While at Palm Valley a further 4.6 petajoules of 2C contingent gas reserves remain available to be accessed by future wells. So overall, the upgrades by an independent certify have provided us with certainly further confidence in the value and the longevity of those production assets. From a gas market perspective, we're continuing to see very strong demand for longer-term gas contracts in particular. We invested in new production capacity this year with the new Palm Valley well and also additional supply for Mereenie, where we recompleted several wells in new production zones. So this additional capacity now enables us to lock in firm contracts for future years, and we've added 3 new contracts in the last year with both Shell and South32 through to 2025, as illustrated on the chart. We're also in discussions with several other parties for additional sale contracts to 2025 and beyond. So that's a snapshot of the year in review. Look, I'll pass back to Leon for his update on the markets and other activities.

Thanks, Damian. Staying with the gas market theme, we have seen significant volatility over the past year, notably some very high prices early on. The year also had federal government intervention in the gas market or gas market code and a price cap. These regulations might make for good politics, but they will ultimately aggravate supply shortages and lead to a more market volatility. We've also seen, over the past few months, lower-than-anticipated production from the offshore field supply in the Northern Territory. This is now having an important impact on the gas markets near our productions, specifically the Northern Territory and Mount Isa markets, where we're seeing improved prices for term gas supply. In response to these market dynamics, we're progressing plans to drill 2 development wells along the crest at Mereenie. These wells are still subject to joint venture approval, but they play an important role in recovering as much gas as we can from that field. Moving on to our helium activities. We announced the termination of the Peak farm-out following their recent default. We'll continue the process to return the equity interest back to Central and pursue our legal rights for monies owed. Unfortunately, the 3-well sub-salt program that was planned has been suspended as we now work with Santos to restructure the joint venture and explore new farm-out opportunities to get drilling again. Mount Kitty is an appraisal target with an existing helium discovery, along with the large sub-salt Dukas prospect, which we find very attractive as well. Both of these should be attractive farm-out candidates to that resumed sub-salt exploration drilling in the basin. In addition to this effort, we're also actively working to farm out our Zevon sub-salt prospect again, to fund exploration drilling, which we think is going to be very exciting if we can get that closed. Moving on to more positive matters. We recently entered into a nonbinding MOU with Twin Bridges for the installation of a Helium Recovery Unit, or HRU, at Mereenie. Mereenie Gas has a helium concentration of just over 0.2%. While this doesn't sound like a lot, it could yield about 60,000 standard cubic feet of helium per day from our existing gas sales stream. The helium market is currently very strong, particularly with the only helium production in Australia scheduled in this year. This would make the Mereenie HRU the only domestic source of helium, making this a very important project for the Australian helium market. So we're quite excited about progressing this one with Twin Bridges. The process to extract helium from an existing sales gas stream is relatively simple. Essentially, we would divert our existing gas sales stream into the HRU, which uses pressure differential and membranes to separate the helium from the sales gas. Both the remaining sales gas and the concentrated helium gas can then be sold to create a new revenue stream at relatively low incremental costs. Importantly, the process shouldn't impact the value of our natural gas, which we sell and is sold on an energy content basis. The proposed commercial structure is expected to be a tolling arrangement where Twin Bridges would build, owned and fund the HRU. Timing for a final investment decision is anticipated to be in the first half of next year, although obviously, we'll be trying to accelerate that as much as possible. Besides being a potentially attractive project for the Mereenie joint venture, one of the other benefits of the HRU project is that it highlights the helium potential of the Amadeus Basin more generally. Whilst 0.2% helium concentration is moderate, it is found in all of our Amadeus producing assets both at Mereenie and at Palm Valley and Dingo. Even though they are shallower fields, they don't have a sub-salt seal to effectively trap that helium. This demonstrates that helium is generated across the basin, making our large sub-salt prospects, particularly attractive. These include our existing discoveries at Mount Kitty and Magee, which have had helium concentrations of 9% and 6%, respectively. Our plan is to quickly get into production for helium from our producing fields. While at the same time, we advance a pipeline of large sub-salt exploration and appraisal prospects through future farm-out activities. Moving to our range project. Pilot well testing has shown improved gas production over the year, which is encouraging, as you can see from this chart. The next step to progress range is probably another pilot project to evaluate the northeast part of the permit. We're continuing to test existing pilot wells and no decisions have been made at this point on any future appraisal program. We're working closely with our joint venture partner, Incitec Pivot on these options. Range is also part of our ongoing strategic review. So hopefully, I can provide a more definitive path forward for the permit by the end of this year. Finally, I'd like to acknowledge the patience of our shareholders as we progress through the strategic review. The review has taken longer than initially anticipated, and our share price has obviously been languishing. Price volatility along with the federal government's market intervention, including the gas price cap, have created a lot of uncertainty over the past year, which has had an impact on the progress of our review. We also want to make sure that any decisions we make ultimately maximize the value of our assets for shareholders even if that takes a bit more time. Notwithstanding the current share price, we have a lot to look forward to this coming year, and I expect it to be a period of progress and key milestones for the company. With that, let's open the webinar to questions.

Thanks, Leon. We do have a couple of questions coming through, and you can ask -- you can type your questions in this, there should be a spot on your screen there, where you can click on the question button and we'll try and answer those as best we can. So I think the first one, Leon, there's been -- there's a couple of questions here, actually already just around share price in terms of why it's languishing, where it is and when it might -- we might start to see some improvement. Is that -- you want to have a go on that one?

Sure. Yes, I had a feeling that was going to pop up. It's something I get fairly regularly. So I thought I'd put some notes down. And I'll make sure I cover everything. Unfortunately, it's not a quick answer. In my opinion, there are several drivers that are worth highlighting. First, the equity market for the oil and gas sector in Australia has been under pressure over the past few years. As at 30 June this year, we were down about 34% over the past 3 years. Surprisingly, that result was enough for us to slip into the top 50% of our peer group of 17, which really just shows how much pressure that sector has been under over that period of time. Contributing to this has been the acceleration of climate change and net 0 policies that are now materializing in ways that impact our ability to accelerate investment in exploration and development. Those are obviously key to unlock and value of our large portfolio, so have been problematic. Things like reduced access to capital, notably debt, which is now much more difficult to secure for small-cap oil and gas companies. Also large increases in regulatory and environmental compliant costs have played an impact and increased uncertainty about the future energy mix impacts risk capital for new exploration and growth. Obviously, the Peak farm-out could be an example of where that has actually had an impact on us. Another aspect is that the -- although the energy markets have been very strong, our production margins have been increasing. But cost calculation for drilling and our relatively large exploration activities remain particularly exposed as we grow the business. So whilst the energy markets are great, we have a very significant cost base with respect to drilling and exploration, and we're certainly feeling that as costs across not only the economy, but specifically our sector play into the mix. And finally, look, I'd be very remiss if I did not include our lack of exploration success, Dukas, Palm Valley 12 deep range and our delayed sub-salt programs are recent examples that has had an impact on share price. We've done a lot of work over the years to bring in capital from the likes of Santos and Peak Helium to fund this exploration activity without dilution. But for various reasons, we haven't yet had success. So obviously, that weighs into it. And finally, our current business model and capital structure are probably making it difficult for investors to see value in our portfolio. First, we necessarily used debt to fund almost all of the acquisition of our operating assets, not just our bank debt, but we also used a gas prepayment and we benefited from a GBA overlift for a number of years once the NGP was open. This strategy of using debt for acquisition was very successful as the assets have increased considerably in value. But the debt has a relatively short amortization period and that means equity investors don't see most of the free cash flow or the potential for dividends until after it has been paid off. Fortunately, over the next few years, this debt load will decrease with the gas prepayments being repaid in full by the end of this year. Obviously, the opportunity to restructure that debt and smooth it out over a longer period that matches the revenue stream of the field is something we will be looking into, and that could free up free cash flow earlier on. So certainly an option there. Second, as everyone is aware, we have been using our free cash flow that we currently generate to organically fund exploration investment. Obviously, without clear success in exploration from that investment, shareholders have not had that clear visibility of future dividends. So that again is weighed into it. I do think our strategic review that's currently ongoing provides a great opportunity to consider all of the options in the current market to both maximize and crystallize the value of our assets for shareholders, which is one of the reasons the Board is taking some time to get it right. I would highlight that, this obviously includes options and opportunities to find a pathway for dividends to be paid from our operating assets, which, again, as I said, have been performing well and have been generating free cash flow, particularly when you look at the debt amortization if it's spread out or once it's repaid. At the conclusion, I guess, our underlying production operations are generating increasing margins. The helium potential of the Amadeus Basin is on the cusp of being tapped and we still have material exploration positions with the opportunity to use other people's money through farm-outs to get drilling underway. My view is that in time, I believe there is every opportunity and the strategic review is certainly intended to drive that type of outcome. But I think we can get our portfolio and share price to recognize the value of what we have and what we can create going forward. So hopefully, that provides a bit of context and shed some light on my thoughts on where we're and some of the impacts on the share price, but also the opportunity of our strategic review to address those and create some shareholder value for us going forward.

Okay. Thanks Leon. Look, there's a couple of questions just around dividends. So for example, is there a time line for returning a dividend? There's another suggestion of about $0.25 dividend that would only cost you $2 million held the share price. So I think perhaps if I could give my thoughts initially. Obviously, one of the things that we've been grappling within the strategic review is just around the fact that we're really running 2 different businesses here. We've got a production business, which actually performs pretty well. You see the margins have been increasing. And on the other hand, we've got an exploration business, which is very capital intensive, costs are increasing, attracts a different type of investor, different risk profile. So at the moment, any free cash flow, obviously, that we've had out of our production operations has been directed towards exploration. And that's obviously accrued our attempts to pay dividend in the near term. So obviously, that's key to what the Board has been looking at and our advisers and how we can try and get our dividend stream back to shareholders or return back to shareholders one way or another. So that's work in progress, something we're very mindful of, and we hope to be -- to have some sort of outcome in the near future where we can give some further guidance. In terms of other questions, there's a question here around the operating margin. So how does the operating margin compared to other companies in the industry? So look, I think it's difficult to compare from company to company, just different operating environments, different locations, different markets. Look, I think at $3.95 per gigajoule equivalent, that's basically a 50% margin on that $7.90 average sale price that we've got. So that sounds like a pretty good margin. It excludes capital, obviously, that's just pure operating and it includes our corporate overheads, et cetera. I guess that's there to sort of -- we sort of published that number to give people an idea of how those underlying production assets are going, they're going reasonably well. In terms of difficulty and comparing it to others, we're located, obviously quite remotely right in the middle of Australia. So ex -- the pipelines is limited. The transportation cost to markets is higher than some others. And hence, our sales price at sort of $7.90 average, which is increasing. But I guess if you compare that to producers who have more immediate access to LNG offtakes and more liquid markets on the East Coast where we've been talking about a $12 price cap, we're probably selling our gas at the lower end of the spectrum ex-field just because of those transport costs to get to market to be competitive. So that's improving. The numbers you would have seen on the charts there that we had, I think we'll see that to continue to improve as we go forward. And we're seeing quite strong demand for longer-term gas contracts at prices which are higher than what we've historically seen. So we think the prospects from those -- from the field is very good. And the market seems to be supporting that at the moment with plenty of demands, the new contracts going at 2025, 2026 and beyond. In terms of other questions, what else we've got here. The question here, Leon around helium. So how is the captured helium stored and transported?

So once it's shipped out of the Mereenie sales gas stream, it will be essentially collected and compressed. We're planning to sell that compressed helium to a large helium aggregator/marketer in the Australian market. They will take that ex field. I think there are some applications where they can sell that gas as compressed helium, but there also is the opportunity for them to use some small-scale liquefaction plants to liquefy it and that allows them to more efficiently transport it around Australia. And certainly, the applications for liquefied helium are a fairly important and high-value subset of that helium market. So conceptually, it can go out as compressed helium gas and also as potentially liquefied. From our perspective, though, our scope and our objective is to separate that helium from the existing gas stream as efficiently as possible, store and collect it on a compressed gas basis. And our plan is to sell that ex field as a product that these major groups that have global experience in both marketing and logistics for helium, they can bring their expertise and take it from there. So that's currently the contemplated approach to the marketing of the product.

While we're on helium, so the question here, can you please give us a bit more detail on the Helium Recovery Unit? And how Central will be paid for the helium?

Yes. So we currently own, obviously, the -- as a joint venture, Mereenie joint venture owns the gas stream coming out of the wells. The current commercial construct is that we will take that gas. We will run it through the Helium Recovery Unit through a tolling arrangement. Twin Bridges would essentially build, own, fund that facility. We would operate it under an operating arrangement, our structure for paying that tolling fee to separate the helium would conceptually be through some sort of profit share. And that would be ideally structured as a tolling fee. Obviously, that profit share allows Twin Bridges to get a return on their investment and compensate them for the risk they take. And on the other side of the equation, it would allow the Mereenie joint venture the balance of that net profit to have a fair return on what is really quite valuable resource that the joint venture has invested in, put in plant and equipment, put in wells and is currently producing. So again, this project benefits largely from the brownfield economics of a plant already in production. And it's one of the reasons we think this is an exciting project. And certainly, it's potentially the only producing source of helium in the Australian market. I think it takes on certainly a strategic and important role within the helium domestic market. Our alternative is to import that from overseas. Obviously, that has a fairly significant cost, and there is risk of disruption, et cetera. So we think this is important not just for the Mereenie joint venture, but I think it's an important development within the helium market domestically for Australia going forward.

There was another question here, Leon while we're talking about helium. Could you give some examples of the helium price per cubic foot that makes sense to lay persons?

Yes. So helium is an interesting, it's a very opaque market. It's not what you see in oil, where you have global spot market indices. You've got visibility on term sales. It's not even what you'd be able to compare to the Australian domestic gas market with gas supply hubs and public information on what those clearing prices are. The helium market is dominated by really 1 or 2 major aggregators and marketers in the domestic market. The bilateral arrangements they have with customers are held very tight. We don't see the pricing. There are some global indexes on spot markets. And again, those have had a lot of volatility. They don't, I think, properly reflect what we see as the term market for firm supply of helium in the Australian market moving forward once the Darwin LNG comes offline and that source of domestic production falls away. So I think we're going to get some robust pricing from our product. In terms of benchmarks, I mean you would have seen some of the benchmark numbers at around USD 200 per 1,000 standard cubic feet. It has ventured as high as USD 500. Again, these are U.S. dollars. So that volatility is quite substantial. The trend has largely been up over the past few years, and we see that potentially continuing. There's another number of projects that are on the decline globally, which will further exacerbate that supply shortage and put some upward pressure on prices. But on the flip side, Russia, Qatar, are both in positions potentially bringing large supplies of helium to market if they -- if the pieces can fall correctly for them. So that's something that's outstanding in the future that needs to be worked through. But we're optimistic and bullish on helium prices, and we think we can certainly for the Australian market get a very good price that reflects the shortfall for domestic production here in Australia.

Thanks, Leon. So I think while on helium, I guess the Helium Recovery Unit sort of represents the tip of the iceberg and to some extent in the Amadeus Basin. Obviously, there's a system somewhere deep in the basin that's producing helium and obviously, the key is to find a trap that traps that helium where it can be extracted from a much greater concentration. So I guess that brings us to some questions around the sub-salt program that we've got of which helium is one of the main targets. So I read a couple of questions. We'll not be able to address them all in one hit. First question, given the lower cost or risk -- sorry, given lower cost risk and higher chance of success at Mount Kitty or Jacko Bore, is it possible for Central or Santos to proceed with drilling themselves? So that's 1 question. Other question is, what sort of delays can we now see moving forward with drilling for helium? So that is, is Peak contesting? The arrangements still -- does this have the potential to limit or stop us moving forward? Santos has shown all along a lack of enthusiasm in actually drilling, is this changing? Do we have a plan B if Santos backs out? So I guess the questions are generally around that sub-salt program surely.

Yes. I might just address Peak first. So as you would have seen from our announcements, we have notified them of their default under the farm-out arrangements. Subsequently, we have terminated that farm out. We're in the process now of going through the mechanics of getting those interests reverted back to Central. There is a separate pathway for pursuing amounts owed through legal recourse. We're exploring those. The question really is around how much we think we can collect from it relative to the time and expenses. So we're weighing that up. I guess the priority right now is to ensure that those -- the farm out is terminated that clears the decks for us to restructure the joint venture with Santos and get those permit interests transferred back to Central. There are provisions under the farm-out arrangement to facilitate that. So we're running through that. Obviously, when you introduce the -- a legal perspective on any of these activities, there's the potential for delays. But at this point, we're moving forward as contemplated under the farm-out for these sort of scenarios and I understand Santos are likely to be doing a similar process. I don't know and I don't currently expect there to be too much of a pushback on this because I think it's quite clear that they are in default, and I don't believe they have any intent to make whole on their outstanding liabilities. So my hope is that it all goes quite smoothly. We get the permits back. We're in a position very quickly to work with Santos on a restructured JV and get out to market and start to identify and work with potential counterparties on additional farm-in opportunities, which we think, particularly for Mount Kitty and Dukas, we think there's certainly potential. Yes. At this point, we have no indication that Santos are going to leave the permit or exit the permit. They're obviously operator. I think perhaps they might have seen the announcement that we made with regards to the Helium Recovery Unit. And I think other parties, not just in Australia, but more globally have that announcement and that project, I believe, has peaked some interest in terms of the helium potential of the basin. Obviously, there's not a lot of places producing helium. It's very difficult to find in commercial quantities and in a commercial production setting. So getting the HRU advance, getting to fit, getting on production, I think, is all very supportive of farm-out activities for the exploration side, which is focused on sub-salt. Mount kitty is really an appraisal. We have a discovery there for helium. It's quite a high concentration. The plan is for that particular well to test it for production flow rates. That will be the key to really unlocking further development at that location. And then Dukas, obviously, we've had that initial crack at it and it came very, very close, quite a number of positive signs that encourage us to go back. Dukas is an enormous size potentially, which is really quite attractive in terms of the value and opportunity to commercialize that development in that remote location. So I think Dukas will also get quite a bit of attention. So to me, those are the 2 farm-out candidates that we're going to prioritize as we go back out with Santos to try and get somebody to come in. Our preference is to not go it alone, our preference is to use other people's money. These wells are very expensive, particularly in the current cost climate. And obviously, as exploration wells carry a degree of risk. So for a company like ours, our preference is to use other people's money and not look at dilution of the company, certainly not going to be looking at debt capital. So I think farm-out is probably the most logical approach for us to take. And I'm encouraged that there's parties out there that might not have been around when we originally went out looking with Santos for farm-out parties and ended up with Peak. I think we can improve on that at this point and try and get somebody with, I guess, more financial credibility and a better joint venture partner to progress these quite substantial exploration permits.

Okay.

The -- that's the peak one, the sub-salt potential. I think, as I mentioned in my speech, the fact that we have helium in moderate percentages across the producing fields, we've got them in Mereenie, we've got them in Palm Valley, and we have helium in Dingo all around at 0.2%, which again is moderate. But what's really encouraging or exciting is that, that concentration exists in a shallower conventional prospects that -- or conventional fields that don't have a salt seal above them. And that salt seal is really the key way we can trap high concentrations of helium within a structure. So the fact that they have a moderate level and the fact that we have existing operations for brownfield development to extract it, I think it's quite positive. It shows there's a very good broad basin generation of helium and that obviously supports the potential for finding sub-salt structures that could trap helium in much higher concentrations, and we have seen that in Mount Kitty and Magee, obviously. So that further gives us some indication that what we're going after has good potential.

Okay. Thanks Leon. I think just rounding off on that. The Dukas well. So there's a question here around Dukas, particularly around the rig access if I can just find it. So given the lower -- I'm sorry for that one. Sorry, just bear with me. So is an appropriate drill rig available for Dukas? Is it available in Australia? Or does it have to come from overseas?

The -- there will be an appropriate rig for Dukas. There has been quite a work -- quite a bit of work on what the well design should be and what type of rig is going to be required. And obviously, the 10,000 versus the 15,000 decision drives the kind of rig we're looking at. Prior to the Peak default and termination, I think there is a pathway to look at a 10,000 rig that was sourced out of Australia, which obviously reduces cost. And we're certainly driving down that path to bring the cost for Dukas down. Certainly, that opportunity is available as we go forward. But ultimately, it will be a joint venture decision on the pros and cons of going with a larger rig versus still quite a large rig for the Australian onshore basins, but a much less expensive option compared to the 15,000 one.

Okay. Thanks, Leon. So a question around that oil. So with oil going to $100 a barrel, was it -- what's with the Surprise field reopened?

Surprise is -- yes, certainly, we're keeping an eye on oil. There's quite a bit of work that needs to be done to get that back into production, particularly addressing a lot of the regulatory and environmental regulations that have come on since Surprise was shut in. So we'd have to get that up, and that obviously takes a fair bit of investment to make it happen. The field itself obviously being very remote and being relatively small, has some challenges from a commercial perspective. But at -- the type of numbers that you've quoted there, it certainly could be something that we could reopen and potentially add to the volume that we're selling at Mereenie. And it is something we're looking at. I think what we're trying to do, and I think this does make sense is work as we have been on a farm-out for Mamlambo. We believe Mamlambo is essentially drill ready. It's a manageable drill. It's not of the nature that we're looking at sub-salt. So we can get more bespoke and cheaper rigs for that. If that exploration well at Mamlambo becomes successful, we've really created a new opening for that Western Flank. Surprise could play an important role or contributing a role to how we develop anything out in that part of the world. And obviously, Mamlambo is reasonably close to Surprise. So the opportunity to aggregate operations and storage and all sorts of things, then become available. So our focus at this point has been on getting a farm-out for Mamlambo, getting that drilled and finding success to unlock and open up that Western Flank of the basin, but we will keep an eye on the potential value that Surprise could add if oil really starts to accelerate and we see sustained high prices of the kind of numbers you're talking about.

Okay. Thanks, Leon. Another question here. A number of exploration licenses, applications near the Amadeus Basin have been lodged for lithium and copper, has Central considered searching the vast tenements for these types of minerals?

Yes. So those are, as I understand, offered under a different exploration or different rights structure. So obviously, we're owing after hydrocarbons and gases. They, I think, overlay our permits to the extent that they sit in our fields. We obviously have to work together with them. It is something where -- as that activity increases, if there's opportunities to somehow participate, we're open to what that looks like. It may be a path forward. Obviously, a very competitive industry. Lithium has been on the radar for investors for quite some time given its exposure to EVs and other battery usage. So it's certainly something that we're -- we see -- we're considering. It's not our expertise per se. But given the co-location, there might be opportunity to coordinate, operate together or maybe not operating together, but certainly coordinate our operations and come up with some win-win solutions with these various groups.

Okay. I think just 1 left here, Leon, strategic review. Can you just confirm the strategic review will take till the end of the year?

Yes. I'll -- I can't confirm that because the timing for the strategic review will be when it is. I can say that there's been an enormous amount of work by employees at Central, by management and by the Board to canvass all of the opportunities to vet them, to press them to see what or how we can maximize the value of the portfolio we have that has taken some time, as I mentioned, during the presentation for a number of reasons. I think it's fair to say that we have canvassed most, if not all of the opportunities that are visible at this point in time. And we have been able to assess those given the changes in the market that we saw over the past year, both in regulatory, market volatility and some of the other aspects, cost escalation, that sort of thing. So I think we're in a point where we're getting good visibility of what these options are and approaching points where we can start to make some decisions. Obviously, we want to ensure that those opportunities and those decisions are in the best interest of shareholders. Sometimes that takes a bit of time as you work through and draw conclusions from what you see from third parties and what you can do internally. So I think by the end of the year, I think we'll certainly have more clarity whether or not it's a definitive decision from the strategic review. I'd be hesitant to commit to that. I can say that myself, management and the Board are aware of and very keen to have the strategic review, crystallize, come into focus and be disclosed to the shareholders as soon as possible. It's not in any of our interest, and it's not something that we would like to do. And I think dragging it out over the Christmas period is not preferred, but I'd stop short of saying that it definitely will happen before the Christmas break.

Okay. Thanks, Leon. Look, that's all the questions we've got. I think it's probably good time to wrap up. It's been a long session. But hopefully, we have managed to shed some light on where the company has been and where we're planning to go. And we look forward, I think, to sharing those results with everybody as they can -- as they sort of coming in.

Yes. And certainly, as I concluded with the presentation, I appreciate all your shareholders' patience and support during this time. I recognize there's a level of uncertainty as we go through that strategic review. I think the fundamentals of the company, their operations certainly remain strong. And I do think we've got a very good opportunity through this strategic review to find good outcomes, good solutions and good strategies to both maximize the value of those assets, but also crystallize them and start to give shareholders some visibility on how they can actually see and benefit from what we think are valuable assets in the portfolio.

Okay. Thanks Leon. Thanks, everyone.

Great. Thank you.