ceilingcat - as you claim Statoil would have probably worked out the XEL method in time, I am curious as to your thoughts why they didn't achieve this themselves?
Given they obtained such impressive results during the Bressay flow test in 2008 of 3200 boe (1200 boe being deemed commercial flowrates), with a VERTICAL well instead of the widely acknowledged 'easier' method of horizontal wells, why did they feel compelled to even consider buying the EWT data?
RE: 10:30 post 13 ...you are border line hysteria...no-one today has said the Oil will not flow ...& much to your despair lots of people are listening , mainly to the nagging doubt inside them. Patience is all very well but it is diluted when Rupert states only listen to Company news the promptly they go into Radio silence...hardly inspiring ?
unprecedented? Hyperbole. Just because companies don't normally feel the need to announce such things, doesn't make it unprecedented. Besides $15M is peanuts to a company like Statoil.
I agree that Statoil put Bressay on hold after viewing the EWT data, and even that Tom Dreyer, one of their VP's said a year ago that "The business will now comb through the area around Mariner and Bressay for developments which can add to the revenue raised from this project.", yet a year on Statoil still appear to show no interest in Xcite who are forced to go down the contractor route with their Bentley Alliance and after 2 years still have no funding. Why?
Ugie, I'm also curious on your thoughts as to value, seeing as you pooh-poohed my suggestion the other day that we're unlikely to see the sort of price per barrel that has been achieved by other companies in recent years.
and yet...Statoil paid an unprecedented $15 million for a peek at the EWT data.
Then go on to publically declare they were changing their long held plans for Bressay as XEL's methods had shown how it could be done more economically, and also increase the value of the business case.
Why did Statoil even need the EWT data?
As they themselves have previously had very good results on Bressay, with a flow rate of over 3200 barrels per day, achieved during a vertical flow test in 2008.
Plus 2000 tonnes of reservoir fluid being extracted, most of which was sold to market.
Bentley seems like the holy grail of heavy oil extraction, evidenced by XEL costs of $35 per barrel...
20.11.13 Knut Rostad of Statoil’s communications department at Statoil was reported as telling the Norwegian paper TDN Finans: “I can confirm that the group has decided to reconsider the development concept for the Bressay field, and postpone the further development decision.”
Rostad said too: “The reason for the decision is that it is extended well data (extended well data) from earlier this year showing that there is potential to simplify the concept of the field.”
Late this afternoon Statoil issued a statement confirming all of the above and adding:
"This (review) will also involve reconsideration of the overall execution and procurement strategy for Bressay and re-engagement with the contractor market. The project will continue its efforts to increase the value of the business case through improvements in the reservoir drainage plan, simplifying the production facilities and reviewing the project execution and contract strategy.”
Thank you, I'm glad someone else flagged up the IP issue before me. Worth noting that it was brought up again at this years AGM. This is the second time the company has had to acknowledge the IP isn't actually IP, the first time being the 2014 AGM, when I am sure the admission stunned a lot of investors.
I am, and always have been, sceptical that Xcite itself is the key to unlocking heavy oil. They only have 17 employees or thereabouts, and you can be sure if any of them held the key to unlocking heavy oil around the world they wouldn't still be working for Xcite. The fact is that technology has come along in leaps and bounds since the 70's, and knowledge of the field has increased dramatically with the tote test and the later EWT. It's that knowledge that has helped refine the way to extract it. Nothing any other company couldn't have done in the same situation.
Xcite are very fortunate to have what appears to be extremely good reservoir conditions in Bentley, but that does not imply anything about intellectual property.
To strengthen your analogy with google, let's look at apple. It's not even always about IP. Apple never originally designed iTunes, it was bought in from a small outside company. There was nothing particularly challenging (or intellectually proprietary) about designing and programming a music player, it just happened to do what they wanted. Likewise, the calculator app was never originally designed in house. I'm sure there are many other examples.
RAR Report - Worth noting that the 2013 RAR had a 2 year timeline to production, widely disputed at the time as being overly optimistic, especially with the lead times for the PUQ, so it's interesting to see what TRACS are willing to sign off.
I think the 2014 RAR is certainly more robust in terms of numbers. Higher costs in general were due in part to inefficient designs and greedy subcontractors, that is clearly something that has been under review since oil crashed in price.
Back to the IP - I am sure if Xcite didn't have the Bentley license and Statoil had acquired it back in 2007 when they bought the Mariner and Bressay licenses they would have also managed to work out how to get the oil out.
Aside from the increased knowledge of the field through the EWT and so on, I think another benefit Xcite brings to the game is the necessity of a small business to do things differently (i.e. cheaper), which large corporations often overlook.
I asked you a perfectly reasonable question, have you seen a copy of the ( alleged) contract to build a rig exclusively for XEL, or perhaps more simply have heard from a reputable person who has seen such a contract. If not I would advise you not to try to spread false rumours which may be aimed at moving the share price, it`s illegal. So try to be big boy, drop the 11 + level insults and answer, or stfu
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.