We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Penguin the iceberg is melting!
Time to throw another Berger on the bbq
GLA!
Penguins
You can copy & paste what you like it does not give any answer to the amount of BOPD with over 1950m extra perforations in one sidetrack well & how this will contribute to dilution when UKOG can only flow 3500BOPD from 6 wells so remains obscure imo.
Do you think that depletion will even be noticeable at that level?
Vertical!
GLA!
there bwill be lots topping up
at last! (Hope it’s true) GLA. One last top up done!
that didnt take long
i reckon 1p will be broken here very soon
This should seperate the bullsh*t from the bulls
looks like hefty buys now coming in
Time to top up. ATB
At last, made my day.
After all the bickering on this board over the recent past, about the rig being false news etc., perhaps we can now get behind the company and look forward. not treat every rumour as an RNS. If anyone is not happy with the company, sell out, I will buy a few more.
Good luck UKOGers.
OMG The Rig is Coming... twirly dance, twirly dance.
Game on!
GLA!
,
RIG coming-------- I say RIG IS COMING!
Crane in at HH.........https://twitter.com/Adrianwfire/status/1151453978233901056
There was a charming story in the Times this morning of 2 little penguins turning up at a sushi bar in Wellington in New Zealand for some fish to eat (p31).
He does moan a lot though. And I'm not sure why he invests so much time to whinge about a share and warn all of us peasants that don't understand anything. He is the harbinger of doom and gloom. Why would you spend that much time doing this...
But on the other hand it takes all sorts to make a world...
Happy Fishing Penguin.
@Penguins
I didn’t say that you’re nasty. Just that you’re being disingenuous about UKOG. For all I know you could be a saint in other areas of your life :-)
Cheers
Red
Redheadedrager,
Just voted, what happens now, does that nasty person go away, or does it just prove that the board is full of a bunch of posters who are b***s deep in something they don't understand and would rather only hear good news, after all it's worked so far.
@Penguins
Your entire approach to discussion on this board is disingenuous. You cast aspersions and doubt throughout your posts.
You claim to support yet litter your commentary with statements driven raise uncertainty over the VALIDITY of the issued statements via RNS.
That’s being disingenuous.
Let other on the BB decide. If you agree vote up.
Simple.
Cheers
Red
Bridgedogg,
If you can find a previous RNS where they have mentioned a horizontal flow rate as a multiple (2 to 3 times) and they haven't also put in a target rate, and probably a statement about 362 bopd (also mising in the latest RNS) please point it out rather than thinking it.
I am not claiming anything is a scam, just pointing out changes in the statements the company makes that may or may not be significant. Rarely however do companies highlight aything negative especially on AIM unless it's the only news they can release, even then they will try and waffle about some positive outcome down the road.
Wizard,
You claimed I would not reply etc. I did and it wasn't even obscure, just used the company's most recent RNS guidance.
Redheadedrager,
I only point these things out. You can do as you please, but if I post an accurate reflection of what is in the most recent RNS don't claim I am being disingenuous.
@Penguins
Thanks for your response. A bit wordy that.
In the absence of other information being issued by the company previous information remains current.
In the half year report: No change in predicted multiples (remains “2 or more times” vs “2-3 times” previously reported). No update on predicted flow rate per the RNS on 17/05/19 therefore take those numbers (in absence of an update flow rate).
It’s quite clear to me. It should be to everyone else.
Cheers
Red
I don’t think they have to put in every rns that they are targeting 2-3-4 times the vertical flow rate on the horizontal. This is industry standard convention supported by third party. What else would they be targeting with the horizontal?
Not sure what you are getting st penguins? That it’s all a scam? They can only get 200bopd from Portland and horizontal won’t improve that so they are gradually letting us know by excluding little bits of info from each subsequent rns? Sounds a bit far fetched to me.
Redheadedrager,
As you might be aware statements change from one RNS to the next. Why - often because things change. Companies don't say look this has changed, they just change what they are stating. With UKOG this happened quite a few times with rig timing.
In the half year report RNS 28 June which is after the date of the excerpt you are posting the company has changed the statement regarding horizontal flow rates
'Company's predictions that future horizontal well performance could achieve two or more times that of the single vertical HH-1 well.'
I defy you to find any statements about target flow rates in this latest RNS. There are also differing statements to previous ones about HH-1Z on top of the Q3 drilling of HH-2.
Statements in RNS are not casually put in, they are there for a reason.
I keep seeing in responses to my posts (eg Quincet last night) that in these tests they are protecting the reservoir (or similar wording) so tests have lower rates because of 'restricted' flow. Surely the next thing they should put is that despite protecting the reservoir in thesearch relatively short term tests when they go into production where they want to produce for 20 year hey won't bother with protecting the reservoir.
Quincet also complained that I post half truthe. What was ridiculous about that was my post was in response to jptop who only posted flow rates (and mangled the RNS statement) from the initial KL3 test in 2018, I posted virtually all the flow rates involving KL3.
I think we can safely say horizontal flow will exceed vertical flow. We also know that vertical flow is commercial. So horizontal will be $$$$ to HHDL & UKOG. No arguing with that I think?