Member Info for adoubleuk

Wellwell,

" But are you saying they can’t make something again from existing drawings? "

Essentially, YES. Or at least, not with any degree of certainty.

Heck. In Dubai, and when fabricating the new buoy, they took the turret out of the boat and plonked it over the buoy to check that it all fit together properly. And that despite the fact that the two were together in the same place, and a chap could go with a tape-measure to check any particular dimension within the turret on any day of the week.

But your suggestion involves a turret being made or modified to fit the existing buoy! Which is even worse.

And you think someone's going to risk multi-millions on that by relying on DRAWINGS? This stuff isn't some poxy mass-produced product like a food-mixer, a mobile phone, or an airliner. It's more made-to-measure than a Versace suit.

Dream on. Which BB poster was responsible for this idiotic idea that they were going to move the AM to the GWA anyway? It has yet to be proved that the GWA exists, instead of just being called the 'Lincoln field'.

Methinks the Wellwell protesteth too much.

If I recall, Hurricane and Bluewater actually press-released stuff about a successful 'dry run' check of the buoy with the turret on the Dubai dockside.

But now it's all 'plug and play', with some hypothetical new FPSO turning up and using the stuff in place.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

PS.

Reverandy,

Donation sent. Checked out the website, seems like an OK thing.

Despite having had huge falling's-out with SIPP of late (probably irredeemable), liked his suggestion that the losers of the sweepstake support your own favorite charity, especially as your own SP guess was so wildly out!

Can't help wondering how the man in question got the answer right though, given that the spread was so tight in that particular 'quadrant' of the sweepstake...

Reverandy,

"Responses from bears of greater brain than me requested."

Response coming through pale fawn fluff at an absurd time of day.

I simple do not know what to make of these 'brokers' valuations', whether they be based upon NAV 2C or whatever to be so much pie-in-the-sky. Because a broker makes money on both the buy and the sell, so whatever?

The SP seems to be comfortably settled around the upper 40p right now, and that's just the way it is. Maybe a 'takeover price' might be above a quid, but who's going to do that?

You mention 2022. Yes, maybe. But for an old man like me, two years can be a long (or equally a very short) time.

So while we're in the doldrums, I just hold.

But your question raises another related one. 'Brokers' valuations' in general, especially related to AIM-listed stocks.

Amongst the assorted posters here, how many of you have seen your 'punts' achieve a 'broker's evaluation' or exceed it? Or also, how many of you have seen them to be wild exagerations?

Honest answers only, please.

LONGWAIT,

"As it is, I could really handle a massage. Even better, handle a masseuse."

Hey! It's still the weekend, sort of, where some O/T is 'allowed', but I'd advise against that sort of thing.

I spent a week down in Spain back in May playing poker at a big thing with about 3000 poker-playing people descending on the place. Me playing my usual cash-game downstairs, but lots of people doing their tournament-thing, hoping to hit the half-million prize. Lovely casino, with the only problem being that one actually had to go outside for a cigarette. But that was OK, because there was a little bar there and with a quadruple gin at 4 euros a glass, it made a nice break from time to time.

I digress.

It was the first time that place had hosted that particular tournament. But they'd gone to it with gusto, Vegas-style, and with masseuses. They plied their services at the tables, at 1.5 euros a minute.

This was all rather new to me, but as I ended up sitting at the tables for up to 14 hours at a stretch (excluding smoke-breaks and an occasional half hour at a tapas bar), my back was feeling it.

So indulged in a massage or two. Turn chair around, sit astride it (while still playing), and get 10 minutes of backache being bashed out of one. Hey, it wasn't gentle!

The two or three girls doing the 'downstairs' cash-tables weren't naive, either, but very sweet in their way. That was their job, and they followed the poker-tournaments. The one who set my aching muscles vaguely better was English, and of course we talked a bit while I was (meanwhile) idly folding hand after hand.

A while later, some fat drunk bloke tried to feel her up. And I've never seen a fight finish so fast, nor a person being ejected from a casino so rapidly! (Much the worse for wear from the masseuse who had beaten him up, to great applause!)

I suggest just applying a hot-water bottle to wherever it hurts, in the freezer.

Longwait,

"When I press Post Message, my massage does not register.
I have to go back to the previous page and press the Post Message button again."

Yup, having the same problem.

Though not having a massage. That must be a big deepfreeze.

WW,

OK, you asked for it. But I'm keeping an eye on the clock before signing in to my usual late-night online poker thing.

"“It (moving the AM to GWA and making room for a bigger FPSO on GLA) is an absurd idea. For 'n' technical reasons I simply won't enter into detail about here.”

Assorted (very simple) reasons...

The AM and its mooring / turret system are an integrated 'fit'. Not 'off the shelf'. A hypothetical 'bigger FPSO' couldn't mate up with what's in place. So essentially you have to rip the whole lot out and start again.

Doing so would no doubt have to include re-certification, plus renewal of assorted bits and bobs potentially damaged through the rip-out process.

New stuff would have to be installed for yer 'new' FPSO.

Shutdown would probably be for a year or so.

Nah. I could go on and on. But the whole idea's stupid. The company has said the AM will be on station for six years. Not something harebrained about moving it to GWA. There the boat is, and there it stays.

It's not an effin semi-sub. Peoples' minds are somewhat boggled that we can move those things around from well-to-well in such a nonchalent way. But it's what they're designed for.

And why would Spirit want our old cast-off junk on what's 50% their patch, anyway?

No, the whole thing's an idiotic idea dreamt-up by people who haven't a clue what they're talking about. Hurricane's got quite enough on their plate 'debottlenecking' the thing and eventually tying it into WOSP without thinking of suddenly shutting it (and field production) down and going back to square one.

That's the sort of 'thinking' used by the people who change their mobile phone every year. Morons, in other words.

Wellwell,

Do tell what?

WWN,

Your post of yesterday morning is interesting. Not 'negative' as such, but certainly thought-provoking.

I'll quote bits of it...

" The CPR states:

In terms of the Low Case, Hurricane considered this {lack of flow from lower in the reservoir} to be extremely unlikely given the wealth of data that supports producible oil below structural closure, but viewed that the inclusion of such a case provided confidence that the economics of the field are robust and the EPS can prove to be successful in this low case.

My argument is that WD probably puts us in the Low Case."

There, I'd disagree with you. I'd propose that such a condition in no way compromises the EPS (currently seemingly going great guns) and its oil-producing minimum six-year lifetime.

" Until proven otherwise this has huge implications for both the resource upside and for water. However, the low case is not necessarily catastrophic and therefore the downside risk is mitigated somewhat."

Quite agree with that. And also remain convinced that the water ingress (from the aquifer) 'issue' is pretty much a non-starter.

"What do you think are the implications of WD?"

Now THAT'S the 64,000-dollar question! One to which the company has not even hinted an answer, simply because they'll still be analysing the data.

It's something I think about a lot (when I'm not thinking about other far more enjoyable stuff, of course!!!! ;-)) ), but not to the extent that it's making me twitchy. Been in this story long enough to not do anything until the 'West Warwick' result comes out.

But nevertheless the failure of WD to produce commercially can't be ignored.

cat5,

"I thought the forward plan (if things work out right) was to move AM over to GWA with a bigger FPSO on GLA?"

No.

That is a pure fantasy-dream issuing from people on this BB and others, who generally have no idea what such a thing would entail. It's an absurd idea. For 'n' technical reasons I simply won't enter into detail about here.

The only thing the company has given hints of forward-planning about is a further FPSO over GWA, and that makes sense. Possibly a bit larger than the Aoka Mizu, who knows? But moving the AM to GWA is just a non-starter.

Moving it in six years time may be on the cards, but that's a different ballgame altogether. And by then, it may not be a question of moving it to GWA, but instead somewhere further up the Ridge.

extrader,

"FPSO's - esp harsh conditions purposed - aren't usually 'off the shelf' items..."

10-4. Plus the AM had considerable topsides weather-protection added in Dubai to prepare her for WoS.

It's true that possibly this was based on lessons learned on during her previous career for Nexon N.Sea, after which she had to be towed to Poland, unable to make it under her own steam.

Plus also it mustn't be forgotten that the Glen Lyon wasn't always over Scheihallion. Se went there in great pomp, but not until after almost two years' shutdown of the field, because the weather had broken BP's previous FPSO.

Biffa,

"Secondly, this is years away and should be way down your worry list. Come back Q4 2020 when hopefully GLA will have had a few more wells drilled on it."

OK, I appreciate that you didn't address this to me. And also, despite my musings today, financing of FFD isn't something which causes me worry, 'cos as you say, it's a long way off.

HOWEVER, I don't know why you're advising Longwait to return to his freezer until the back end of next year. Because if it's on the basis of GLA drilling, according to all corporate planning published to date, new new wells are anticipated on GLA until 2021. Sure, such planning can change, but up to now, any GLA wells being drilled next year are nothing but figments of the imaginations of over-enthusiastic BB posters.

LW,

"'finding three or four billion...'
That means more dilution, Double.
"Too many shares..."

Well of course, that did occur to me. But I just wonder if the investment market could actually be 'tapped' for such sums? It's not as though Hurricane pays dividends.

One thing's for sure. If AS mentions a 'slug of equity' again, or words similar, you won't see adoubleuk for dust...

DC,

Thanks for that comment. I think I agree. (And I missed the mention of relinquishing Strathmore, but that comes as no surprise.)

Something I find interesting...

I note that nobody here has made mention of SXX. I was never invested there, and an article in the Times a few months ago seemed a bit like 'writing on the wall', but I don't want to sound gloating. However, I've glanced at the SXX BB a few times over the last few days, just to see how people were reacting. Human-interest stuff, even if it might seem a bit ghoulish.

So I was somewhat surprised to see a thread there headed 'Sirius vs Hurricane', a thread started by SIPP, a regular poster here. Drawing attention to the following article:

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/902865/sirius-minerals--fields-and-dreams-why-small-cap-firms-struggle-when-building-projects-902865.html

It's worth reading. Especially with the possibility of HUR 'going it alone' for GLA FFD, because to my mind, even with revenue from EPS, and increased revenue from a beefed-up EPS following Lincoln hookup and tie-in to the WOSP gas system, I still harbour some doubts as to whether 'going it alone' is feasable.

Oh, and Xcite gets a mention, as well.

I wonder why SIPP didn't post that link here, as well, given that the article's title refers to Hurricane?

An interesting RNS / report. I read the 'expanded' version on the company's website before logging in here, but essentially just the technical / operational stuff, skipping the detailed financials. And finding nothing much there that we didn't already know, so nothing to provoke any significant SP change.

I did note that the ESP's have still not been called into action to date, thereby disproving a wild idea I posted in the early hours of this morning!

Also noted that despite perfomance so far, the company is now 'guiding' 11,000 bbl/day from now until the year's end. OK, very well, but I wonder if this isn't typical Hurricaane conservatism again?

Also the implied possibility of 'go it alone' for initial phases of GLA FFD couldn't go unnoticed. This obviously affects shareholders, even PI's such as ourselves, should such a course of action be taken. Because despite now earning revenue, there's no way such money can significantly offset FFD costs, which are likely to be an order of magnitude greater than the EPS was. Raising half a billion is one thing (and even that raise was a 'record-breaker'), finding three or four billion is a different kettle of fish. So in that respect, I think we're back to the waiting game.

On thing notably absent from the report was even a hint as to what AS might have been referring to at the CMD when he mentioned a potential 'interruption', which was cryptic, to say the least. I begin to wonder whether his comment might not have been simply some sort of 'teaser', to keep people guessing. Because related to the hint about 'going it alone' is the lack of anything saying that the company is 'actively seeking partners', which was the case in previous years' reports up to mid-2018.

JK,

"The last RNS wording was ambiguous, we don't know if the water cut was stable or increased, it could be read either way..."

Yes, I'd agree with you on that. But am hoping that tomorrow's (oops! sorry, today's) report may clarify such details somewhat.

One thing being, I suspect the company may be rather surprised by the way so many people on BB's like this have become so 'technically interested' and thus put every announcement under the microscope, picking up on such seeming ambiguities.

I mean, there's another thought I have had, related to the recent latest offload and its timing. Because since both wells have started (as we're led to believe) producing through the two separate flowlines, enabling the company to do various 'experiments' regarding well interactions, and so on. Which one may imagine require shut-ins, and so on. From which (logically) one might expect daily production to decrease somewhat. But the offload timing appears to belie this. So have they offset any decrease by temporarily kicking in an ESP on one well, then the other?

This is very technical stuff, and I don't personally have the answers. But I'd be very interested to learn them. But in no way from an 'investment strategy' way.

The only thing which might affect my 'investment strategy' will be the result of 204/30b-1A (now aka 'Warwick West'), and we won't know that for at least a couple of months yet.

JoeSoap,

"I note that there was no formation water in LC, but there was in WD.
What is the difference between perched water and formation water?"

That's a good technical question!

And my take on it is that given the context of the RNS about the Warwick Deep result, there may not be any difference at all.

My understanding of the RNS was that it was differentiating between returned drilling brine and other water emanating from the formation, whether 'perched' or not.

Whereas in other documents regarding the EPS production, the company is making it clear that the small water cut is 'perched water', which isn't coming from the aquifer underlying the field.

My opinion only.

Yobbo,

"or maybe they are not aiming for the Crest anymore ? Could their plans have changed slightly for the next Warwick drill ?"

This is exceedingly unlikely. See my post of 17:51.

thanks, people. i'd overlooked the 'warwick west' reference in the rns.

and yes, it'd be tempting fate to have 204/30b-A referred to as 'WC' !

londoner,

(can't copy the relevent bit of your post as usin phone.)

the last Transocean fleet report dates from august, so is a bit old. but it had the TOL on contract to HUR until nov 30th. of course that may change slightly due to delays on WD. but equally I was very surprised that the Lincoln DST was of such short duration, so it's not impossible that things are being done to remain within timeplan and thus budget. remember, Spirit will have input on this, because it's they who are bankrolling the show.

either way, all seems pretty much 'on time', and avoidin the bad end-of-year weather.