Member Info for adoubleuk

"modifying a further fpso to take the current design buoy fit would not be an overly onerous task, one suspects" Etc etc on this subject. I thought the 1st April was past. Or have the Russians dosed the UK's water supply with hallucinogens?

Cebo, "Worth keeping an eye on Seafish for an update tomorrow," Yes, I do this every fortnight. However, looking on Seabay I see no call yet for AHTS, nor any recent allocations for the PBLJ. Though sure, it's possible that there are boats 'on hold' for the move whose charters date back earlier than last month.

More from the presentation: an obvious point. Final report update (ie RNS) on or by the 25th April. I was interested to hear that the subject of corporate complience to premium market company standards would be explained in greater depth. That will make interesting reading, and I suspect it may act as an 'attractor' for potential investors. I also couldn't help noting that Dr T specifically mentioned that any move to a 'premium' market other than AIM would not take place until after FoiL. There's another question answered!

JoeSoap, "aduk, 11:05 - 11:50 in the presentation recording DrT explains the 6km limitation. Have a listen, I think dspp might have..." I have to admit to the lamentable oversight (mea culpa) of not having listened to the audio before: something I've now rectified. And having done so, I feel that the message is very plain and clear. Wells tied into the FPSO will be Lancaster producers within the 6km radius. Any exploration or appraisal wells drilled (ie Warwick, Lincoln, or Halifax) WILL NOT be tied back for FPSO production. A further (amusing) note about the audio presentation at or around 10 minutes 30 in, which I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned: a Dr T slip of the tongue. Poo at SIX HUNDRED dollars a barrel? Well I suppose one can dream!

TJ, "Not sure if it's been mentioned but looks to me that a producer well will be drilled next like the 2014 Lancaster operation. Then I imagine they will plan to hook this up to the EPS, thereby getting the full capacity of the vessel." Yes, it's been mentioned (by myself in an earlier post). On careful reading of the RNS, I now feel that a further Lancaster producer (maybe a sidetrack of 4z) is very likely top of the drilling list, with possibly an exploration well on Warwick as a second objective. With further work on Lincoln and Halifax following later. The more I think about it, the more logical a third Lancaster well seems, both in terms of 'adding value' to the EPS project, and also from a technical viewpoint. Please note: this is a slight change from what I thought prior to the RNS, but there's nothing wrong with altering one's thoughts as new information becomes available. It's OPINION ONLY.

extrader, "dspp reckons that the FPSO can handle production from appraisal wells on Lincoln (8Km step out) AND Warwick (10 Km stepout)" I have a lot of time for dspp's posts, because he obviously knows what he's talking about. However his theory about tying in wells on Lincoln and Warwick contradict the company's statement that the furthest stepout from the FPSO is 6km. Or did his post pre-date the RNS, because that was the first time (from recollection) that the company actually published such information?

Cebo, You mean to say you haven't noticed all those strange lights in the sky that have been reported to have been seen circling over the GLA?

Wessex "I can't see any risk specific to Hurricane over and above the general risk to non-involved nations and companies." Me neither, and in this respect I feel some of my recent posts have been misinterpreted. My regular sparring-partner Ricfle says this today: "Now we are supposed to believe that you have an insight into how "big potential investors" think and they are more concerned with the war in Syria then the construction of the EPS." No specific 'insight', but at the same time I don't consider big investors as some sort of demigods who think differently from other human beings. I don't see the 'war in Syria' being in itself of any particular concern to 'us' as regards getting the FPSO to WoS. But tensions in the Eastern Med and a naval military buildup there may conceivably have an effect on shipping (Maybe not, of course.) And it would be a shame to have the Aoka Mizu halfway along the Suez canal and then find that the exit to the med were temporarily closed down for whatever 'diplomatic' reason! The fact is that the two major componants of the EPS are currently a long way from 'home' right now: their construction / refurb seems to be on schedule, and so does everything else regarding the WoS material and its installation. Or at least, we have no reason to believe there are any delays. So this being the case, getting the FPSO delivered to where it belongs is a MAJOR milestone on the horizon, if not THE major milestone, important though the other bits and bobs are. I don't think it takes a genius to figure this out. And it's my opinion (nb personal opinion) that it may have some bearing on the SP for now, maybe more than 'doubts' about fractured basement or whether the EPS will 'work' once all is in place. I still reckon (more opinion) that we'll see the SP moving once actual heavy marine operations restart WoS, which will be in the near future. But that any significant 'moves' will only happen once the boat is out of the Med or safely round the Cape, depending on the route she takes. From that point on, things should be (to use an apt metaphor), 'plain sailing'.

OUCH, major typo! Erratum: for ..."but not CA..." read "...but not Kerogen..."

Boyzee, " cant avoid a tr1" Thanks for the reply. It neatly puts to bed (or on the scrapheap) a small niggling (but wrong) idea I've had for ages. And which keeps recurring on this BB. Because by extrapolation, it strikes me as a near-impossibility that we'll get suddenly hit by any 'hidden takeover' news. I can see CA accepting a lowball price like �1.20, but not CA, nor Dr T, nor some others. Or to put it another way, there might be an 'iceberg' around, but it's not a real danger to shipping! Just people who don't give a monkey's whether their 'investment' is in WoS oil or frozen pizza, but just trading at a much higher level than we PI's. Would that be a correct assumption in your opinion?

HTL, Mikemine, Boyzee, et al., OK wrt the 'iceberg order' thing, but I have a further question on the subject. As such an order is being filled, are the resulting acquired shares automatically immediately listed in the name of the buyer (end-user), or might that only happen once the entire 'iceberg order' has been completed? If the latter, and if the order is REALLY large, it seems to me that it could be a way of avoiding having to declare a TR1. But if that's the case, in whose name are the shares listed while in 'limbo'? Genuine question, 'cos I'm a bit thick regarding such matters. Or rather, not thick, just lacking such specialised knowledge.

PS: Sorry, my latest post is under the 'TA' thread header, and obviously it shouldn't be. Maybe should try another. 'Shipwatching'? 'Buoy design'? 'Adoubleuk argues with Ricfle'? No, not the latter: it would see too much use!

Ricfle, More. (Just because I'm feeling contrary). "The FPSO could sail today" No it couldn't. Try sometime before the end of September, instead. The only point I was making was that it's the wrong side of a big military buildup in the med right now and whatever transpires in that respect is obviously beyond Bluewater and Hurricane's control. Dubai itself will probably remain unaffected by whatever happens (unless it turns seriously serious), but it's not inconceivable (in a bad-though-not-worst-case) that it could cause a delay. It's this sort of issue that I believe big potential investors might be looking at (thus affecting the SP), not p*ss-ant details like whether the rig stays with Repsol for another ten days. While pondering this, I looked back at the December Edison report, and found these two paragraphs which I think are worth copying here, because they involve not only the sailaway, but also the buoy capacity. Both of these are topics recently raised here. Future proofing It was encouraging to see that Hurricane is planning for potential EPS enhancements by building in spare capacity in key infrastructure. The Aoka Mizu itself can handle up to 35kbod of fluids with a maximum oil rate of 30kbod, and water rate of 20kbwd. Additionally, the newly constructed buoy incorporates 11 J-tubes that enable a total of five producers, five umbilicals and one gas disposal well to be hooked up to the FPSO turret. This compares to the Lancaster EPS base case, which will utilise just two producers and one umbilical at the outset. Travel routes to the North Sea Hurricane has a couple of sail away options when relocating the Aoka Mizu from yard in Dubai to the North Sea. These may interest those who like to track vessel movements, but do not have a significant bearing on the timing of FPSO arrival at Lancaster, in our view. Routing via the Suez Canal is expected to lead to a four-week sail time, but will require the FPSO flare tip to be attached in a European yard due to route height restrictions. The alternative would be to route around South Africa, which would require approximately six to seven weeks but would limit the time required in a European yard, where in both cases the bottom plate of the turret is to be removed. (And on re-reading this, it seems that just by seeing one picture of sailaway from Dubai, and looking to see if the full flare-tower is in place, we'll know the route!)

Ricfle, No, you sure don't get the point. My post was about middle east geopolitics, not the mooring chains.

SpruceGoose, "p.s. sorry for delay responding, been up a tree." The weekend is here, and time for off-topic posts! Have your arboreal ventures got something to do with your choice of pseudonym?

Ricfle, "Pray tell, what are the redundant pieces of equipment the EPS can do without?" Very witty (for once). I should have included the buoy (which is in Dubai) as well. But I'm sure you get my point. These two key pieces of equipment are currently in a part of the world which can hardly be called 'stable', and will have to transit through an area which is looking less stable by the day. These are facts which can't be ignored. No point worrying about them, but no reason why not to label them as 'incertainty points' nevertheless.

Jacdaniels, "Share price comparison between BP and HUR not too relevant as number of shares in circulation is vastly different." I disagree. BP's shares in issue are essentially an order of magnitude greater than Hurricane's. Now what are BP's assets in terms of 2P reserves, 2C contingent resources, and capital assets such as refineries, ships, office buildings, photocopiers and staff vehicles? (Oh I forgot: they maybe rent their photocopiers.)

Biffa, "This is not going to take off properly until the AM leaves Dubai" Agree. The one indispensible piece of equipment for EPS is currently in the middle east, with its transit almost certainly planned through the suez canal and the Med.

SIPP, "But my point remains, at most levels of investment here, who wouldn't be banking profits at �1? Or even 60p?" The people who witter on about a fiver a share ought to consider the following: BP shares arre exactly that price.

haggis_trap, "imagine BP bought Hurricane out at 2 quid a share tomorrow. most of us would be delighted." That's a nice idea. I'm now trying to imagine a post-buyout LSE Hurricane BB posters' party that could be organised afterwards. Should we hire the Royal Albert Hall? Maybe Mr Clapton could be persuaded to play. And we could set aside the Royal Box for the card school... Dr Trice would be guest speaker, of course.