Member Info for Bubblepoint

The problem isn't in the price movement, the problem is the pending potential that they don't get Global financing and the risk that the Payday loan goes to conversion.

Until the market knows where that stands, then overdone is not really reality.

Ocelot/NeoGeo,

The drop off in trades in the 2nd half of the week are much the same for many oilies, and is directly associated to the drop in oil prices, and continued gas price weakness due to the U.S monthly stocks showing a glut.

Not rocket science, and was easily trackable, but no big deal either.

As for the small upshift in Angus SP, personally I don't buy into it, even the earlier volume is inadequate to justify, and as always for me anyway, any movement on any stock that has no supporting reason is simply: if you cannot explain it then best to trade it !! as it is likely done for reasons that let big guns offload stock, and they will do that from froth created in Pi's thinking/hoping it has some reason !!

Yes correct Ocelot, cheers,

Well that would be a market cap of over £250m and that assumes no more shares are issued in the meantime, I think a tad optimistic, but hey, you never know, it is Aim after all.

A bit ambitious on price projection somewhat NeoGeo, it would have struggled to see 4p in the good old days when there were 1/8th the shares in issue to today, Angus have a LOT of work to do to really give any real upside from here "in my opinion" though I do hope for those invested it somehow does a miracle run up.

What fekin goal posts, gezzzz you are really a bitter, perlock, who only looks for negatives then tries to inflate them into something far worse than reality.

What you do is exactly the opposite of what the industry does, including myself, we don't look at them as end of the world problems or issues, we take what we see and look for SOLUTIONS to better or even resolve the situation/s, something I have spent the majority of my 30 years DOING !!!

AND there are PLENTY of options and solutions available for SLBY to significantly benefit the field for the longer term.

As said, I will leave you to pump your DOOM and DISASTER sheite out, because it really is lame and flawed.

No more from me, I have better things to be doing today than responding to your doomsday drivel !!

Ohhhh I forgot to add, because the "DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL" something you conveniently forgot to mention, that B07T actually produces 40bbl/d of condensate, that is NOT included in the current 160 bbl/d production noted in the RNS's, because it is too contaminated to meet sales grade, so the true condensate number is around 200bbl/day for the field, with 18 bbl/day of water, water being about 9% of total liquids produced.

WG,

This is MY LAST post on the subject, because ou simply ONLY want to present an "end of the world is neigh" at ANY opportunity, which is seriously flawed.

You go on about this fekin CPR, put together by experts, BUT you also fail to recognise that the CPR utilizes a whole raft of assumptions and scenarios for their projections, which "may or may NOT" become reality. the data is FACT the projections are NOT.

Any changes within the field, design, application, variation change the written dramatically, and a CPR becomes outdated the second a variation is applied, THUS why CPR's are produced/REVISED repeatedly over years, BECAUSE they can revise applying any variations that change the projected outcome.

The production figures, charts, data etc ARE FACT in the CPR, END. !!!!

WG,

I see you have taken my punch line of "the devil is in the detail" nice one, BUT I suggest if you are going to try and review such DETAIL, then get yourself to spec savers first.

Firstly, A4 was NOT shut in for all of May, June & part of July, the flow & pressure chart clearly shows shut-in and flowing periods throughout those months.

Secondly the ACTUAL field data for A4 as below, shows June at 541 bbls for the MONTH, = 18 bbl/day, the peaks in the earlier months also align with the shut-in and flowing periods, where BANKED liquids also are enabled to ACCUMULATE and this gives a SKEWED rate for the month.

Yes water is a field killer, but not really in this case, YOU just want to make it the elephant in the room, when actually it isn't at this time.

Month Water Production Gas production WGR

bbl pcm MMSCF pcm bbl/MMSCF

Oct-22 358 90 4

Nov-22 626 106 6

Dec-22 624 76 8

Jan-23 938 76 12

Feb-23 718 69 10

Mar-23 1019 75 14

Apr-23 1117 72 15

May-23 588 44 13

Jun-23 541 41 13

Add to that, and as noted in past posts, A4 is the main well with liquids contribution issues, why not the others ?? as said it is the trajectory of the well that is causing it in this well, B2 for example ALSO intersects the lower reservoir, but because it is not a horizontal producer, only a deviated well producer, then it allows for the gas to enter the well above the liquids below, and therefore flows no water to surface, only condensates with gas, condensates that are being INDUCED as it flows to surface DEW POINT !!!

Same with B07T, horizontal producer, but does NOT intersect the lower area of the reservoir and does not therefore suffer from collecting BANKED liquids in that low area of reservoir.

NEXT !!!!

WG,

Booster compressor has been in the outfit references for well over 2 years, but it is something that "should" only be utilized once they have used commercially viable options on the actual wells FIRST.

Reason being that well production solutions and production string solutions have the potential to alleviate the the surface pressure issues "potentially" for a considerable time.

And the booster compressor ONLY enables the main compressors to function above threshold, it does nothing for the production of liquids or well condition, ONLY installing a booster compressor and doing nothing else will seriously impede the life production of the field.

As for A4 water production, I have discussed this in detail over the last couple of years, and the main reason for A4 contributing the vast majority of the produced water is that the well trajectory was poor, and dips down to near bottom of reservoir BEFORE changing direction while drilling and shifting upwards more towards mid reservoir, therefore the gas entering the well in the latter part of the well is met with BANKED condensates and possibly a SMALL amount of reservoir water which is being forced out of the well with the gas.

The latest water volume is not that big, around 18 bbl/day, hardly earth shatteringly high, and it is also fact that condensate creation also has water induced from that condensation effect, maybe not all but a good portion of the banked condensate also contains BANKED induced water too.

In part, the BANKED condensates and induced water is likely from ALL past and present wells, being that the density of both liquids means that a proportion of condensates and water generated in the near wellbore reservoir and in the well as it produces does not make it out to surface, and can simply fall out slowly to bottom of reservoir, only to be collected by any well that intersects that low lying area of the reservoir.

A4 potentially has options, they could for EXAMPLE, run a production tubing that extends further into the wellbore so the tubing end is past the low point and into the higher point in the well which would avoid some or all of the banked liquids, they could as noted in the CPR, install a jet pump to assist the lifting of liquids and ease the back pressure.

Ultimately they cannot stop liquids being produced in some quantity as that is part of the reservoir depletion condition, and the dew point effect, but it is manageable, and they "can" apply solutions that WILL make a big difference.

""Your guess was it was crap from SF7 newly connected line that was causing the production fall off""

wg,

I have stated numerous times "in my industry knowledgeable OPINION".

Now, you say Guess, BUT if you care to bother to look at when the daily flow reduced, was totally in line with the removal of Well test pipe work and most importantly the temporary well test separator, which clearly indicates that the NOW sent total produced from B07T is affecting at the field plant separator etc, so YES I maintain that reasoning.

If it is more to do with total liquids being produced rather than the potential contamination from B07T within the condensates collected from all 3 wells in the plant separator, and they simply need to reduce liquids production by say 20%, then it could be they have reduced flow from A4, either way it still relates to the switch over and the effect it is having on the filed plant and separator system.

NEXT !!!

ALL PEOPLE REALLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND HERE is they have 70-80 barg reservoir drive pressure to play with.

ANY pressure readings at surface are ALL influenced MOSTLY by liquids, apply industry standard solutions for the liquids to get to surface easier and more efficiently and you resolve the surface pressure issue, they go HAND IN HAND.

YOU fail to highlight the word "CURRENT" in the paragraph, meaning if you do NOTHING then the ONLY solution to keep surface pressure above the COMPRESSOR critical level is to choke back and reduce liquids lifting to surface, but it has a short life in doing that.

AND I do NOT believe that is the issue right now on site, the issue on site is almost certainly the B07T flow and contaminants, that no longer have a separate well test separator to handle it, so they can only crank it back a little to reduce the unwanteds to a workable level, and ensure that ALL condensates can maintain sales grade.

Keep posting my stuff up to twist what I say, I have explained it in notable detail since that post, which YOU chose to be selective about lolololol

WG

you rely on nothing other than trying to find snippets and then turn a gust of wind into a hurricane to suit your doomsday agenda, what a total pile of carp you spout to defend yourself.

Guesses from me, NO, 100% industry standard solutions and reasonings, which can ALL be derived from the information within the CPR, but YOU cannot do that, nor want to do that, as it goes against your fight to see an Angus fail !! idiot

OP,

I will add, that actually working the production strings over is likely the cheapest and quickest solution for the near/mid term, and would likely be well within Angus ability to fund that work, which I believe would actually delay booster compressor requirement for some considerable time.

OP,

In principle you are correct in that the issues mentioned are real, and obviously cash remains the elephant in the room to both deal with debt and the forward work program/s.

As for the field and pressure references WG has made, it is more about him constantly driving on about the 17.5barg COMPRESSOR critical point like it is something that is "the end in neigh" of which I have "in detail" explained why it is NOT, using 30+ years of industry knowledge and experience to post industry solutions and options, and WHY 17.5 Barg is NOT the REAL issue, it is the LIQUIDS that cause the reduction in surface pressure that are the issue.

As long as Angus move forward in utilizing one of many options to "help" liquids to surface faster and more efficiently, then that WILL result in compressor critical pressure being kept at bay.

As said, they have 7-=80 Barg res pressure to play with, which is plenty of drive pressure to make any number of solutions work.

I noted a few days back that WG does offer some stuff up here that I consider useful, but it is clear the perlock cannot handle anyone countering his doomsday references with INDUSTRY FACT, and he simply resorts to trying to insult and belittle to discredit when it suits, Well I don't accept that carp, and it is his own credibility that he is making a fool of, not mine.

WG,

My answers last week are based exactly the same as this week, the only problem is YOU DON'T want to understand what was said, and it is EXACTLY why I have had to repost in a slightly DIFFERENT way, to try and explain it more simply.

And as with your last post, you simply turn on people that DON'T share your view, try and embarrass & belittle, well each to their own, I will maintain sticking to points using my industry knowledge to put it into some understandable logic, I will leave you to the childish throw backs, seems you have quiet a talent in doing so.

As far as being in or out is concerned, again not a single share I hold, BUT as with ALL aim stocks, there is and will be money to be made, and when that time comes I may decide to take a punt. as it stands I don't buy in on unfounded movements, and if I was to be holding any then I would be selling into unfounded movements,

As said before, if you can't explain it TRADE it. I cannot because I don't have any !!!

WG,

I don't really give a fek what YOU asssume. like some of the stuff you post, it is simply incorrect, you just make yourself look more desperate for an ounce of credibility, you cannot win on that so you now jump onto the personal attacks, it is so, so obvious what you do.

It looks like you are unable to refrain from your posting ways and actually take on some other INDUSTRY knowledgeable insight, as it goes against your own asssssumptions, looks like normal service resumes regardless of MY attempt to encourage some value discussion other than the Zig n Zag show you turn it into.