Member Info for Bubblepoint

Ps, and before anyone makes ANY assumptions, I have NO holdings in Angus, and have not held any for well over a month, and currently have no plans too, I may do so if and when they give further info on what they are planning operationally, but for now I am NOT in, but I have no issue posting fair & balanced info if asked....

A-D, Ohhh I forgot to add one point to the previous post.

The SURFACE flowing pressure is not something that i would expect any company to keep informing shareholders of.

Why ???

Well simply flowing well head/flow line pressure from each well is "managed", it is managed through a special valve called a choke, the clue is in the name, it is designed to be anything from totally closed to full bore fully open flow, and has various stages of open. it is not too dissimilar to a hose pipe with attached nozzle, if you close the nozzle to half flow then you get a mild spray, but the pressure in the hose and the amount it can deliver is much greater, if you open that nozzle fully then the flow is peak and there is no differential pressure either side of that nozzle.

If Angus stated say a flowing pressure of 33 barg, then we would also need to know what the choke or restricted flow was too. If they clearly stated that all wells are open at full chaff and we have 33 barg then you can reasonably assume that this is the maximum you can flow the well and this is the maximum the reservoir can deliver, but they never state this in any rns,

The ONLY real pressure reading of true value is a"SHUT-IN" pressure, or a bottom hole pressure reading, this is the pressure representative of what it is at reservoir and what that reservoir is capable of providing.

Any other pressure at surface is not something you can use to determine depletion etc, Angus may simply chose to open all 3 wells slightly more for example, to increase the flow from the reservoir but this will result in the surface flowing pressure to be a little lower, but may well have been determined as the "optimum" flow they can achieve at this time without "over compromising" the reservoir and the "dew point"

Anyway, just to put to rest, that anyone referring to "flowing surface pressure" as some kind of true indicator of rate of decline is simply clueless. END.

Right off out for a lovely walk along the south coast today, laterz all.

A-D,

I won't be bothering to respond to anyone nit picking what I have posted, but will note that Angus would very likely be able to drill a new side track well vastly more efficiently than B7T, based on lessons learnt, I would expect them to opt for the heavy drilling muds from the get go next time, and remove the issues that developed on B7T and that grew arms & legs because of a chain of knock on effects. I would expect a future side track to be a third to half the time and cost of B7T.

Some simply want to diss at every opportunity & other company aspects, that is these forums these days,

Yw A-D,

Though as said, the CPR was based on approx 450m of horizontal on B7T, and they only managed around 200m and in reality B7T was designed as the "main" drain for a fair chunk of the Northern side of the field saddle that separates the North & southern side.

I personally think it will reduce the recoverable's noted, maybe by as much as 20%, BUT well A4 is almost certainly going to require a workover at some point, and it may well be that they opt to perform a side track from there that runs much higher in the reservoir and much further to both minimise liquids production at the later lower reservoir pressure and to regain that optimal level of drainage/recovery from the northern side.

It is worth noting that CPR's use a fair number of historic parameters but also include a fair number of assumptions, these assumptions are noted in the CPR, and any variation to that, such as the reduced side track horizontal leg are influences that are likely to affect that stated recovery, and they also note about potential for liquids/condensate banking through further depletion being a potential factor that may notably influence the total recovery.

A-D,

All wells are connected through infield flow lines to the in field production processing facility, everything has to pass through it, the 3 wells are surface pressure harmonised, meaning they are choked near the well to a "current" flowing pressure of 33 barg.

All flow basically will pass through a large separator to allow any liquids to drop out, the liquids are then diverted to their related in field storage tanks for off take via tanker.

The gas combined dry gas carries on through various processes within the plant, this is to condition it prior to entering the compressor/s.

The compressor/s main objective is to take the produced gas that is entering the compressor/s at around 33 barg, and compress it to a higher pressure which is designated by Shell in this case, the compressor/s have to increase the pressure of the gas entering the pipeline to the national grid, that is likely to be around double the 33 barg flowing pressure from the wells.

In SLBY case, each compressor can likely compress around 7, possibly 8 mmscf/d if the all the wells are producing more than say 7mmscf/d then you need to run a 2nd compressor to accommodate the additional flow, so if slby is producing 10 mmscf/d then you would have to run two compressors, likely fairly evenly split between the two.

If angus were to find more gas within the field and want to produce it and the total flow was greater than say 14 mmscf/d then they would need to add another compressor to accommodate that amount of in flow.

There will be production issues to deal with in due course, as the flowing pressure/reservoir pressure continues to deplete, the in flow/ flowing surface pressure of the gas has to be over a certain threshold for the compressors to work effectively. once the surface pressure drops below this Angus will need to add a "booster compressor" in to the system, the Booster compressor will be before the main compressor/s, and is designed to take all the low pressure gas, boost it to above the main compressor/s threshold and gas production can resume to the grid.

The CPR for the remaining recoverable gas was done based on what the two original wells could recover and the additional new side track could drain.

One factor that "may" affect this is that the side track only managed half the total designed horizontal leg, so it "may" compromise that CPR quoted recovery as the wells stand today.

That said, the field has decent permeability, and gas has a much better mobility than oil at reservoir, BUT the added compromise may also be the Condensate that is banking/building and will only increase as the field depletes, lower pressures and more liquids are not inducive to optimum gas recovery from the field.

Ewwwww Howey,

Be careful !!!! openly stating you actually work your stock and trade it is a BIG no noooo here !!! you will be lynched !!!

I will ay well done though, at least you react and preserve to keep fighting another day.

OHHH another for the green room.

Join your twatter group friends in the green room ADRIAN..

OOOHHH AND ERMM pathetically transparent !!!!! ehhhhhhhh I have ALWAYS been transparent, I will take that as a complement, thank you

Saintsmith,

welcome to my green room, posts from last week noted I have NOT held stock for the last month, and I remain out for the foreseeable.

I openly stated I was only primarily here for the side track and "possibly" Balcombe, and I have completed all trades on that front thank you !!!

There are some out there that like eating sour grapes and don't oddly approve of people trading on the "stock MARKET", it is your choice to hug n hold, good for you, that is life, though I am enjoying a nice sweet & fruity red, much better than scowling on a sour grape !!!! enjoy... and give my regards to your fellow twatter group lol...

no need to reply you are now just a green box on my screen.

Robday,

Just to be clear, I too totally agree on the original realistic values £300m producible reserves, the storage value etc etc, it was in part what drew me into this project in the first place, but they still leave too many questions unanswered in regard to excess revenue, and just as important, the condensate banking that is increasing notably, and the direct relation to reservoir decreasing pressure & dew point.

I will leave it there for now, as I hold no stock at this time, and I have no interest in putting up with the twitter group mob posts, such as saintsmith etc, seen it all before, they and some others are slowly filling the green bin.

I am tracking the company progress, I "may" be back, but I will leave you to it for now and wish you well.

Robday,

There are bits of such reference, but it isn't really transparent as to what they are or have done with the excess daily cash generation.

Everyone sits focusing on the debt, yet this whole project is about the revenue which Gallder notes as around £9m, not small numbers and the company would do a notable service to investors to at least give some basic detail as to where it is being dispersed, and how that also sits with the up to £25m they are looking borrow to consolidate etc.

Most of the industry generally do their sums prior to such projects and development, and most usually work on a max 12-18 month max recovery.

Upside/Jimmy,

Obviously, I hope PRD do have great success, it only helps to build on the Morocco story, every contribution also helps to push the domestic market closer to saturation, which then kicks in the export market, which is obviously far more lucrative.

But it still stands for me that not following what are logical exploration well processes and going on to drill another well, especially as a minnow Aim outfit is exposing it's self to far greater and unnecessary risks, including to their reputation.

Saintsmith,

Like I give a flying feluk about what you think about me lol.

Sneaky ??? really, why ? because I openly question what the company has done with millions while they load the company with consolidated and larger debt.

You and a few others are obviously the sort that prefer to cover your screen, plug your ears with your fingers and make stupid noises when you see or hear something you would rather not look to answer.

DO you know where all the excess revenue has gone to date ?? thought not !!! nuff said !!

Jimmy,

I agree with some aspects of your response, but then you also have to consider that the noted Jurassic Carbonate geological torturing, inversions & compressions can also result in some significant variation in permeability, meaning potentially adverse, as much as it can be positive.

This "can" result in some partial or significant compartmentalisation over a larger area, and make a field far more complex in optimal recovery.

Chariot is my largest holding, but I take nothing for granted or a given, seen both good and some odd results in my time come out of Morocco.

Hi Ocelot,

Yes but then we go on to 3 well production and notably ramped up levels to now, but it does not answer why they need so much or simply want so much when in reality it should be proven to be paying down hard from all the revenues generated.

It simply almost looks to be avoided in notes, and what happens then is they consolidate using up to £25m and in reality there is nothing to show as revenues for the NEXT 18 months or more are then needed to cover this and anything else that needs covered.

I struggle to see how they can issue divi's as it will take much of everything to service this.

In my book they are simply swallowing this whole SLBY story in extended debt and the significant dilution already inflicted to get here.

Anyway, it is what it is, but it really doesn't sit right to me.

easy on the word "proven" jimmy,

the logs and other drilling indicators may well show "the potential", but the truth is in the testing, and i am not a fan of outfits drilling an "assumed" discovery well and then moving on to drill more without proof of test, it is insane to do that, regardless of the so called delays to get perforating guns out there etc.

i am very well rehe****d in the processes within n africa, and have operated in morocco via sd|x, and it isn't such a drama to access perforating out there.

the last time i watched an outfit do this was matd in mongolia, they shouted fluorescence this, colour that, elevated gas blahh blahh, went on to drill 13 wells, before testing and managed to get a total of 2 barrels from all the wells.

words mean nothing if it proves too tight or other issues, a solid test does all the talking and proves the worth.

Well JS, it appears no one knows what has happened to all the excess revenues generated over the near 12 months it has been running, and as said, the total ££££ of excess revenue is likely a significant number.

I wouldn't mind if Angus stated they had used it for say paying off Forrest, or % of this n that dept, but I cannot find anything anywhere.

Bottom line is, this whole project isn't about the wells, gas etc, it is about the daily revenue it is generating, yet it looks very simply overlooked by both Angus and investors. very odd indeed.

OP.

Yes it was well over budget, but they also did raises to cover a chunk of that, meaning in the last 12-18 months we have seen around what ! 2.5 - to near 3 billion shares issued to get to this point, along with the loans and other financing tools used.

But I still do not find, or see anywhere noting what the revenue has been used for, they are not small numbers.

Sticky keyboard, " that is almost 1 months" 12 months,, obviously ;-))

Robday,

I am not asking this to cause arguments or irritate people, genuine question, you or someone else may have spotted that I have not.

The TOTAL revenues to date, that is almost 1 months of production now, has a significant excess to the hedge/merc payments, anyone have an approx of what the total excess to date is likely to be, and has Angus quoted anywhere, what they have done with this likely significant amount of excess revenue ?

I mean, it is OK if it has all gone, but has been used to pay off Forrest, or in part, some other debt, but I just don't see where.

Realistically, this field is producing enough revenue to cover ALL debt and obligations from 12-18 months of production revenue, including the £2m + of condy revenue

I am still bemused by the total blanking of info on the total revenues generated from production for the last near 12 months.

Has anyone got rough total revenue generated from day 1 at slby, less Mer payments, we are still talking about a significant excess sum up to today, yet it is like it has simply evaporated.

Some aspects of the news today, I see as modest improvements, mainly the disposal of GL, but gezzz I am not getting excited yet at a smidge over 1p.