Member Info for Carcosa61

"When approx do you think Hur will release a update for Lincoln ? "
I have read from other investors that they think some news will be issued around now. However I do not believe that is likely to be the case because similar wells have taken much longer time, so I would expect no positive news until end September for Lincoln. But it will come when it comes. Am not too fussed about that. The actual results are of more interest.

Ok I'm done ;-)

Prior experience has shown that when they have used Driplex oil based mud for well control it bungs up the fracture surface and tends to stay there, preventing/reducing oil flow during testing. Driplex is a safer option (Enterprise oil lost the entire mud column in Italy once upon a time using a water based mud) to use over a water based mud but brine is the preferred option for data acquisition but has challenges in getting tools to the bottom of the hole.

Therefore if the well results come in with a flow rate on the low side then knowing what fluid they used will be of interest. Whatever they have used it seems to me actual production rates are likely to be much higher because of the time it takes to clean up Driplex or if the fracture/microfracture/joints system is extensive then significant brine will be lost (good because it indicates a great system) but will initially reduce actual oil flow returns during the short period of testing, as was seen at Lancaster. Savvy investors may want to keep an eye on this because when real production starts flow rates are likely to be significantly higher when reported.

Ok, I have been posting too much here lately, time for a break. But I would like to point out that when CoS (Chance of Success) figures are bandied about it has a different meaning in the industry compared to what investors may think it means. CoS is compiled from a series of inputs. So even if a CoS of 95% is mentioned you can view it as 95% chance of meeting all of the objectives, of which only one of those inputs is related to the flow of oil. It is not 95% chance of commercially flowing oil! Sometime Ccos is written and this is supposed to be the "Commercial" chance of success which is what investors are really wanting. However CCos are usually the domain of investor analysts; make of that what you will.

"Out of pure curiosity, why was Linclon never tested back in 2016, just find it rather odd.?"

Not at all odd. Might be useful to go back a bit. Dr Trice took on the whole WoS FB idea largely based on decades earlier drilling by other oil companies that drilled basement, often in 'error' (a bit of a simplification but stick with me). Having reviewed the logs, samples of those wells and combined with the then known geology of Rona Ridge he managed to secure funding to drill exploration wells. These wells are there to discover more about the geology than anything else. As such they are effectively vertical wells with some deviation along the way down. Oil 'flows' may only be a cup full but that is not what they are drilling for in Fractured basement rock. They are drilling for data. And the Hurricane website presents a lot of that data in their technical presentations. It humongous! So there is no point in setting up any flow tests because they are not expecting to find anything worthwhile in that respect. Although these wells are not being drilled blind as they are targeting obvious seismic scale LONG faults and good connectivity of faults as preferentially reservoir targets. there is simply too many unknowns to go straight to drilling a more expensive horizontal producing well.

So vertical wells are all about planning before drilling a horizontal producing well.

With considerably improved understanding of the Rona Ridge geology following initial vertical drilling combined with the successful Lancaster field they can plan i.e. relocate the next phase of drilling Lincoln which is ongoing.. Largely because Lincoln shares a lot of characteristics (unlike Warwick) with Lancaster it is hoped the current drilling will be a producer.

So in summary, testing was not planned because vertical wells in FB is about gathering data for future planning of horizontal (producing) wells.

Probably better off reading the CPR in preference to the investor friendly statement on HUR website regarding Lincoln in 2016. Anyway, should be remembered that well did not flow at all; minimal fluid was recovered (a cup full, if memory serves) however it was a deviated (vertical) well and it's really not until the horizontal section is drilled that any meaningful flow should/could occur. The direction/depth of the horizontal section should ideally cut across multiple fractures.

The current well is spud some 2.3km away from the 2016 well and the direction of the horizontal section is roughly the same as Lancaster (yeah!) and Warwick (boo!). Obviously Hurricane are drilling in an area they regard as being optimum compared to the 2016 well and the 1975 Arco well (less than a cup full).

Other than the technicalities of drilling (and many of Hurricane drilling activities have run into technical problems which are not reported by RNS because they are resolved in a timely manner) there is always the potential not to have a successful i.e. flowing result. Having said that, whereas Warwick deep can be forgiven as a long shot, the current drilling really has to bring home the bacon otherwise, at least for me, the credibility of the entire Rona Ridge FB is in question. Of course, few things are as simple as that; if the result is say a flow rate of 500 bopd is that success or failure... because no doubt the well might significantly clean up as it did at Lancaster but would the market see it as a failure?

So in summary all i would say is read the CPR regarding the 2016 drilling results and don't consider this as a slam dunk well being drilled. I hope it is because I have quite a lot of $ invested!

https://twitter.com/ShadowFallCR
Series of tweets bolstering the shorters view...

Gas reinjection was considered but Hurricane say they would not want to risk compromising the Lancaster reservoir or EPS data collection within the first three years.

WD was chosen for a number of reasons according to the reports/presentations I have seen:

- Hurricane's Warwick licence commitments.
- The intent was for the Warwick well will be drilled below structural closure to prove flow rates for deep oil.
- The CPR stated a Fault existed between Warwick and Lincoln, potentially a sealing fault. Drilling Warwick should have demonstrated that it can 'talk to Lincoln' indicating Lincoln and Warwick share the same oil accumulation.
- The intent was to leave pressure sensors on this well to see how they responds to Lincoln and then Warwick shallow plus additional wells to be drilled in 2020 (Giving a total of 5 wells) i.e. It was designed as part of a huge area monitoring network

Seems all those plans went awry in reality due to poor porosity which was assumed to be the same as prior discoveries. At least it did not cost Hurricane to drill it.

Has anyone established what discount/premium to Brent Hurricane are getting for their oil? I presume there will be an initial discount to Brent given that refineries will likely want to see a period of stable oil characteristics before paying a 'full price'?

It is against basic listing rules for a listed company to provide rebuttals to articles such as these unless the article is stating factual information which is not in the general public domain and is price sensitive. That's part of LSE/AIM rules. It would be irresponsible for any company to give credence to such comments. On occasion if something gets out of hand and say, something is reported in the national press and the share price drops 20% or more then there is some justification for a response but this is not the case with DGOC.

Decommissioning costs and much lower for the reasons stated by DGOC.

Life span increases are again for the reasons already provided by DGOC. Incidentally I saw somewhere else that a life span of something like 92 years was quoted by some poster the other week (maybe not on this board). The question should have been 'How many wells with that lifespan?' The answer was 3.

You have to congratulate the blogger on writing an interesting job application but as far as being accurate in terms of an investor is concerned it is way off the mark. However good fodder for TW to promote.

What investors may be more interested in is the volume and price of gas over the next 12-36 months.

Opps Sorry. Finger trouble on my part! Found it.

The only data I see is for 204/26- 1 back in 1995 not the current 205/26b-C ?

Someone on Twitter also pointed out the Gain on bargain purchase i.e. assets bought below mkt value of $173.4m. So I reviewed the results in that light and stripping out that gain as non-recurring + others then I get an EPS 7-10c. May also explain why forecasts were so low compared to declared 52c

What i See is a PE of 3. Yield 9%. Results on the back of 41k boepd yet production now at 70k (+40%) and perhaps higher prices(?). So outlook very positive on that alone. Also looking at main market listing (see presentation p29). Not sure I understand the risks because share price reaction is muted to say the least!

Surely it just can't be the Pennsylvania plugging issue? or the single declared short by Mangrove Partners (who's investment criteria is stated as "On the short side, we focus on companies that are executing a flawed business plan or strategy, engaging in fraud, or capitalizing on a fad. ")

What is the 'bear case' or perhaps the valuation case?

Enthusiastic investor ;-) Just positioning myself for a 'half' holding. Will do a similar trade should the share price slip back ~15% over the coming days assuming no material RNS's issued in the meantime. Have been meaning to buy shares for a few weeks but eventually had to chase the price yesterday/today. Due to the illiquidity surrounding such a small cap this is likely to remain a long term hold.

Assuming they are not Automated trades, then when an investor does not have enough cash on settlement day the broker may be entitled to sell a small number of shares to settle the bill+admin. Hence the relatively small number of share sells. If they are 'buys' then I have no idea...

Try using Google Advanced Search

e.g. "Hurricane Energy site:www.lse.co.uk"

and then use the drop down menu to filter between desired dates

Fairpoint (LON:FRP) Press coverage states that a previous source of concern over group earnings may have gone away. seems the government have shelved a reform around minor motor accident injuries, specifically the operation of whiplash claims. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/13/delays-to-whiplash-reforms-costing-drivers-3m-a-day-insurers-cla/