Member Info for dazzle1000

Dw"You don't have to be a rocket science to do the math, but there's a much bigger prize at stake that we're going to be testing with this upcoming drilling of Icewine-2."pb "The distance or the width of it is pretty profound. Then, the other thing that happened at the sale was we're not only able to pick up additional acres, but we're able to increase the net effective footage because the shale gets thicker in some places that we just picked up." DW :Really, it boils down to the viscosity. You need a hydrocarbon that can flow more easily through these tight rocks which means it can flow at higher rates. You need hydrocarbon pore volume or resource concentration, which is the amount of oil in place per acre per foot, which means that a single well can access more oil and therefore can flow at higher rates again and have better ultimate recoveries."

StephenS: So it’s relatively low risk. Of all the wells that have been targeting the Brookian over the last few years, as long as they’ve got 3D seismic to base those wells on - they have a 60% chance of success. And for exploration that’s excellent. You don’t find that very often. PaulB: But at the end of the day when you run the full-field probabilistic, stochastic volumetrics of what could be the ultimate prize, it pales compared to the HRZ, and that’s the reason that’s our primary objective.

A REMINDER WHY A CR IS NEEDED... DaveW: It depends. So - we’re always looking at what we believe is the most accretive path for shareholders. So for example - if we drill this well and get 100 -150 barrels per day and the market goes - “yawn, that’s not commercial" or something like that - and it’s not meant to be commercial. And the market cap doesn’t go up enough for us to think that raising money at that price point is appropriate because it’s too dilutive compared to where we thing the real value is - then we’ll go to industry who DO understand the value - and we’ll try to cut a deal with them who’ll give us a better valuation - and that in theory makes the share price go up because you’ve crystallised the value point. So it depends what happens. When we talk about being masters of our own destiny - which we are at the moment - once you do that (cut a deal with industry) - you are giving away control - and that is worth a LOT. So if can delay that (cutting a deal with industry) by getting an appropriate valuation for the stock and coming back to investors and giving them the opportunity instead of big oil to invest in this project - and we’re still kicking goals and not having failure after failure - we would do that. And if we can do this organically with you guys and other investors then that’s the ideal way to do this. However it’s very rare that you’re able to do that

Yukon gold and 1bn commercial aint bad this should get us above $1.5 if oil holds its price above $80.... but hrz is potentially more than 8bn

Brombarb hope we re close the gap back up to pre cr levels 2.7p....

HH .... FROM 2016 SEPT TRANSCRIPT : DaveW: We run a multitude of economic models - and it really depends on what flow rate we can get and the oil price is. So - if we get our P50 case and the oil price is say $85 per barrel - so let’s be a bit optimistic - you’re looking at something in the order of $20 billion. Would someone buy it off us if it’s not fully developed for that amount? No. You have to leave something on the table for those guys. And they might come in and extract 6 or 7 billion dollars at 18 percent rate of return per year for ten years - which would be good for their shareholders - but our guys don’t want to be there for that. So maybe it’s in the order of that 10 to 13 billion dollars that we might be able to realise. And that’s an ideal world scenario. In reality we look at Aurora which is a peer company in Australia - they got their asset to a point - and it was a much smaller acreage position - 22,000 acres - and they transacted for $2.6 billion and that was the height of the oil horn. DAZZLE

Hh look in 88e wiki under dave wall q&a or interviews transcripts...cant remember exactly buts its there...I'll try and find it tonight...dazzle

HH dave wall optimistic scenario is $85... boom ... lets hope it keeps at this level for the buy out...when we prove up the hrz tge figures will be astonishing to say the least....dazzle.... taken from daves q&a/interview

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-16/morgan-stanley-says-a-shipping-revolution-has-oil-headed-for-90

Great stuff garry ... well i never... glad to be corrected and that you have a good tech knowledge base on this. ... keep those posts coming as they help dearly. ... would this reduce overall well cost for break even ?

Interesting to be reminded of the 1200 wells , this was to be spread over 40 pads from memory, together with the P50 of $39, no updates since, so quite correct to use these figures. This was at a time prior to the amazing increase in lateral drilling distances. This may suggest that the number of pads and wells per pad may come down significantly. As POO climbs we can also expect to see the service support companies increasing their fees, Perhaps, when we get the results of ice2 an update would be forthcoming?

Lazarus651,530 Posts. 84 11/05/1810:47:30Post #: 33030856 JFC1899 said: ↑ The P50-mid cost scenario of US$39/bbl was not the extraction cost but rather the price at which the project breaks even. This is the point where NPV=0 on a full field development and full life cycle basis. Estimate only of course. Given that NPV includes royalties and state taxes but not federal taxes (as noted by their estimates at the time), this implies that the P50-Mid estimated cost of extraction (average on full field etc) is around US$31/bbl. Using this figure, at PoO of US$70, the profit after royalties and state taxes (but before federal taxes) is a little under US$18 per bbl. At $80 oil this profit is a tad over $23 per bbl and $100 oil has a profit before federal taxes of around $34 per bbl. Now, this is just a point on a range of breakeven scenarios. I don't know to what extent artificial lift has been figured into various scenarios within contingencies etc....but even if they were not reflected a (say) $2m cost per well for 1200 wells in a full field development is $2.4 billion. On a per bbl basis, the resource estimates suggest that this will be under a dollar per bbl. The other thing to bear in mind is that the acreage is now much larger than when the estimates were done. Expanded on the basis of extending the HRZ thermal maturity sweetspot. One would presume that if this baby flows then the prize pool is commensurately larger too....and hence the full field economics may benefit from further economies of scale. All just my speculation while we patiently wait. And all IMO. DYOR.

From dave q&a :31. Re Planned acquisition of 3D seismic ~March 2018 to delineate optimal drilling locationsIs this to be purchased from seismic data that has already been shot? Could this be purchased sooner to benefit from the 40% SOA rebate? Are there any plans to shoot more 3D before that rebate window closes? 'Section 12 Amends AS 43.55.025(b), Oil and Gas Production Tax, Alternative tax credit for oil and gas exploration. The 40% credit for seismic work under AS 43.55.025(a)(4) will not be available for work done after Jan. 1, 2018. DW We will be shooting this ourselves. There is no 3D over the conventional leads – the 3D that exists on our acreage is over a small area. No rebate available. Seismic cannot be acquired prior to this as it can only be done in Winter. Correct. We never had this in our budget anyway...........................wish people read stuff and join the dots and do the math...dave had no extra money for this and or for yukon gold hence $$$ plus aquiring land purchase ... dazzle

Desmond45 yes dw did mention a possible share consolidation in a previous interview last year... that is now history as dav ed ssid in the the globe in February 2018 that no way will there be a share consolidation now ad it would take off 15% of our leverage profit...this subkect has been talked around for ages in here and in hotcopper by people I'll informed or just not keeping up with what's going on. ...i was at the globe in feb as was over 100 people and can confirm daved words... cant really see my self dave doing a SC and destroying 15% just for the hell of it... i would be very surprised if he did....dazzle

The only negative or - minus is the weather and that will by nature turn positive ;-) dazzle

My gut feeling is a bit windy at the mo.. cue bob dylan..the answer my friend is blowing in the wind.... ;-) dazzle

29. What point in the advancement of the unconventional prospects is seen as prudent to explore a 'farm-in' arrangement, to speed up progress, reduce need for funding from the market, share risk etc. ? DW A probable year, a probable number of drills, a probable point in the spend curve, …. Any of those are a reasonable way of adding to our understanding. Any time that the right deal can be struck that maximises shareholder value. Typically this is post 3D seismic for the conventional and post decent flow test from IW#2 for the unconventional. We have come close on both prior to these events – which is a testament to the quality of the project but ultimately we did not close a deal.

http://www.upstreamonline.com/upstreamtechnology/1275866/tackling-the-tight-oil-recovery-challenge

Hi brombarb just catching up on hotcopper some interesting figures from the rebates and bank loan... we are due 21m maybe less 10% from soa leaves us 18.9m - 16m for bank facility = roughly 2.9m in our war chest. .. can see why dave needed pkacing what with the newly expected yg purchases and expliration cost involved with the farm out jv at end of year....maybe more suprises dave has instore for us...not the kinda guy who would bite off more than he could chew....food for thought dazzle

Researchers are also investigating the injection of surfactants that cause water to penetrate the shale rock matrix and displace the oil through a process called spontaneous imbibition. Shale is an oil-wet rock, which means the rock naturally absorbs, or imbibes oil rather than water. Surfactants can change the rock’s affinity from oil-wet to water-wet, meaning the rock will more readily absorb water than oil. This wettability change allows water to displace oil from the rock surface and oil is free to flow through the formation to the fracture network. Like huff-n-puff using gas or CO2, the injection well is shut in after the surfactant has been injected into the formation to allow it time to penetrate the matrix before the well is reopened as the production well. In laboratory tests of surfactant injection into Eagle Ford and Bakken cores, researchers from the University of North Dakota and Nalco Champion reported recovery factors of 48% to 55% of original oil in place. While other factors are likely at play, the scientists determined that wettability alteration is the dominant mechanism of recovery...... http://www.upstreamonline.com/upstreamtechnology/1275866/tackling-the-tight-oil-recovery-challenge