Member Info for DiveCentre

Longwait

You can't be sure when such messages are posted. Is it someone who feels compelled to tell the world of their decision or a rather pathetic deramping attempt. It might have had a little bit more credibility if the poster had not claimed to have made up his loss on covid stocks. When eventually I sell up I will move on and you won't hear from me again.

Banker2
daltry is right. You just need to put in a limit order at a price you are prepared to pay. I have just done a test order (HSD) for a small quantity and got a price of 10.47p to buy. If you are content to pay this put in your order.

ADUK
"OK, sure. But what be (or not be) Premier's relationship with BP? I don't know. But will try to find out."
read todays Malcys blog.

ADUK

Yes I am aware that the ownership is a collective but BP, apart from being the operator are one of the collective partnership and will therefore have a say in any new contractual arrangements for use of the pipeline. HUR are still talking of a possible LC tie back which would suggest that gas export via the pipeline is not out of the question. If BP wanted to put the screws on HUR denying access to the pipeline by demanding a pound of flesh would seem the most straightforward option. I don't know if they have clout with the OGA but even if they do there is no valid reason for BP to interfere with permitting on HUR's licence blocks. The OGA have asked HUR to drill a commitment well to determine the maximum extent of the Lincoln field, following which a field determination will be made.

Why has it only now become necessary to determine the maximum extent of the Lincoln field? As part of the Lincoln field appears to fall within PMO' Licence block they would surely have a valid reason for making representations to the OGA.

It might seem like stating the obvious but last year HUR must have had a good expectation that LC could be tied back. The fact that the plan was set out in last years presentations confirms this. If they had had any reason to suspect OGA approval might be in doubt you would assume they would have sought an informal OK. It would have been cavalier to commit to significant expenditure on drilling and publicise their plans without a reasonable expectation that a successful well could be tied back as a producer. So have the OGA moved the goal posts for their own reasons, or have they been leaned on. Don't expect HUR to explain (assuming they know the reason) as its not exactly a good idea to be critical of the OGA. They remain reliant upon them for approvals in the future. I had thought that it might be due to problems with the WOS pipeline as gas disposal other than flaring is a condition for production from Warwick/Lincoln. When you think about it the pipeline has finite capacity and connecting to it will reduce the current spare capacity. What's in it for the pipeline owners? Are they driving a hard bargain as they know that HUR and Spirits options are limited to export or reinjection and RT is not keen on the latter. HUR said in the last presentation "Commercial arrangements to export gas in advanced stage of negotiation." If BP wanted to make life difficult for HUR they only need price the tie in out of reach.

I am more inclined towards JoeSoap's suggestion that its PMO. Remember TD's offer of the Solan platform for a tie back which would not have been made if Solan was performing. HUR not interested: TD miffed.

ADUK and MCB55
Sidetracking from the commitment well is a fairly obvious option. It certainly occurred to me when HUR first announced the OGA's requirement to drill these wells. The question is are HUR confined to any specific location for the commitment wells and are such locations suitable for producers in terms of the local fracture network. Unfortunately the current situation looks like restricting this years drilling activity to the absolute minimum.

MVB55
I think the answer is yes.
Lancaster 7 was drilled as a vertical, or semi vertical and then plugged and side tracked as 7z.

Well that's a relief.

Johnpwh
$45 for Russia is about right. I have read they need $42 to $44. US shale costs have reduced significantly from last year when $50 was being quoted. A lot of shale has shut down but what remains is sub $35:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil-shale-costs-analysis-idUSKBN2130HL
The questions regarding Russian production is how long can they survive at current prices. Will they have to shut down production and if they do how much can be brought back.
I am not unduly concerned about current surplus production as there is a finite limit to storage. At some point production has to shut down. The plus side is that worldwide much of the marginal production shut down will not be brought back and with a hold placed on exploration field decline will lead to a further reduction in production and when demand returns will there be enough?

robone
production OPEX is $ 17 and overall $26 which I am sure you are well aware of.
"Hope 'water cut' won't be as high as 50% by the time poo recover to $60pb?..."
Why don't you listen to the CMD again. I though the 'water cut' issue was dead in the water

robone

Bond redemption is due 24th July 2022. That is over 2 years away. You may consider this to be soon. I don't.

HUR can survive at $30 Brent. In due course PoO will recover. That is of course an opinion but one which I think most will agree with.

adoubleuk
It's a point that had occurred to me and may have been mentioned by LW.
People who have to travel are going to be more inclined to use personal rather than public transport. Do you get on an airplane, train or bus and expose yourself to contagion or take the safe option. This may well result in significantly more car use and higher petrol consumption. Just think about all those internal US flights translated into car journeys

daltry
simple,
remove the other seven.

Thanks Missdosh

So a bit more value from the basement.

bartlebobton
Wrong. They're looking in the basement and it sounds like there's a fair bit to be found.

I do not think the financial cost could be justified at present. They have said that it was under consideration and why else would they have taken on two extra NEDs. They will also have to sort out the CFO position, but when poo improves it must be ranked higher on the list of priorities.

https://www.oilfieldtechnology.com/special-reports/01052020/rystad-energy-global-oil-glut-set-to-halve-in-may-and-shrink-to-just-6-million-bpd-in-june/
last paragraph:
"Rystad still believes in an oil price recovery, possibly starting as early as June, and see a risk for a tight market in 2022 with prices much higher than pre-crisis levels. This will be facilitated by a recovery in demand to above pre-Covid-19 levels in 2022, ongoing OPEC+ cuts, and a loss of supply capacity in both US shale and long-cycled global production. Not all production that is currently being shut-in will be able to swiftly return."

The market was informed of Stobie's resignation on 27th February. Look at the next RNS on 3rd March (Box5).

Genghis you posted a link the FT's twitter page advertising their article "Why the oil market is even weaker than you think"

The advice was intended for anyone who wanted to read the article. As you know FT content is normally behind a paywall.

Google the article title:
"Why the oil market is even weaker than you think" and you might get it.
I was lucky and did but that is no guarantee