Member Info for Dreamingforgold

Joe,

Except this is not the same as she states. It's unique, ie... not conventional reservoir parameters, etc... as so on as I'm sure you've seen the video.

Why is it so hard to buy into that they may have found a 'new play concept' as she describes?

By the way... you have said previously that this was a 'gusher' and you believed SP would grow to circa £1. Do you feel different now?

Joe,

I get you. Although Lorna has already said it is 'coming out of solution' with no hydrocarbon nasties, AND the carrier is Nitrogen, ie... not a fluid.

I'm a layman compared to you guys, but I can follow the english she is speaking.

Are you saying she is mistaken or something else?

This is the place to be..... HE1

Watched it yet again....

At point 7.10 she states being in discussions with other Hydrogen & He operators, that are currently producing. They are also costing up a plant and what that footprint would look like. Surely this is a lot of time/effort/energy to be spending if it's not a serious intention to proceed with?

All hangs on the 'evaluation of the data' as we know - so we can place a true value £s on the find.

Fingers crossed.

That's how I took it Skippy. With nitrogen as the carrier.

Surely this is good news which is how she described it.

Hence the unconventional ways needed in order to evaluate that's the tricky bit, as this is not normal (unique).

Fingers crossed.

Legal, if I may....

This was the interview 11 days ago....

https://youtu.be/OLtoKpXsJoU?si=--9rpRiEpXwKGm3P

From point 3.30 LB says 'out of solution and to surface'. She then goes on to say that 'the carrier is Nitrogen which is a much simpler approach'.

My favourite bit is at point 10.40, where LB pauses before saying 'transformational'. Her expression says a lot in my view.

What do you think??

Anyway, just excited to be here, hoping for a +ve update soon....

Useful, thanks.

Just watched the FocusIR interview again.... LB says they have to work out the data from the fault zone, rather than conventional route as in 'reservoir', hence the complexity.

That said, she does say they have flow and pressure info already - so I agree, if it was stonking data we would have it by now.

Thanks Joe,

Aren't the flow rates related to a reservoir? And we don't necessarily have a reservoir situation?

My take was that it's being produced differently down there.

Joe, JS,

Completely get the points made re absence of data and I agree they should be well noted.

However, didn't Lorna explain that due to the uniqueness/complexity of the find this was hard to quantify? She went on to say that short term priority no1 is to evaluate the find and provide all the context, which I take to mean these figures will be provided in the next update.

LB quotes 'uniqueness' a lot, ie.. flowing to surface out of solution, nitrogen being the carrier, no nasty stuff mixed with the helium, etc....

Just a 1st timer on here, looking for some sense through all of the noise - thanks.