Follow the evidence!30 Aug 2019 09:37
Follow the evidence to where it leads - Repost:
Excellent posts from our trusted geologist [macd_91]
Intro:
I am a fellow investor in MATD from 2016 dipping in and out depending on my view of the reservoir modelling stage and drilling stages of the campaign (av. 4.3p). I don't try to be all knowing like a lot of the self proclaimed know it all's who chime in here, but i know what i know and invest on facts rather than sentiment.
The bottom line is; the likely hood of finding oil is very high, its pretty much an appraisal well, the new seismic data and extra reservoir modelling as well as a proven hydrocarbon system make it a very strong investment. (people who state that the companies history indicates its future are either uneducated or just stupid.)
Stick to the facts and enjoy the ride.
Seismic/reservoir modelling:
What you are looking at in that presentation slide is related to the seismic, however it is actually a topographical representation of the top reservoir. Think of it like a regular topographical land map where you have valleys and mountains. The blue is essentially representing the flanks of a topographical high. The reason this would be picked as a reservoir is because more often than not oil will be found in these structures when a proven petroleum system is present.
This isn't always the case however as there needs to be a good top seal to prevent the hydrocarbons escaping, the same with the faulting that has created the structure. Faults can potentially leak, however with proven reservoirs in the area one can assume that most of the faults are sealing in this area due to hydrothermal fluids and shale smear (fluvial sediments often have good inter-bedding with mud which acts as a seal along the faults) taking place during the rifting phase.
COS explanation:
COS is a difficult thing to apply, exploration wells have a ceiling on their COS (i can't remember off the top of my head) but it basically limits how you can weigh your drills.
Some wells drilled in the north sea have a COS of 25% which is considered very high.
As stated if MB has said 1/3 then by all means use that for your risking profile.
*Just something to consider before people see it as a very low number/high risk (it naturally skewed to the riskier side inherently).*
Duster argument:
If you want to be technical it wasn't a duster in the case of no oil. There was not an economic volume to be recovered and there was oil staining which proved the petroleum system. Sure it was a failure in providing oil flow but it has helped understand the geological modelling. This in turn means that the following drills beyond that point will have a better chance of success as they have information about the geology rather than just using seismic.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
