Member Info for Genghis15

Hard to know.
stock figures can b erratic, but do seem to be trending up.

I could witter on all day about the supply/demand balance and the forward outlook, but tbh I'm not sure if anybody (me included) would be any wiser at the end of it.

The trend may be clearer in about 3 weeks time, after the Iran sanctions click fully in.

donscot

If your info is right then it HAS to be extra work re Spirit deal.

It doesn't take that long to detach the plate and fix the flare stack, surely?

So by 1 Nov the AM is in the safe waters of the med, with mb 4 more weeks to WOS. FOIL is then in the lap of the weather gods, with 2018 still just possible, but Jan 2019 more likely.

Poor workmanship and supervision? I'd b v surprised. I appreciate u might have to b careful about sources, but without further reference or backup I cannot accept that at face value. Please elucidate , at least a little, and let's see if that info is credible. For the time being, coming from a new poster with no history here I'm afraid I don't believe it.

FWIW I am convinced extra work re the Spirit deal was what delayed the boat, given all the circumstances nothing else fits.
Biffa, if I remember correctly the communication from HUR seemed deliberately ambiguous, and fell short of an assertion that no extra work was carried out. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Of course it's coincidence.

Instis do not buy or sell overnight on a company presentation ; they will have procedures to go thru and asset allocation strategies to fit around. I would expect AS' presentations to have a positive effect, but not overnight.

MO, or anyone, any chance of an update on that link?

My MT page still shows the AM in Gulf of Oman, where it switched off the signal.

Interesting commentary.
One thing they don't mention is what impact Trump's trade war will have on global growth, some think it will impact demand growth significantly. Also current Poo is already impacting demand growth in emerging markets such as India.

As ever with Poo there are risks to both upside and down.

Wessex, thanks for the explanation.

I had a fair idea of much of it but it's nice to see the detail. Good Q from bb, too, methinks.

Yes, but be careful about ascribing high values to oil in the ground without infrastructure already in place to extract it. The climate change agenda may mean that past valuations are not a good guide to the future.

The amount of 2C oil we have, if moved to P even at $2 per barrel would give us a very nice return indeed.

"The number of barrels of oil is no longer what Hurricane are about, what use is yet another 500m barrels of 2C here or there, the game has moved on, it is now about pushing the value of the 2C (cents) as close as possible to 2P (dollars)."

Very well put, and spot on imho.

Some time ago AS said that either Lancaster or the GLA, I can't recall which, was the biggest since Buzzard, mb even Forties.
He caveated the Forties comparison somewhat, but I doubt if any LT ers here think that the GLA, plus 50% GWA, plus Whirlwind, will be less than 2.8bn recoverable, tho there's still a way to go to prove that.

WW

"there are several companies I could name in the UKCS with ‘new’ field developments that have opened the taps and found out what they thought would happen doesn’t? "

Ok not quite the same as “oil didn’t follow”.

But there care only 2 reasons for the reservoir not to flow as expected when expected. Engineering mistakes/mishaps/complications, which can happen but imho so far our project management looks first class.
Second is if reservoir modelling is flawed/inadequate, which I do not believe ours to be given our world class team, state of the art seismic modelling, and numerous wells confirming such.numerous wells

It is of course impossible to make comparisons if you don't quote the examples, tho.

They say Buzzard.

I would say Forties.

Ok, a higher risk perception, then?

Is it possible that if plotted on a true Great Circle the AM is following the shortest route?

Tho one would then expect other boats to be doing the same...……..

"Risk is a function of consequence versus likelihood. "

Well..... not exactly. A failure to flow LT is a very tiny risk imo, but as you say a high impact were it to happen.

Anyone invested LT here is judging (whether they think so or not) that the risk the market is pricing in is excessive, and that the real risk is much lower.

At the end of the day it is a matter of judgement ; I have made mine based on HUR's presentations, Dr T's 15 year project, and not a few other bits of background noise in the industry.

Your judgement, differs, which is your privilege ; the only comment I have is that if I shared your doubts I don't think I would be invested here, or at least only with pocket money.

It does seem odd to be taking such a southerly route atm.

I would have thought it cheaper to embark guards in Dubai or even Oman than divert to Mumbai, with the costs of that delay.

So maybe there's something else to pick up, or mb she'll swing west soon.

johnniefp and daltry
Sustained flow is a risk- not our biggest by a long shot - but that risk is tiny, given the technical data behind us from multiple wells on structure and sophisticated seismic mapping and modelling that was simply not available only a few short years ago. Not just modelled by the most experienced geos in the world in fractured basement, HUR's own, but independently checked by outside , third party experts.
A
Now there may be a perception of such risk that weighs on the shares, but the real risk there is tiny.

The biggest risk here is, was, and always will be the same as for any company digging stuff out of the ground, the price of our product. Just keep a weather eye on PoO, nothing else to worry about.

divecentre
Ok, understood....but would it not be a bit surprising if a vessel designed to be stationary had the fuel capacity to do such a long trip unrefuelled?
Things are not usually over engineered unless necessary, but who knows.