Member Info for Genghis15

HUR is not Enquest, AM is not arriving in February, and Bluewater et al are incentivised to FOIL.

Yes, Q4 weather could cause delays, but if we don't see FOIL by December at the latest I'll be very surprised.

I'm doing the same!

https://www.malcysblog.com/2018/08/hurricane-igas/

" in other words the numbers clearly show there is a bid premium in the current mcap"

I can't see any justification for that conclusion.

WW
Understood, and I welcome challenges to groupthink. You must make your investment judgements as you see fit. And let me add that I treat you as HUR investor who just likes to air the perceived doubts.

But I can understand why some here get irritated by continued highlighting of what independent experts are certifying to be a very small risk. In the context of O&G, probably (imho) smaller than many "Black Swan" events such as a tsunami, Hormuz closure, etc, and most likely even less than engineering failures in connecting the wells or plugging in the buoy.

Added to your support for Bernstein this understandably makes some suspect your motives, given the widespread feeling here that he does not act in HUR's best interests.

WW

Listen to the link Biffa posted- this one - https://vimeo.com/223760753.
All of it if possible, but especially at 12m in where CA's independent consultant demolishes fears of water breakthrough.

He also has some pretty complimentary things to say about HUR and the size of the fields, tho. Note independent, this is not RT or HUR appointed consultants, this is a consultant employed by a major investor whose job is to look for flaws in HUR#s modelling. He can't find any.

pjoe that's nonsense.

You are ignoring the value of all the other fields, and of the oil in Lancaster not recognised in the EPS, which covers only 62Mb out of a 523MB field.

Mandrill
I can't see you getting a 46p entry, if you can catch sub 50p you'll be getting a bargain imho.

As for early next year, well, if we aren't pushing a £1, at least, I'll be very surprised.

After watching the presentation I'm very comfortable here, despite being 60% down.

LT holders will do well, imho.

Yes, some prat om twatter comparing this to ukog..

Nonsense, of course, this is a serious financially planned model which will deliver, tho of course wells have to come in.
The Stevens are not DL.

revenue.

This early water breakthrough is termed coning. It should also be noted that the effects of coning in fractured basement can be reversed by simply halting production for a period of time and then bringing the production back at a lower rate. One example of where such mitigation measures have been successfully deployed is the fractured basement field Zeit Bay offshore Egypt.
3) Despite the belief that early water breakthrough is not going to be a problem Hurricane acknowledges that we could be wrong. Consequently the plan for Lancaster field development will have surface facilities that can accommodate water production from day one. To be clear we are not expecting water production on day one, but if it does happen the Lancaster field production facilities will be designed to accommodate any produced water.
4) Hurricane has evaluated how other oil companies have developed basement fields and how they have accommodated early water breakthrough and we are applying these lessons learnt to the planning of Lancaster's Early Production System (EPS) and also the full field development. These plans have been discussed with potential farminees and with the UK's oil and gas authority (OGA). A key part of the road to full field development is the EPS which is being designed to allow for the gathering of key reservoir data which will help establish how oil and water movement is occurring and how it gets into specific well stock. Based on the EPS evaluation I believe that it will be possible to make an optimal plan for the field development, whilst at the same time generate early

Please feel free to share this response with other interested shareholders as the information I have included in the underlying text is in the public domain albeit in a more technical form. I have assumed the issue you have raised is about water movement rather than the actual water contact itself. Whilst there is a uncertainty in regard to the contact we have collated sufficient data to provide a range of contact depths and these have been reviewed by specialists and published in the competent persons report. Recognising uncertainty exists in the contact and therefore the volumes of producible oil the plans for the Early Production System are such that we expect a commercial return even if our shallowest estimate of the water contact are proven to be corect.

Ultimately all reservoirs will produce water over the life of the field. Such water production is generally towards the end of field life and therefore can be accommodated in any field development plan. The concern at Lancaster is for early water breakthrough. Along with shareholders and potential farminees. Hurricane's technical team consider that early water breakthrough at Lancaster is a potential issue, however, Hurricane consider it to be a low risk consideration for the reasons outlined below;

1) Fractured reservoirs that have experienced wells with early water breakthrough, are associated with wells that have had a too aggressive drawdown. Put simply the wells have been put onto production at too high a rate and the consequence of this "sucking too hard" to get advantageous oil rates ultimately led to early water breakthrough. In considering the specifics of Lancaster we have a very good understanding of the reservoirs pressure regime as determined from the horizontal well test in 2014. This data has been evaluated by Hurricane and third party specialists all of who conclude that the wells planned for the Early Production system (EPS) will require a relatively low drawdown in order to deliver commercial oil rates. Put simply the currently planned Lancaster production wells will not need to suck hard to get the oil out.
2) Lancaster has a significant hydrocarbon column height (even using our shallowest estimate) and the proposed development wells are being planned to take advantage of this by being horizontal and at a position high on the geological structure. The rational behind this is that with an extensive oil column and low drawdown any water below the oil column will gradually "rise" as a function of oil production. This is referred to as a "piston like displacement". In the case of other basement fields where production has been too aggressive piston like replacement does not occur and instead water has been drawn preferential up a specific fracture or fracture zone resulting in early water breakthrough. This early water breakthrough is termed coning. It should also be noted that the effects of coning in fractured basement can be reversed by simply halting

WW
Fair enuff but I would recommend it if you get the chance as biffa says.

Water? Well, we've done it to death. I can't blame you, or anyone else, for having doubts ; scepticism is probably a good thin in any investor.

But Biffa has posted below the comprehensive way RT addressed this in the CMD. Prior to that he had replied to my email, which I posted here in Jan 2015 in very similar terms..
I will repost that reply below, and for me it is all very convincing. It is my belief, stated here b4, that almost any experienced reservoir engineer will be convinced also ; and that majors' apparent reluctance to commit is more a bean counter caution than any real doubts from techies in field management.

Nobody knows this stuff like RT, and Schlum appear to back it too, as deo Bluewater, Kerogen, and (gulp) CA.

Anyway, here's RT's reply from 2015.

I hope you meant that the finish line is approaching!

SIPP
Yes, I'm thinking too that a mooring system completion RNS cannot be far away. Let's also hope missdosh is correct re seat trials.
extruder
Yes,. I know you're right in that short term moves shouldn't matter. But Mandrill is trying to time entry points so newsflow is critical to him. But it's also good for all of us as it keeps a flame under the sp.

If we get a moorings RNS this week and a sailaway RNS, say, a week after missdosh's 11 Aug, the sp could bubble up nicely by the time the school holidays are over.

Chalk and cheese, tho. Shale assets are short term ish. Investment case very different, but point taken.

I rhink there may b more significance than you say. Not time to worry yet, but consider. That pipeline might, just, carry enuff to compensate for SA thru Bab el Mandeb.
Not for, rest of Gulf tho, leading to delays in deliveries.
If Hormuz blocked ( no suggestion of that yet) the pipeline will not help Irak, Kuwait, GCC..

There is another question if Bab el Mandeb is considered dangerous........

contact john.moncure@ft.com

you two should get married! ;-))