Member Info for Genghis15

IJWT I think we owe you thanks for setting up your file and crunching that. Food for thought!

"seems always to be remarkably conservative." Yes, and no. The point of my posting the Edison figures was to show that current and future values are not thye same thing, and that today's price will not reflect potential until it gets much closer to realty. Some of the expectation on here (�10 a share?) may appear reasonable if you look at the potential resource nos and start assigning values to them. But analysts' approach is to break that potential down into cashflows, discount future cash at an appropriate rate (often 5 to 10% for each year), and then make allowance for the risks of things going wrong. The problem with some of the valuations that get quoted on all BBs is that they take no account of either of the above. Given enough time and assuming stable or growing PoO, and no technical, geological, climatic, political,taxation or other mishaps, �10 a share might be achievable. But that's a pretty heroic set of assumptions.

LW Thanks for posting the update, which, I think, pretty much gets to the sort of figure I suggest the above would produce, with a bit to add for the fact we're 6 months forward from Dec 17.

Why "(particularly the EU)." ?

"we can assume he is,2 Can we?

For all the debate b4, it might be useful to look at the Edison valuation from a year ago. "Our valuation of Lancaster EPS and full field development, excluding upside for Lincoln and Halifax resource, stands at 102p/share. We include an additional 32p/share for resource under appraisal at Lincoln and Halifax in our RENAV of 134p/share. Key areas of uncertainty other than commodity prices include the ability to deliver Lancaster EPS in line with management estimates of capital cost and schedule, and reservoir performance for full field development. We note that we assume first oil at the start of 2020 (management H119) and an additional 10% cost contingency (we note that the bulk of capex costs are contracted on a lump-sum basis) in our base case. " So RENAV of 134p a share even assuming a 10% EPS cost overrun, and FOIL delayed to 2020, both unlikely imho. Plus we are now 1 year on, several milestones passed, so that figure should be higher if calculated today. BUt, of course, the shares in issue, incl CBS, have roughly doubled, so halve whatever figure is now applicable. Where does that get us? MB, nowhere at all, given SPs rarely reflect analysts figures anyway. But at least it has some proper investment analysis of DCF behind it. https://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/research/report/hurricane-energy5/full

http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/198074/hurricane-energy-starts-well-operations-as-it-advances-lancaster-198074.html?utm_source=Sign-Up.to&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=7163-376727-Proactive+Investors+Newsletter++-+02%2F06%2F2018 Apologies if already posted - it seems unlikely I have beaten missdosh to it......

" Today 19:44 One of the issues with fractured basement is that to maximise your chance of success you need to be able to drill accurately and horizontally to intersect multiple fractures in one well path and do so perpendicular to the fracture network. This wasn�t possible twenty years ago when basement shows were seen in by Arco etc. They couldn�t hit a barn door from straight in front. Also the geological modelling tools were in their infancy and understanding of the geology was lacking. This last part is the final missing piece of the jigsaw.....no one believes it-yet; so it�s up to DrT, not to prove people wrong, but to prove he�s right." I'm not sure I understand this. Both the 2014 and 2016 drill campaigns demonstrated beyond doubt the ability to ap and hit the fractures. No doubt left at all, imho. Mb you mean the other issues thrown up on here re, water, wax, connectivity? well, the first two were really only ever bogeymen and have been pretty comprehensively demolished, Connectivity, I guess, may still leave scope for some doubt. Give us 3 months - mb less- of steady production and that will be removed as well. I have stated b4 my belief that most of these "doubts" are more products of the constrained capex environment post 2014 than of true geological questions, and are used by the bean counters and decision makers as a filtering tool on capex decisions rather than being truly doubted by the geos and reservoir engineers. I may be wrong, of course.

Nm, it's better than that. those rates were constrained by limitations of surface equipment. Much higher rates are likely possible, tgho HUR are planning for a cautious 10k BPD for each well to befgin with, possibly rising to 15k bpd once reservoir properties established. See here https://www.hurricaneenergy.com/~/media/Files/H/Hurricane-Energy/documents/presentations/hurricane-corporate-presentation-2q-2018-secured-v2.pdf re well capacity on p 24 each well perfectly capable of 20k bpd, "world class" productivity index, etc, etc.

jimv, that's pretty much my thinking too. HANK, I'm not decrying your calculations bcos all of us have done the same back-of=envelope figures at some point. But the Net Present Value to HUR or a major is a complicated model of flow rates, staggered investment, and discounted cash flows. A barrel from the EPs next year is worth a helluva lot more than the barrel that comes out in 10years time after another $3bn (?) investment. I can't model it, especially in a climate of carbon agendas bearing down on future barrelage. Which is one reason I keep my expectations grounded, at least most of the time.

a little ambitious withy 2.5bn shares in issue incl CBs, methinks....�25bn valuation! I haven't dared to think beyond �5 even in my wildest dreams, and my realistic expectation is rather less than that. Still, definitely a lot of upside come this time next year. (yeah, I know...�.Rodney)

You're welcome, glad you're up to speed!

No, sensible posting, pjoe.

https://www.malcysblog.com/2018/06/oil-price-hurricane-energy-ophir-energy-wentworth-resources-and-finally/ Hurricane has released an operational update this morning stating that the Lancaster EPS well re-entry and completion operations have started. The Lancaster EPS will use two currently suspended horizontal wells , 205/21a-6 and 205/21a-7Z which produced 9,800 stb/d and 15,375 stb/d constrained by surface equipment. This is more good news from Hurricane who are demonstrating that so far the Lancaster EPS development is being carried out on time and budget and that first oil is still expected 1H 2019.

Yes, quite right. I rather wish they would say a little more, but you're absolutely right, that's their style and they stick to it. Hey ho, What's next? AM going on sea trials, I guess. Slated for Q3.

It's getting late so I will leave it to others to explain, I'm sure several here will b happy to oblige. But it took me a minute to realise that the MZ was the AM, and I still have no idea what a Poggenpohl is... The answer to all of this is of course here https://www.hurricaneenergy.com/~/media/Files/H/Hurricane-Energy/documents/presentations/hurricane-corporate-presentation-2q-2018-secured-v2.pdf but I confess to also pleading for shortcuts to info in other shares so pls don't think I'm being smart an shouting dyor at you!

SG2 I didn't notice the typo until I copied it.....Ricfle has correctly read my misunderstanding. It has been my reading of co presentations and updates all along that the AM refurb - and other EPS milestones - would run, and are running, ahead of the published milestones. So I look out keenly for any indication of such, and misread your post as a hint of a rumour....anyway, not so. Plan has sailaway in Q3, which is not far away, so I'm bettingearly Q3 rather than late.

So when's ETA in Europe, Amsterdam/Gdansk or wherever she's going?

rever andy put me in for 21 October. Macmillan cancer care Cheers

Rome? No, York, apparently. https://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g186346-d12882452-r526756174-Valhalla-York_North_Yorkshire_England.html