Member Info for GKahn

Held since IPO
GKhan

is juvenile, pathetic and boring.

Rocket - You will find him at the bottom of the garden with the fairies

Does anyone know if any further drilling will be done this year using this rig?

Foxykiwi
As there is a significant difference between bopd and bbl/d, the statements in the two RNSs are clearly not consistent and irreconcilable without an explanation. Moreover, the company appears unwilling thus far to provide an explanation or clarification. I suspect that the flow rates measured were actually total fluids and not just the oil content.

Extracts from RNS’s
20 March
Seeking to increase the Company's gross production by 325 bopd..
The Company is aiming for a gross initial flow rate of 325 bopd at the well..
Haywood said: 'Achieving our forecast of a 325 bopd production rate at 16a would ..
1 April
Testing rate of 1,100 bbl/on a ? inch choke significantly exceeds base case production rate
.. production testing at well 16a.. delivered a test flow rate of an average 1,100 bbl/d versus the previously announced target production rate of 325 bbl/d.

The company will likely have feedback on the first target of Red Deer as it should have been intersected last week.

flava, Starbuck0121 and Mani01 all filtered

So, I wonder what happened to the most knowledgeable and enthusiastic supporter of BLOE?

Gary - I agree 100%. Mike31 is a prolific poster on both MATD & BLOE boards and is clearly obsessed. I have filtered him on both boards and encourage others to do likewise
GKhan

TalPaulNY - absolutely agree and have applied the filter, hopefully others will follow - M31 is nauseating and boring

For goodness sake Mike 31 stop plugging MATD, this is the Block board

Why are we promoting MATD on this board?

Flava
You misunderstood. I was not suggesting that Matad have or would bribe anyone.

M31 is probably right on the money – ie bribes. Petro China’s subsidiary Daqing Petroleum has a lot to loose from unitisation of the structure straddling blocks X1X and XX. If so, this will take some sorting and, given the sensitivities, Petro Matad would be unlikely to say much publicly. I am not surprised that there has been no explanatory RNS as yet.
GKhan

It must three weeks since the company became aware of problem and I don’t think there can be much more, if anything, that MB can do at this point. Unfortunately the provincial government is under no time pressure, whereas this is becoming time critical for MATD. Moreover, it will take time to get permits for another location for the DQE rig if Gazelle-1 is not an option.

Taproot: very interesting thought. Have you been told something which you can share with us?
Does anyone know whether Gazelle-1 is within the same provincial government jurisdiction as Heron-1? If not, it would make sense to secure Heron-1 and move the DQE rig 40105 to Gazelle-1. If the problems at Heron-1 can be resolved in the reasonable foreseeable future, the rig can return to Heron-1 this drilling season. There would be some additional costs with the extra rig move plus the cost of the delay already incurred.

I expect we will get an RNS on Monday. Hopefully, it will say that the political problem has been resolved and drilling has resumed. If not, then the well may have to be plugged and abandoned.

In regard to timing and costs, the Company must have known of the problem certainly before the drilling reached a depth of 551 metres, otherwise why stop drilling? This level probably would have been reached within a few days after spud, which was on 19 July. Accordingly, by this Monday the delay will have been 24 days less the days of drilling to reach 551 metres. The costs to date must surely amount to in excess of $200,000, not $84,000. Also, the time frame for resolution of the problem is approaching three weeks, not one week.

While the costs are significant for a small company, a far more important consideration for the PM management and board is the duration of the remaining drilling season. It would be disastrous if the delay continued to the point that the DQE 40105 rig could not be relocated to the next planned well site i.e. Gazelle-1. However, as Gazelle-1 is about 5 km from Heron-1 it may come under the same provincial jurisdiction as Heron-1 which could be problematic. Relocation to another site would involve further negotiation with the rig contractor as well as delays in getting permits etc.

I don’t believe that PetroChina want to see any success on PM’s block XX where unitisation will be an issue, and PetroChina certainly will be interested in the outcome.

I don’t know how long it takes for casing to be run and cemented, but the depth of 550 metres should have been reached within seven days of the spud of Heron-1. This implies that the Company knew of the political problems by 26 July i.e. 10 days before the announcement of 5 August. As of the end of last week, the delay is already two weeks.
GKhan

I agree with Moveonup. We are now half way through the Mongolian drilling season, and if this political problem does not get resolved in the very near future, MB and his team may have to consider an alternative drill location for DQE rig 40105.
GKhan