Member Info for gordon1237

Yes I saw that. A lot of the things he says are weird. Mind you, if I dont get a response to my email, I may start to wonder.

Not since the name change. Hard to see why that would make any difference. Plenty on here must have bought since the change.

I don't think you pay stamp duty on foreign registered companies. I never have on Oex/Syn.

Yes Conger, they should either have given a bit more explanation or left the flow rate out. So far, after 3 days they haven't replied to my email requesting clarification. Sent them a gentle reminder this morning.

I now have the most I've ever had 10 million at an average of 0.19. Never thought I'd get in this deep again. Only time will tell if that makes me an idiot or a clever dick. Lol. Would be more than happy to double my money. Gls.

They already have a PR company Jack. Maybe they should get them to read rns's before they put them out, to see the impression they give to a lay person.

Vf. This is from the rns you are referring to
" Production for the month of May on the Company's Cambay field (WI 100%), averaged 0.24 mmscfd gas production and 18.5 BPD condensate production. The majority of the production has been from the C-73 well but production from the C-77H well has been intermittently co-mingled to provide a route to higher production levels. "
The majority was from c73 which was a vertical well, so I repeat, a meaningless comparison.
We could just as easily make the following negative comparisons which would be equally meaningless.
We could jump on the fact that the latest rns gives a flow rate of 0.5 mmscfd with 50% of the fluid removed which is the same as the previous one with only 10% removed. Can we say that means it will stay the same when all the fluid id removed? Of course not, none of us knows enough about how it works to say that.
Or we could say we got 1 mmscfd (at least initially) using the old fracking methods, now we've only got half that. Again makes no sense.
The only comparison that makes sense is between what they got before from c77, 1 mmscfd and the final value when all the fluid has been removed and the rate has stabilised. I am sure you will still disagree. Fsir enough, that us what this board us for.

Hi Steven. Hoping it all goes well for all of us, but especially for you, as I know the hole you are in. Stb.

Yes Espen. The narrative part of the rns is very positive and you wouldn't think they'd say those things if they weren't confident. Just a pity they included a flow rate which was the same as the previous rns after removing a lot more fluid. That, I think, is the reason for the market reaction.
I think to say that if the refrac was unsuccessful there would be a scaled down field development is an understatement. In those circumstances, I doubt there would be any further development. Atb.

True enough Callum, but they have replied promptly before, usually their PR people but once from Joe. It's in their interests, and ours, to clarify things. Atb.

Annoyingly they haven't as yet replied to my email requesting clarification.

Just to emphasise I am not feeling negative, just the opposite. Don't think they would have said the new methodology appeared to be successful if they didn't expect to get close to the 2 mmscfd target.

VF. Fully expect at some point an rns saying that flow rate is much closer to the 2 mmscfd we are hoping for. However, that comparison is meaningless since most of the 0.24 mmscfd was from c73 which is a vertcal unfracked well. Also C77 has produced much more previously, up to 1 mmscfd even when using the old methodology. So obviously they are at the very least hoping for substantially more than 1 mmscfd and crucially a slow decline over time. Atb.

Vf. Agree we need to wait for the final results but nevertheless it would have been more sensible not to have issued the latest rns or made it clearer. We are not double anything as we have nothing to compare it with. Even if it was, it wouldn't mean much as the number is so low. Hopefully at some point we will get an rns saying it had stabilised at close to 2 mmscfd.

That would be a good title for an episode of Family Guy. Lol.

BTW. They certainly all look like sells. At a steadily decreasing price.

I take your point Elegance but it is a fact that on any given day only a tiny percentage of many companies shares are traded but very often that is enough to move the sp by more than you might expect. Atb.

Yes Jack. That is almost certainly the case but they would have done better to either not include the figure of 0.5 mmscfd or say that a substantial increase is expected once all the fluid is released.

Not sure that makes sense Elegance. There HAS been a lot of sells (26 million according to this site) and it HAS dropped the price.

Yes VF. Agree with that. Have however asked for clarification. See previous post.