Member Info for gordon1237

sent them an email requesting clarification.
" I am a long term holder of Oilex now Synergia Energy shares.
There has been much discussion on the lse bulletin board about the latest rns on the refrac operation. The consensus is one of confusion. On the face of it the flow rates seem low at 0.5 mmscfd, nowhere near the target of 2 mmscfd but the commentary is upbeat saying the new methodology seems successful but the decline rates need to be determined to be satisfactory.
Presumably the company is expecting a much improved rate once the remaining fluid is removed and the decline rate will be measured from there. This is by no means clear and probably has something to do with today's drop in the sp.
Perhaps a clarification rns might be in order?
Best regards
Gordon

Not sure VF. I would assume that they are expecting it to go up considerably from the present low rate of 0.5 mmscfd to somewhere near the target of 2 mmscfd and then hopefully decline much slower than previously. Which I suppose would be a stabilised rate.

The numbers seem very discouraging to the layman and yet this bit seems very encouraging.
" Initial indications are that the revised fraccing methodology employed on the C-77H re-frac operation has been effective and could underpin a full field development, subject to funding, once the decline rates have been determined to be satisfactory."
Confused? I know I am!

Yes beadle, unfortunately I have now lowered my expectations to maybe getting out at 0.4 ish, just over double my current average.

Yes. So much for the name change meaning the start of a new era.

As BP says, I think the poorly worded rns's have created uncertainty. If they'd added something like, " we expect the flow rate to increase significantly once all the fluid is removed" (assuming that is the case) the reaction might have been different. Either that, or wait until a stable rate us achieved.

Just for completeness, the only number we have for 77h on restart us from the rns of 6th June.
" 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. "
That number is mix if 73h and 77h, so comparisons are meaningless.
Roll on, an rns saying we have something near 2 mmscfd. That would be jackpot time. Gla.

Ekegance. Yes I am sure. The increase of 3 to 5 times is based not on the rate for 77h on restart, but on the original rate from when it was first fracked in 2014. Thus from the March 2022 quarterly report.
" C-77H had initial production levels of up to 1.0 mmscfd. The Company believes that a successful re-frac stimulation could potentially increase production levels by 3 to 5 times."
The refrac on 77h is being done on only 2 zones anf will be more on a new well. The target from those 2 zones is 2 mmscfd which will indicate that 3 to 5 mmscfd can be achieved from a new well.
Also from the quarterly.
" The targeted new initial production rate from the two new re-frac zones is 2 mmsfd."
We don't actually have a figure for 77h on restart, so we can't tell how much improvement there is. Based on the above targets it would be a pointless comparison anyway. Atb.

Dunno Elegance, but a lot more than 0.5 mmscfd. Hopefully we'll get the target of 2 mmscfd.

know about anyone else, but I think I would have rather that once the refrac had finished, they waited the original 30 days they mentioned, until everything had stabilised , and only then issued a definitive flow rate.

Not sure what you mean VF. It's the flow rates that prove the principle. If they don't give a substantial improvement then the whole thing isn't viable. Not saying that's what's happening and the tone of the rns is upbeat, it's just that it's very confusing.

BP. Agree absolutely. All this and the previous rns has done is create confusion as to what the final flow rate might be. It is worrying that the current rate is still only 0.5 mmscfd, which is nowhere near enough to make a profit. If they are expecting a big increase they should say so. Either that or as you say, not release at all.

Well that's a bit of a mixed bag. No change in flow rate between 10% and 50 % of fluid being removed. On the other hand they results could underpin full field development. Confusing?
Presumably, the reference to funding means a potential jv. Hope so anyway.

I don't think any of us have enough knowledge to judge Conger. I have no idea how much the fracking fluid reduces the flow. I think they would have done better not to give a flow rate at this stage. All we can do, is wait and see.

Thanks Vf. Atb.

Fair enough Conger. As long as I can access the old records, it's not now a problem. Atb.

Just checked under OEX, and you are right the old records are still there. Wasn't expecting that. As long as I can still refer to them that's ok. Still a ridiculous situation though. Thanks.

How difficult can it be to differentiate between the old and new SYN? Also, where have they put the old OEX records? It's just ridiculous? Atb.

Ssccss. No doubt they do have to keep a record but that needs to be for the correct company Synovia. The fact is they have removed all the old Oilex records in error and replaced them with Synovia. I mean, it seems mind bogglingly simple. All they had to do was to change the Oilex heading to Synergia and keep everything else the same. I for one, found thr old rns's and news items an invaluable tool. Atb.

They just replied.
" Hi Gordon,
I'm not sure we're allowed to fully remove old RNS releases but I've passed it over to the technical team to check over all the same.
Kind regards
Craig"
Unreal. Talk about wrong end of the stick.
I replied.
"Thanks for the reply Craig. It's not a case of removing old rns releases. As I said the releases are in error and for a completely different company, which I believe no longer exists. I guess, that when it did, it used thr ticker SYN, hence the error.
Regards Gordon "