Member Info for GreyPanther

Drill or Drop are having another go at Biscathorpe today.
Have a look at: https://drillordrop.com

HI Zoomer. Could you please translate "I'm in Reabold at 6.1"?. You can't possibly mean pence, can you?

It's often quite useful to look at what a company's previous management did, if only to be able to tell when the new lot start sniffing around the piles of cr*p left lying around the place. I'm sorry, but I've no great confidence that the present bunch of jokers will make a good job of the SF sidetrack, either. But I'd love to be proved wrong.

I've only a vague idea what a cornerstone investor is, so I'd be happy if someone could enlighten me please. For example, does it mean a large shareholder, either private or institutional, who comes in to help with a share placing, or is it just another word for an institutional investor? Thanks.

Thanks RNST. My comments yesterday were based on the same two slides. It's pretty obvious to me too that the reservoir in B-1 (which is on the KA slope) is very thin. It’s also significantly deeper than the B-1Z reservoir which is situated on the KA platform. Also, B-1 doesn’t seem - on the slide at least - to be well connected to B-1Z since the reservoir between the two wells is shown as very thin, and it maybe even pinches out in places. Hence my concern about the validity of the 118 metre hydrocarbon column. These slides also made me wonder whether Rathlin were able to obtain any pressure info from B-1 before it was abandoned. I can only assume they did, because it would have been needed to confirm that B-1 and B-1Z are in pressure communication, and therefore part of a single hydrocarbon column. From what we are shown on Slide 8, though, there might be two separate hydrocarbon columns only a fairly small distance apart, even though they are in the same reservoir formation. No doubt one of our technical experts / resident rampers will tell me this isn’t a fact either. But hey ho!

Hi Unabashed. Thanks for that. I'm always interested in what others on this and other bulletin boards have to say when I can see signs of independent thinking in their posting history, rather than "cut and paste" jobs. Rather sadly, independent thought is becoming a rare event on this board. All the best. GP

From a technical POV it may not be a great idea to get too excited about the reported 118 metre hydrocarbon column. I'm sure that the relevant RNS is factually correct, and the 118metres certainly far exceed any previously reported hydrocarbon columns. But to my mind there's still a big caveat. What we know with reasonable certainty is that the B-1Z well found 62 metres of gross hydrocarbons, probably both liquids and gas, and this is what's currently being teste . My expectation is that there will one or more tests of the liquids zone, and a further test or tests of the gas zone higher up in B-1 KA reservoir. All this will take quite a lot of time, hence the 6 week estimate. However, the missing 56 metres requires an explanation. It's quite obvious (to me anyway) that it wasn't seen in the B-1 well, which was abandoned to drill B-1Z, and where I recall that not much of the KA reservoir was found. My take on this is that Rathlin and their partners have quite reasonably measured up from the bottom of the KA in the B-1 well to the top of the KA in the B-1z well to achieve their reported 118 metre column. It's factually correct, but you won't see all 118 metres in any individual well. It certainly can't all be in the B-1Z well that is currently testing. I don't mean to be a kill joy, but that's how I see it. Call it a "de-ramp" if you will, but I see it as being cautious technically.

Hello Heid. Great to find myself agreeing with your sentiments as I occasionally see things differently to you. Are you expecting the Wressle PS result to be announced before or after the West Newton EWTs? I'm putting my money - what's left of it - on a Wressle RNS being first because Rathlin and its partners may wish to carry out both the B-1Z and the A-2 EWT before announcing the outcome. IMO this could add a few weeks to WN's schedule.

Hi feelinlucky. When you say there has been little Union Jack director buying and / or director shareholdings, this isn't really borne out by the facts. On page 20 of the company's latest (Dec '20) annual report you can see that the two exec directors both increased their holdings in 2020. Bramhill's holding increased to 83.3 miilion (pre-consolidation) shares, so that's about 0.417 million shares in today's terms, and worth about £125,000 today. O'Farrell also increased his holding in 2020 to 337.4 miilion (pre-consolidation) shares, so that's about 1.687 million in today's terms, now worth about £500,000. I don't know what they paid for these shares over the years, but they seem to have put at least some of their money where their mouth is. The two non-exec directors have fewer shares, which doesn't come as much of a surprise as their salaries re much lower than those of the exec directors. I also understand that when wells are being drilled or tested there are long periods when the directors are "insiders" and are not allowed to buy their own shares.

I've read the 30 June RNS several times and I'm a bit confused. It says "Following admission of the Second Tranche Shares on or around Wednesday 21 July 2021, the Company's enlarged issued share capital will comprise 516,777,031 Ordinary Shares". Can someone please say whether the last number includes all the shares that will arise from the loan stock conversion, or must these also to be added? Rather sadly, I'm thinking that they have still to be included. Any ideas please?

Thanks for that deemule. What do you think Corallian's (or the Victory Field) "planned liquidity event" might be? It could be either a Corallian IPO or a Victory trade sale, or maybe something else, maybe. The former would presumably get their share of the funds into RBD's hands more quickly, whereas the latter might not do this unless the Corallian directors decide to pay a dividend. I've no doubt the RBD directors on Corallian's board will help them with their decision making!

Hi Rubey. I was very interested in your Friday evening comment that Rathlin are likely at some point to be IPO'd. I can vaguely recall some speculation several years ago that Rathlin were looking at an IPO, but I think it was before RBD acquired their controlling ?59.5% shareholding in Rathlin. Have you heard anything more recently in this connection, or is it an educated guess / opinion? Wouldn’t it make better sense for RBD to buy Rathlin out completely, or maybe there are still too many non-selling Rathlin shareholders? Thanks, GP

I think the $18 per barrel that's being quoted is the full cost, including all the Wressle development costs. I read a while ago that the opex (operating cost) would be around $9 per barrel at 500 bopd. Most - but not all - of the operating costs are fixed. I would therefore say that an oil price of over $40 should give us a significant operating profit even at (say) 100 bopd.

Malcy certainly has a "terrific" track record, but it's a terrifyingly poor one, IMO. His blogs are an almost unbroken record of verbatim repeats of what client companies tell him when they publish an RNS. The blogs come without any serious analysis for shareholders' benefit. This shouldn't be a surprise, I guess, since I've been told that his client companies pay him a regular fee for what he writes. So, and this is just my opinion, his blogs are simply not an independent view.

Hi Rubey. Regarding the timing of the proppant squeeze, the Wressle community liaison group was told in early June by Egdon's CEO Mark Abbott, who presumably ought to know, that the PS results would be available in mid July. The process will apparently take only a few hours, with the - hopefully better - productivity quantified very soon after. IMO this means that the PS will not happen until early to mid July. We may, of course, see some equipment delivered to the site well before that. I can't now recall where I read this, but all the PS staff and equipment are apparently coming from Central Europe. So perhaps we shouldn't hold our collective breath just yet. On the other hand, I'd be very happy to hear that something is already happening on site. This would make me feel much more optimistic about the timing.

BobDoff; Thanks for that. GP

Hi ddboy. You say "in oilfield terms this is taking way too long" but you then say that your experience of onshore UK drilling is very limited. Wouldn't it therefore make sense to rely on the operator's estimate of 6 weeks for the EWT? I dimly recall seeing this period mentioned in one of RBD's RNSs, and we are only about half way through the schedule. I'd therefore be quite surprised to see anything significant published about the EWT for a few more weeks, IMO of course.

Hi RNST. Are you able to tell from the few close up pics or from the drone shots that have been posted here and I believe on Twitter, or even maybe take a guess, at which model of LRP they are using? This would be really helpful in estimating what volumes of fluid (? oil or condensate) is being pumped. I understand that some smaller LRPs are rated at only about 100 bpd, so I'm still on the cautious side. Thanks, GP

I think this modern flare stack will be used only to burn any gas and traces of liquids produced during the EWT. Any oil or condensate production would be separated off before it reaches the flare and stored briefly on site before being trucked away. I assume it could be sold (probably at a significant discount to Brent for small amounts) if there is much of it. I think the reason that small amounts oil may have been incinerated during the previous test of the A2 well was because no one was expecting it, but that's merely a guess

Hi ChimeyBleue. A valuation of "proved oil in the ground" at $10 per barrel would be reasonable, IMO, for a developed field with "still to be produced, proven and probable" oil reserves. WN is, as yet, neither developed nor even proved. I would therefore say quite a bit lower than $10. The going rate used to be about $4 per barrel for an offshore undeveloped oil discovery, and maybe around $6 for an onshore oil discovery. But we must also bear in mind the rising oil price (Brent is $74 today), which will make any such "guesstimates" a bit too conservative. I can't really estimate how conservative $4 to $6 might now be, since I can't recall what the Brent oil price was when I last saw undeveloped oil in the ground valued at $4 or $6, but it was certainly less than $74.