Member Info for GreyPanther

Lots of interesting questions have been sent, no doubt, but S&S probably won't answer any of them that fall into the "too difficult " category. I reckon there will be quite a lot of those, but let's hope that's not the case. Roll on Tuesday!

Thanks for that, RNST. I'm not sure about "propant" in your spellchecker, though. My oily dictionary (and Egdon) seem to think it's a "proppant squeeze".

Could someone please provide a link to CJ's blog? We can then judge for ourselves whether it makes sense, or is yet more unsubstantiated opinion, as is sadly so often the case.

IMO it's a bit soon - if you can bear yet another reference to Wressle's extended development timetable - to think that it will turn out to be a damp squib. We know that Egdon applied to the Environment Agency for consent to carry out a proppant squeeze some time ago but we don't know if consent has been granted yet. I rather suspect it hasn't been, or we would have heard all about it. The EA has a well deserved reputation for working extremely slowly, and they are probably over-cautious because of a shortage of staff with O&G experience. And that was before COVID happened. The well should probably stabilise on free flow from the Ashover Grit within a few days (or weeks, maybe) but it might still not be at the best achievable rate in the longer term. It's quite possible that Egdon don't know precisely what the effect of the squeeze will be until they do it, but it was presumably part of their calculations to get the production up to 500 bopd. So the best Wressle flow rates could still be some weeks away, although I guess we might hear something in the mean time once the well has stabilised on free flow.

It all depends on what's really meant by "$10 in the ground' . If you are thinking of $10 / barrel for an already developed field with potentially recoverable oil still in the ground, I'd say fair enough. Even maybe a bit on the high side when the WN field life could possibly extend far into the future - think net PRESENT value. But if you mean $10 per barrel of undeveloped "oil in place" rather than recoverable, then in all honesty I'd have to say dream on.

As well as its spare capacity (ullage), does anyone know what that 2km distant pipeline actually carries? I suspect it won't be what I personally expect WN to produce, which is wet gas, plus some (possibly a lot) of very light oil and / or condensate.

Thanks for that, gkb47. It wasn't meant to be an exhaustive list, but I've checked FlueChem's website to see what it does for a living (bespoke marine bunkering solutions and on-board ship blending systems, for the abatement of SOx, CO2 and NOx). So it might be another relevant business, I suppose, although the company has been in business for only just over a year and FL has been a director there for the last 2 months. And he's quite young, aged 30, which is not necessarily a bad thing. I couldn't find out much about GP Jersey as it’s not strictly a UK Co, and it's presumably registered "offshore" in the Channel islands. In summary, I see FL mainly as an investor in Angus, rather than making much of a contribution towards getting Saltfleetby off the ground, should he join the board. But time will tell, of course.

Regarding the transport of the WN liquids to a nearby refinery, a pipeline would presumably be preferable in the longer term if the reserves turn out to be as substantial as we hope. It also might it be difficult to truck the liquids if they turn out to be condensate. I 'm only suggesting this because until we see the EWT results, we won't really know whether Rathlin / RBD will have to dealing with (presumably fairly light) oil or condensate.

If you go to Companies House website at:
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/iyrx-BiDmkjI4njc4edma9JSrbs/appointments
you'll see that Frazer Lang was a non-exec director at UJO for only six months from Dec '18 to June '19, and that he was (then) resident in South Africa. Shortly after resigning from UJO's board, Forest / GP Jersey seem to have sold most of their UJO shares, or at least reduced their holding to less than 3%. So it's conceivable that he might turn up on the Angus Board quite soon with a wealth of onshore experience. To be fair, this includes his exec directorship at Humber Oil and gas where the main activities seem to have been fairly short-lived involvements in the West Newton and Biscathorpe projects, in both of which he was partnered with UJO before selling out of both, probably with a decent profit. So here at Angus we can only await developments with interest.

I'm with AJamesW on this one. We know that Egdon have applied to the Environment Agency for consent to carry out a proppant squeeze, but we don't know if consent has been given, but I suspect it hasn't ben granted yet as the EA seems to work very slowly, probably because of a shortage of staff with O&G experience. And that was before COVID. The well should probably stabilise on free flow from the Ashover Grit within a few days but that might not iindicate the best achievable rate in the longer term. I suppose it's possible that Egdon don't know precisely what the effect of the squeeze will be, but it was presumably part of their calculations to get to 500 bopd. So IMO the best Wressle flow rate could still be some weeks away, though we might hear something announced in the mean time once the well has stabilised on free flow.

As I see it, issuing 150 million shares in the earlier placing, and now a further 15 million in the latest one (it's "only" a further 10%), makes me wonder whether GP Jersey / Forest kicked off about not being included in the first placing, and were being diluted. So they might well have insisted on being allotted a further 10% to avoid a dilution It's only my guess but, if it's true, it won't have exactly fostered the love affair between our CEO and Frazer Lang, regardless of the warm words in the RNS.

Hi Tacuma. Thanks for providing that link to EOG's useful summary of what each Wressle zone produced on test. I hope I've got this right, but if you add all the figures up, you get quite an interesting result. They all come to 351 barrels of oil and 2.203 million cu ft of gas per day. That's 367 boepd for just the gas if one uses 6,000 cu ft to a barrel of oil equivalent in thermal terms. The gas therefore represents slightly more than 50% of the combined 718 boepd for all the zones. To my way of thinking, this means that unless we are able to capture and sell all the gas produced (if and when all three zones are put into production, and not just the Ashover Grit as at present) we won't see anything near the full value of what Wressle contains. Does this seem correct to you?

Hi oldabutnowisa. Your interesting concept of a RBD - UJO merger isn't very likely to happen, in my opinion. RBD's exec team is a lot younger than UJO's, it's true. But have S and S been able to get the WN A-2 test programme moving at a decent pace, even though RBD is thought to 'control' Rathlin shareholding-wise? And I don't feel they've exactly set the world on fire at any of our other assets. So much for youthful vigour! However, my main reason for being dubious about such a merger is that all of UJO's licence interests are directly held and, apart from our 16.665% WN licence interest, all of RBD's licence interests are indirect investments. So, to my mind, the two sets of assets would not be a good fit, regardless of what one might think of their relative qualities. Regarding the 16.665% WN interest, I've been wondering lately why we hold it directly. After buying it, wouldn't it have been better to pop it back with Rathin's 66.67% holding? It could have saved RBD having to fund it 100%, although presumably they would have had to put a major share of the extra funds required into Rathlin. Maybe I've missed something important here, but if RBD's 16.665% interest were to be sold before the rest of the field is sold off, it could provide us with the funding for what might turn out to be a long but potentially highly rewarding exploration and appraisal programme.

I wonder what Forest's average SP is. They own 10% of the company, so it will be interesting to see what stance they will take if things don't go according to plan …. whatever that is today.

Notwithstanding the unwelcome placing of a further 1.36 billion RBD shares, which seems to have been done very efficiently, it’s good to see the technical info published on our website so soon after drilling the WN B-1 and B-1Z wells (it's the Jan '21 presentation under "Investor Relations"). Detailed stuff like this is usually kept confidential by the OGA for up to 5 years and, once the well info has been released, you can usually obtain only the un-interpreted logs and a few other things like the geological horizons that were encountered. So IMO they must be pretty confident. I thought the computer processed logs and the core photos on Slides 4 and 5 were particularly interesting, and they are most encouraging. We can now compare the B-1Z and A-2 Kirkham Abbey intervals, and see how good the reservoir really is. The ”before and after drilling” images in Slides 2 and 3 show exactly what happens to the KA when you move off the platform and down the slope into the Southern North Sea Basin, and demonstrate how the partners’ geological understanding has changed since WN-1 was drilled. Can you spot the re-positioned Cadeby on Slide 3. Here’s a hint: it’s labelled in very small writing.

There's a new presentation on RBD's website under "Investor Relations" this morning which seems to be identical to the one announced by UJO in their RNS this morning, and which is now on their website. I'm a bit surprised that ours presentation hasn't been more widely advertised.

It’s good to see UJO publish all this technical info so soon after drilling the WN B-1 and B-1Z wells. Detailed stuff like this is usually kept confidential by the OGA for up to 5 years and, once the well info has been released, you can usually obtain only the un-interpreted logs and a few other things like the geological horizons that were encountered. So IMO they must be pretty confident. I thought the computer processed logs and the core photos on Slides 4 and 5 were particularly interesting, and they are most encouraging. We can now compare the B-1Z and A-2 Kirkham Abbey intervals, and see how good the reservoir really is. The ”before and after drilling” images in Slides 2 and 3 show exactly what happens to the KA when you move off the platform and down the slope into the Southern North Sea Basin, and demonstrate how the partners’ geological understanding has changed since WN-1 was drilled

Hi gkb47. I recall your commenting on this matter a while ago but can't now find your posting. Could you please repeat what you said then, or maybe say where / when you posted. In all honesty, I think "XXX is leaving to devote more time to the running of YYY" is often a form of corporate shorthand, when they don't want to give the real reason. I'm reminded of a friend of mine saying that someone was "resigning to spend more time with his money". All the best.

The presence of C4 or C5 in the mud gases indicates that some - but not necessarily a lot - of liquid hydrocarbons are present in the reservoir. It doesn't necessarily mean that it will flow at a high rate, though. That will mainly depend on the permeability.

Mirasol. You may well be right. However, I recall that Frazer Lang (who was one of the people behind Forest / GP Jersey / Humber Oil) was given a board position at Union Jack in Dec '18. He resigned after only about 6 months, shortly before Forest sold most / all of their UJO holding. So, despite the fact that Forest now have 10%, I certainly wouldn't suggest that they have any inside knowledge. But we don't yet know which way they may jump. The Humber people have been advised in the past by Gneiss Energy regarding some previous transactions, e.g. the sale of their 15% Biscathorpe interest to UJO earlier this month. So I reckon Forest et al. won't be short of good advice, no matter what transpires.