Member Info for GreyPanther

Thanks for your analysis RNSTranslator, and I don't disagree with any of it. Regarding the Petrichor / George Yates situation, I'd be pretty p*ssed off too. But fracking in the UK was always going to be a gamble with our small, faulted sedimentary basins. So, rather than owning (?)34% of Egdon, which seems to have nearly run out of cash, I'd let them raise some further funds and not participate if I'm short of cash myself. Yates could then be diluted to a more sensible ca. 29.9%. Still, I guess our problems aren't quite as serious as his must be.

Thanks Heid and lunus. That's reassuring. I assume the oil tanks are fairly visible to a passer-by.

Thanks for that, Heid & lunus. I guess those oil tanks are easily seen by a passing observer, which is good news. Maybe we'll get another update soon, even if Egdon don't give us one for the next week or two.

Hello Heid. Can you say where you found your quote …. "I can confirm that oil tanks are now on site at Wressle. More equipment arriving tomorrow. Work over will start soon".
Was it on this board or somewhere else? Thanks, GP

Someone said on ADVFN's EDR board that they emailed them this morning regarding their prelim results and Mark Abbott replied as follows: "The results are in the final stages of being finalised and we expect to issue these towards the end of November. We will provide a notice of timing ahead of release". So we'll have to wait a bit longer, it seems.

Hi Manwell. I'm not an operations type, but I'd expect them to do both. However, I don't think it will take very long if all goes well. We've been told there was a Schlumberger truck on site, but we don't know if they've also obtained a cement bond . Are these mandatory , or only advisable these days?

If that's correct, and Rathlin really did have 1,312 metres of (drill) pipe in the hole earlier this afternoon, then the drill bit will probably be back down at the well's current TD by now, or very soon. I reckon that's near the top of the Zechstein section, and it shouldn't be long until they're ready to drill ahead. Maybe they'll have to conduct a pressure test first, but that shouldn't take too long, all being well. Then there are - maybe - only a few hundred metres left to drill.

If 1,312 metres of (drill) pipe were in the hole earlier this afternoon, then the bit must be almost at the current TD by now. It shouldn't be long until they're ready to drill ahead, but maybe a pressure test first?

I understand, thanks. I always enjoy RNSTranslator's posts as he seems to be very well informed.

Hi Lenin. Your post has little to do with Egdon, other than your passing reference to Wressle, so it might be better if you posted it on UJO's board. Have you any thoughts for Egdon holders, other than getting into gold shares? Back to Egdon and RNS Translator's comment: I would have expected to see their annual results to 31 July '20 by now, so maybe they will be delayed to see Wressle on stream. Does a company's annual results still have to be published within a six month period, or are they allowed longer in the current Covid era? That would give them at least until the end of January '20, maybe longer, to get their funding sorted out. Or does yesterday's seller know something that we don't know?

The 9 5/8" casing been run, according to well site pics, and I reckon sufficient time has passed for it to be cemented by now, so that logging truck could be there to run a cement bond log. They need to know the cement job is really sound before they drill into the Zechstein, where the pressures can be grater than the regional gradient. If that's right, then it will only be a few more days until we see the KA. I still don't think we're there yet.

Hi RNSTranslator. You have probably hit the nail on the head. I too have wondered if Egdon are still a going concern. I would certainly hope they are for the sake of the Wressle project, if nothing else.

Here's a link to a video taken from UJO's board:
https://twitter.com/hullpete1975/status/1323914238830682114
It looks like fairly large, possibly 9-5/8"casing to me. If that's the case then we must be near the top of the Zechstein, possibly with only about 200m vertically to go to reach the Kirkham Abbey

Egdon's annual accounts (to July '20) are due to be published soon. I assume we'll learn something then - but when?

Hi Alexios. I think "CoS" could be useful if analysts like Shard would distinguish between the geological chance of success (that some hydrocarbons will be found) and the commercial chance of success (that hydrocarbons will be produced commercially). At WN there is obviously a very high chance of the former but, as you say, the jury is out on the commerciality until we see an EWT or two.

Alexios. Deloitte's CPR is dated June '17 so it predates the A-2 result. The latter will probably have changed Rathlin's perception of the CoS. I agree that Shard aren't qualified in this area, so I assume they got their CoS via UJO from Rathlin. Also, I struggle a bit with a Cadeby COS of 26% but we now have two wells, one of them cored, and oil shows apparently in 2 out of 2 wells.

Hi Alexios. Thanks for the link to that paper. I too was surprised at the suggested recovery factor, so you might like to have a look at UJO's home web page: Shard Capital Research, July 2020, page 10, as suggested by Kristof's posting at 16.03 yesterday . There is, however, a positive factor at WN that's not apparently been seen in many other onshore Zechstein gas fields that could improve the recovery factor here. We didn't see a gas / water contact in WN-1 nor an oil / water contact in WN A-2, so water break through would probably be more difficult here.

Hi SecretBlueprint. Could you point me to that diagram please? The only one I can find is a well schematic in the Shard report, which is also shown on Reabold's website. If that's the right one, I didn't think it was very helpful as no depth scale was shown. It also shows the proposed B site wells incorrectly since we now know that B-1 is to be a deviated well. Regionally speaking, the Zechstein formations dip gently to the east so, as the B site is south-east of the A site, any wells drilled from it should generally see the Kirkham Abbey a bit deeper, IMO. The real problem, though, is that all the WN wells to date seem have been deviated. So, unless you know the exact bottom hole location for each well, which I don't, it's not really possible to say. Regarding the 72% chance of success shown in the Shard report, it looks to me as if they were talking about the KA gas, rather than the oil. This seems about right to me. It's probably a coincidence, but 72% is also their recovery factor. If the KA were actually to be deeper here than at the A-2 well, then we should see oil again, and possibly even an oil / water contact, if there is one. Mind you, this is only my speculation, so please take it with a pinch of salt.

Hi Kristof. Thanks for the info. I wonder how Shard calculated it? I assume it must be just for the KA target since it's so high, but it doesn't seem unreasonable with two KA wells already successful at WN.

It's far too easy, with our SP where it is right now, to forget that there's plenty to be optimistic about at WN. JustBe was asking about the chance of success at B-1. I can't recall seeing a figure from the partners, but please say otherwise if you've seen one. We should perhaps bear in mind that the average success rate for appraisal wells (which is what B-1 is) is only a bit better than 50% on a global basis. But it's much better than that in the North Sea and adjacent onshore areas, where the geology is mostly very well understood. Obviously nothing can be a dead cert, but surely we can still be "cautiously optimistic" - as they say - whatever is going on / not going on at the moment.