Member Info for InJamesweTrust

Additionally for a lot of majors the work still required in Namibia is a pain so letting ECO move it along the value curve makes sense to the..

Looks like Hurricane Energy are about to move from exploration to production but they were left with little choice by the industry to do so.
When you look at the Namibia prospects of 3.8bn barrels and post drill what a sale of Guyana may yield it makes alot of sense to drill then sell to fund Namibia - perhaps with a buyback/divi offer also.
The numbers for Namibia 3.8bn barrels and 80% interest make for bewildering calculations if there is any level of success. n converting those prospective resources to 2P/2C levels.

Its you
Interesting presentation, I wonder how content TOTAL will be e8th 4 proposed wells between now and end'20 on Guyana? I'd reckon they might have ambition to see more drilling.
Sensible approach from Tullow and interesting to see cost of Cormorant well.
Very interesting note from Hannam - once these prospects have had further analysis and been firmed up on Hammerhead results the output should be a real catalyst.

Biffa
Depdends what FFD constitutes. If it is an FPSO solution then I guess it is feasible that it will be signed off by 2020 and underway by then too.
To be fair, I think if 2019 goes as planned monetization will happen in H1'20 at the latest.

Biffa
Why not?

Rfts
RT has stated (quite often now) that within the first 6 months, the reservoir performance and operational capability of the Lancaster (and perhaps GLA). That being the case (i.e. the industry players buy into this), that would essentially move Lancaster/GLA to 2P and there is likely to be further clarity about the overall field size connectivity as would be amazed if it is not drilled by end Q4'19.
Allied to the drilling projected on the GWA to prove up 750m barrels which given prior CPR indication may prove up more - if the data from these drills aligns to the info acquired from GLA then such moves well along the 2C value curve.
By the start of Q1'20 there may therefore be 1.5-2.0bn barrels in GLA as 2P and anywhere from 500m to 2bn barrels on GWA (of which we have 50%) as 2C. Pick your values for those and work out where you think it could be.

Biffa
We didn't know as at that point the 2nd FPSO in the mid-20's was not mooted.
An objective look at the likely EPS cashflow if they get 20,000 bopd and $292m p.a. in free cash. So by end 2020 you have $600m. With $150m for drilling that leaves alot of cash for a further EPS solution. Take it through to end 2021 and you're at $750m the cost of a top end FPSO. Get a middling one and spend $300m change on sub Sea and Xmas tree and hey presto 200k bopd by end 2021.
So $3bn per annum cashflow at least 4 years earlier than currently envisaged.

AdUK
The multiple FPSO option made sense with or without Spirit. The ability of the BoD to have ordered some Long Lead Items in readiness for completing a secondary one on GLA was evident to anyone thinking outside the box.
The publication of such a plan to do this in order to monetise revenues would have been significant and could have seen the company producing 200k bopd by end 2021.
Stick that in a model against the mid-20's currently quoted by RT. No need to wait for GWA drilling have more than one on GLA.
The EPS revenue could fund drills also.
This has been mentioned by some more than a year ago and roundly dismissed.
I know my preference in terms of monetization.

AdUK
Haven't had time to properly look at the Edison interview but on a fly by review, am I right in seeing he mentioned a 2nd FPSO.....? That would be multiple FPSO's on the Rona Ridge......shurely shome mistake.....

Wonder if there is a bit being worked or something else afoot. Back if a drop though.

Arbitrader75
Problem with that is the people involved have alot to contribute.

The posts of the last 36 hours have descended into farce. Ricfle rightly called out that his treatment was over the top. Random reference to him in posts is over the top by some - he contributes alot of useful info to this board.
For his part in response he has adopted a wide ranging approach pulling in some perhaps not involved this time.
It cannot be beyond the capabilities of the individuals to resolve this - perhaps a meeting is a good way to go.
As a starting point I suggest leaving the 11th Aug photo behind and reference to the "other place". Another positive step would be to stop lazily referencing people in posts sarcastically. Do so to address their points by all means but let's try to quit the one upmanship about who is the big swinging dick of the oilfields.
Lots of people have valid contributions to make and the BB is a much better place when we listen to them and debate them.
Have a bit of fun by all means with those you know well enough to do so but NOT at the expense of others.
Reading through all this crap is getting very boring now.

Biffa
Nobody is suggesting the project has hit the skids, however delays to indicated possible delivery schedule are absolutely evident. Perhaps you are pleased it is taking longer - I am not.
The market is not stupid and the delays will be noted.
If you listen to the H1 crap AM could sail in March and still.make Foil but how.would we and the market react to such an eventuality while the BoD maintained radio silence because we are on target!
We are at least 2 months behind schedule as alluded to by RT himself that is at least $50 of revenue or a decent drill budget.
It is also about a third of the initial Spirit free carry... but that's ok It is just half the GWA.

AdUK
Ready for sail away but well keep her in Few and incur fees.
This also ignores the incentivisation of BW to get her producing.
It's like building a new factory then sitting in your office saying I wonder when we should start making stuff.
SURF is complete and timelines were designed to dovetail for a reason.
Such linguistic flexibility does not explain why RT would have introduced the Sept possibility.
Are you suggesting we would have a 6 month window where she was ready for sail away but we'd just keep her in Dubai as who really needs the $25m a month income or data to.prove the concept.
Nobody's waiting on that are they....

Not to rehash prior discussions but there is clearly a delay and it is now of the significant variety.

RT said previously the AM could be on site in Sept - these are not words he would have uttered lightly and they were spoken after the AM had been in dry dock for 6 months - by which point the condition of the vessel and the level of work required should have been well known.

The window for sail away was once Q2/Q3 2018 and subsequently tightened to Q3'2018.

In light of the above to suggest there is no delay is to have ones head in the sand. Perhaps it does not imperil oil in H1-2019 but it is clearly a delay in this part of the project for one reason or another. I dare say this was a question asked on the Analysts/Institutional call but what do we matter.

Think Phoebus is intimating we will no longer be a participant in Guyana by the time any more money is spent on Namibia in Q3'19/Q1'20. Hence, in the interim funds will be applied to Guyana prospect.

Can't see ECO ceasing to exist, if someone is interested in Orinduik it makes sense to split this out from Namibia and develop them separately within the corporate structure.

Given the proximity of the drill for Orinduik which Gil was at pains to point out will be early Q3'19 - tighter time windows, hiring of drill ship, naming of tagets, detail on multi drill program are all good catalysts for ECO. Along with detail on further analysis arising from Exxon activity.

Hereandnow
That's the point I was making - even a presentation is going to get the market swooning and see us jump to the $600m value Gil attributes to the field today.
However, some maths by TOTAL accountants or those elsewhere if confident in seismic might.
Maligned by some Malcy has stated many times we will not remain independent for too long.
He is perhaps wrong in that we will (for Namibia) but likely not as owner of our share in Orinduik

NPV10 of the revised EPS is c.$3.5bn.
Take $4 a barrel on 3bn barrels and you have a fiver a share.
Adjust the barrels and price per barrel how you desire.
For LanFax for each 1.25bn barrels on a 25yr NPV10 model it is about £8.00 a share but given time to achieve that would be discounted significantly.
Take 3x (3.75bn barrels) and it is £24.00 discount by 75% and you get £6.00 plus the EPS another £1 a share.
So if all goes very well £5-7 may be possible......
If they ever drill LanFax again!

Info on a new CPR would be useful but even a presentation that makes it clear to the less technically minded such as myself just how much Hammerhead-1 desrisks Iatuk would be really helpful. Similarly, if we get an idea that Iatuk now becomes a target with c.1bn barrels ECO can go some way to showing they have 15% of a largely derisked 1bn barrel field.
Market currently values that at a pittance so the Co. Need to get the message out.
Alas, May not rerate from market buying and selling but more from Corporate Activity if TOTAL (or other) decide they want the lot.
As mentioned before, $0.5 - $1.25 a barrel is a great deal above the current MCAP but still cheap compared to finding the oil from a greenfield development.
Then taking a chunk from Tullow to carry them and TOTAL are in the driving seat.

130p please Reverandy