http://icebergshares.blogspot.com/2019/05/aaog-djeno-unmasked-aaog-are-looking-to.html
PS - seeing as 4 years is your time frame, 4 years ago today the share price was 0.52p. So Dave's actually delivered a 60% increase. Wow - not too many CEOs can claim that, and as so many on this board have summarised - the jam's coming tomorrow.
By comparison the FTSE 100 Index is up 6.4% over the same period. So we've outperformed the main index by approx 1000%. Yay - go Dave.
Class, 4 years of building the underlying value in our company. Thank you Dave.
4 years of moving us from a single unconventional prospect, to multiple company making prospects
4 years of increasing our acreage from 85,909 acres to 371,000 acres
4 years of getting us into an enviable position on one of the most prolific, yet under explored, oil regions in the world whilst interest was further North and is now moving near us
4 years of taking us from zero conventional prospects to 2200MMBO of conventional prospects
4 years of taking us from 431MMBO unconventional prospects to 800 - 2,000MMBO (on 73% acreage)
4 years of getting us to a point where we are able to attract multiple "tier 1" companies to bid on farming in to our acreage
4 years of executing 3 drills on time and to budget with 1 being an "out and out" failure.
Dave can control decision making and execution. He cannot control geology, physics nor the level of understanding/psychology of the market place. On the first I believe he is exemplary. On the latter, the market will catch-up once the level of risk is reduced or there is a more obvious value catalyst.
The thing with Jam is: you need to plant the fruit, grow the fruit, pick the fruit, cook the fruit and then put it in a jar. So given where we have been for the past few years (planting, growing, picking and cooking) of course it's jam tomorrow. But unlike Alice, we will get our jam.
FYI Oil exploration success rates are approx. 36% according to Dr Andrew Latham, Vice President, Exploration Research, at global natural resources consultancy Wood Mackenzie. Worth remembering that for every successful exploration well 2 duds have been drilled. Exploration is high risk.
Apologies if already seen - 5 months old, but a nice summary of 2019 on the North Slope. Lots going on.
https://www.adn.com/business-economy/energy/2018/11/17/big-exploration-season-and-major-projects-planned-as-oil-companies-see-north-slope-resurgence/
Dol03
http://www.pantheonresources.com/investors/presentations/597-agm-presentation-2019/file
Slide 17 - yes Discovery based on "Pipeline State-1" well (Arco 1988)
Interesting theory Woody - if true then are you suggesting this is just one participant forward selling? I presume CR would run into the millions of pounds.
Flat - is a data glitch. The mid-price is often reported incorrectly. Go off the bid/offer prices.
License extension confirmation was expected news and was reported as going to happen 29th Jan.
Maybe we’ll get aTR-1 in the morning confirming who sold down, I just don’t get why with all the news due someone would do that. Confused.com
Interesting time to unload over 1% of the company. Any hypotheses as to why?
Well slightly insignificant compared to the 254k sell that just came through...
Sure it was a buy?
Trades either side of it were 10.20 buys, and 10.075 sell...
Oil Majors Behind Flying Start To Hydrocarbon Exploration Activity In Q1 2019
https://www.forbes.com/sites/gauravsharma/2019/04/29/oil-majors-behind-flying-start-to-hydrocarbon-exploration-activity-in-q1-2019/#27553a2435bf
I took some comfort in the words in the AGM presentation of the 14th April:
"final due diligence and approvals underway prior to documentation and execution"
Whilst I'm not familiar with the governance on Capex release in Oil Majors, having worked in a number of FTSE 50 organisations, I know that there is a level of bureaucracy and process required to release budgets in large companies. Ironically the bigger and richer the company, the harder it can become to get budgets approved. And depending on the size of the commitment the more hoops you have to jump through. There will be finance and legal departments at minimum, as well as the exploration department. All 3 departments have their own processes and governance. For example, anything requiring over £500k-£1m of budget will probably require a CFO/Deputy CFO sign-off.
I also have no idea how long the final due diligence will take, but we're at least 2 weeks in as it was "underway" on the 14th. It could easily take a month from then....
Both 88e and Farmee will want to be hitting that permitted drilling window next season. If this continues much longer without DW having high confidence in closure, I would expect him to kick-off contingency Plan B (the next best suitor) in parallel which I think he would need to RNS.
In many ways I agree, no news is good news.
Sorry - what I meant to add to that is that I don't believe anybody had 3D seismic when drilling historically, which is the differentiation we have in our play. We should be able to more accurately target the potential reservoirs.
I also don't know how common fracking was on the North Shore when these wells were drilled, which I understand is now the norm for extracting from the Brookian - I guess as a result of the tight sandstone. Although this is speculation on my part as to why they weren't taken forwards.
BD1,
Welcome - there's not too much nicely summarised material out there. You can access the actual well files, but it's double dutch to me. Brombard may have something as he tends to have encyclopaedic knowledge on much that is going on.
There is the following here https://royaldutchshellgroup.com/2006/03/11/
"The southern part of the Unocal lease area lies around the Heavenly 1, Malguk 1 and Amethyst wells, Decker said. A mid-Brookian deepwater sandstone, 800 to 900 feet thick, forms a prominent feature in these wells, he said. These sands correlate broadly to the reservoirs of the Tarn and Mel****er oil fields to the north, but are fine-grained with relatively low permeability and porosity. Oil and gas shows are common, although the fine-grained nature of the sandstone may be more appropriate to gas production.
The northern sector of the Unocal leases lies on the same general trend of mid-Brookian rock deposition, Decker said."
The September presentation actually gives quite a lot of detail on Malguk and Heavenly here: http://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02020953.pdf
Why the wells were plugged and abandoned I'm not sure, possibly for the reason outlined above re: tight sandstone. What the 88e presentation above does highlight is that they believe Malguk missed the main fairway (slide 25).
More information here: http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/403780014.shtml
"Paul Decker, petroleum geologist with the Division of Oil and Gas, concurred with Myers and Mull. He said Chevron’s recent acreage expansion in the White Hills “gives them significant running room, possibly in pursuit of a thick package of Upper Cretaceous deepwater turbidite sands penetrated with good oil and gas shows in Unocal’s Amethyst and BP’s Malguk 1 wells.”
Both wells, he said, are on Unocal/Chevron acreage taken in previous sales.
“The same Upper Cretaceous interval was show-bearing in Phillips Heavenly 1 well to the north, and the sand depositional trend may extend onto Chevron acreage north of Heavenly,” Decker said.
“This sand package is well positioned to receive hydrocarbon charge. They lie close to and stratigraphically above the HRZ and Hue Shale source rock units — rich, oil prone shales at oil to gas window maturities in this area,” he said."
BD1,
I'm no expert at all, but simply put it is a technique used to take seismic data apply an algorithm and use it to describe the characteristics of rock properties - such as whether there are hydrocarbons or not. As Jennifer Aniston would say, "here comes the science".
"Seismic inversion is essentially a very simple procedure. In a seismic inversion the original reflectivity data, as typically recorded routinely, is converted from an interface property (i.e. a reflection) to a rock property known as impedance, which itself is the multiplication of sonic velocity and bulk density. In a conventional seismic reflectivity section the strong amplitudes are associated with the boundaries between geological formations, such as the top reservoir. This type of data is most suited to structural interpretation. In an inverted dataset the amplitudes are now describing the internal rock properties, such as lithology type, porosity or the fluid type in the rocks (brine or hydrocarbons). Inverted data is ideal for stratigraphic interpretation and reservoir characterization."
https://www.geoexpro.com/articles/2014/06/a-simple-guide-to-seismic-inversion
With regards to Indigo/Lima and Heavenly being described as Discoveries, there are historic wells on our acreage (Malguk, Heavenly etc.) that have oil shows at certain depths. When the logs from these wells are taken and analysed in the context of the results from the 3D seismic, the oil shows correlate to the depths at which the seismic indicate reservoirs. This provides increased confidence that the seismic indicated reservoirs are oil - hence the company has upgraded these to "discoveries".
Hope that helps.
Morning,
I have the utmost empathy for folk feeling frustrated and worried. It is a horrid feeling to see money you have sweated to earn reducing in value with nothing tangible to show for it. That sickening feeling when you see the share price plummet 30%+ on the announcement regarding failure of Winx-1, horrid.
For people who believe the Board are failing, and the company is going nowhere, I cannot fathom why they would stay invested - if you are right then the share price will continue to fall and your investment will reduce further. Far better to cut your losses, than stay in a company you believe is failing which logically means you'll lose more.
There's a brilliant book which is quite a light read "The Art of Execution" by Lee Freeman-Shor, and is definitely worth looking at. It's based on a study of 1,866 investments made by top investors and how they behave in the market place. It segments investors into 5 distinct groups who all have different behavioural characteristics, and also generate very different returns.
The first 3 are behaviour sets when in a losing position:
1) The Rabbits - who get caught in the headlights, take little action, and watch their investments dwindle away
2) The Assassins - who ruthlessly cut losses at 20-30% loss, limit loss but don't turn a losing investment around
3) The Hunters - use a strategy of averaging down at the bottom when in a losing position and turn the investment around
The final two are when in a winning position:
4) The Raiders - take small profits, but never run winners for maximum returns
5) The Connoisseurs - run their winners for maximum returns
Good luck folks.
Indeed that would be a good result. Would not only top up the coffers but would be great endorsement for future production from the well. Specifically:
"Pantheon's working interest in the Alkaid well increased from 75% to 100%, however Haliburton does have a back in right which would allow them to "back in" to a 25% working interest for an approximate 400% of the applicable sunk cost."
Spinefx,
You're welcome, and you did read that, although I think there was a bit of hyperbole in what was written ;-)
If the Eagle Ford story is of interest, these are also worth a look.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/article/South-Texas-geologist-led-the-way-to-the-Eagle-3040998.php
https://craveyrealestate.com/ns/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/The-Wildcatter_-Corpus-Christis-Gregg-Robertson-key-member-of-Eagle-Ford-discovery-named-2012-Newsmaker-of-the-Year-»-Corpus-Christi-Caller-Times-Mobile.pdf
https://stedc.tamucc.edu/files/Robertson.pdf
Good to hear your reasoned thoughts on Unconventional vs Conventional. Thank you.
Hi Spinefx,
It was drilled in 2008. See announcement below:
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/18837-petrohawk-makes-significant-discovery-in-south-texas
re: the HRZ IW2 operation, I find the explanation Dave gave in London last Autumn the most insightful where he talks about:
1) hydrocarbons appearing from the upper zone and then disappearing when the two zones were commingled
2) The over fracking of the Lower Zone with 70% of the proppant
3) the working hypothesis on how the Lower Zone (with larger fracking) with more gaseous Type 3 Kerogen curtailed the production of fluids from the Upper Zone which has more Type 2 Kerogen.
From about 7mins in on the link to the presentation here (thanks Brom): http://88ewiki.wikidot.com/av-interviews-presentations
I agree with everything you're saying by the way, I think I feel a bit warm and fuzzier about the HRZ potential though :-)
V111JAS,
I agree with that. For example, if operating in a different climate would we have executed the artificial lift in 2017 rather than having to wait a year and therefore be a year forwards in our HRZ play? Quite possibly.
Reaper007,
I'm with you. The data will be invaluable from both wells, and with the ongoing HRZ analysis and no RNS declaration that they don't think it will flow, confidence must be increasing/high after this length of time.
Re: Eagleford. I looked into this as there have been lots of references to Eagle Ford. It turns out that Petrohawk who discovered the play drilled just 1 well and declared a discovery, but initially declared as a gas discovery (flowed at 9.1mmcfd and put into production). They started with a 3,200ft horizontal well though and not a vertical. Within 2 years over 500 horizontals were drilled by multiple companies on the play. Anyhow, whilst I'm sure there were many wells which they used to optimise extraction, the discovery was made with just one horizontal well. So for us, and having listened again to the September London recording where Dave is clear that hydrocarbon fluids came to surface from the upper zone, but disappeared when they drilled out the plug between the upper and lower (with a working hypothesis that the more heavily fracked lower zone gases escaping prevented the upper zone fluids from coming to surface) getting that lateral drilled in the upper zone feels like an exciting next step.
Although it does beg the question on whether or not we should try the lateral on our own pre-FO. I can see both sides of the argument. If successful - we would be in a great position to negotiate with FO partner. If unsuccessful, our position would surely be weaker and I don't like to think about what would happen to market sentiment. Tough one, but I guess the least risk is with bringing on a partner asap, even if that means lower returns.