RE: martin hulls view26 Feb 2020 11:22
I asked some further questions, previously asked by fellow investors on this board to Martin. these questions were regarding the recently drilled well in the eastern cube, lack of information release and the issued Wizard asked concerning the exploration well in santa cruz ( reliability of seismic data).
below is his response:
As I mentioned previously I do understand the frustration.
Exploration is a high risk business and whilst we all hope for a very positive outcome, by its nature that is not always the case. That doesn’t change the real impact of the commercial failure of the exploration
You will appreciate that I am unable to engage in a conversation that reveals any previously undisclosed information. The only way we can reveal sensitive information is via the RNS mechanism. Those rules are in place to protect small investors like yourself. The alternative is what used to happen in previous decades where certain investors got an advantage through access. You will I hope understand that in seeking to be a corporate citizen with the highest integrity we want to, and simply must respect those rules.
I did want to correct a couple of inaccuracies.
We clearly stated in the RNS that at the well location the tested intervals do not meet the commercial threshold by themselves. Again as stated we estimate the commercial production threshold is approx 1 mmcf/d. The tested rates are below that. However there are additional intervals of potential interest which we have not tested. We are looking into whether those intervals might combine with the tested intervals (or indeed by themselves) to meet the commercial threshold. As you would expect we are doing a detailed cost benefit analysis on our options. We are unable today to draw any further conclusions other than the tested intervals are not commercial.
With regards to the Campo Limite well, is was an exploration well. You will appreciate that the published CPR figures on the Santa Cruz Sur assets are for 1P and 2P reserves. Exploration does not impact these reserve numbers.
In terms of information disclosure I take this very seriously. I have asked my team to compare our disclosures vs our peers. I have had it reconfirmed that we provide more than similar peers and substantially more than our regulatory obligations. We hope to have a revised and updated investor presentation available in due course.
As we look forward I believe there is much to be positive about. In the short term the Campo Limite testing will provide a result in the near term (clearly there remains both risk and real upside). Meanwhile the production optimisation / enhancement at SCS is tangible and with a different risk profile to exploration. Nevertheless the continuing exploration potential in the Tapi Aike license remains and this has always been considered the potential ‘game changer’