Member Info for Olderwiser

Taxi

That is classic 88e

Yes it is the first time 88e have flowed oil to surface, it in no way means it is a commercial flow

Substantial scale, by whose definition, compared to Longhorn, maybe, but wont fly in Alaska

Second successful flow. jeez 4 barrels, I guess its true the 4 barrels did successfully flow

Given 88e have never flowed oil before, anything is outstanding after 7 complete fails

As with the BFF having volume, is no help if it wont flow at an economic rate

Taxi

It is a classic wool pull

Banditputin1

That is pretty simple, that was a year ago, since then PANR have had a great flow test on the SMDB, 45 BOPD average over 5 days with the hand brake on, and a measured GOR of 3000 to 4000 scf/barrel, with an additional ~30 bbls of NGLs at C5+ and above to add to the 45, say 75 bbls of salable liquids

88e Hickory in the same reservoir but downdip got a best of 4 barrels over the 16 hrs in which oil was produced.

There was hope until the actual test results emerged from the spin, with the 50 bopd peak now revealed as a total of only 4 barrels produced

Taxi

That searching for a partner is a piece of fluff, anyone can say that and still claim it is true, even if you know there will be no realistic chance of securing a partner

Look over the fence, they have the real deal in assets, order of magnitude better, but chose to go alone, as we all know a partner that does not adequately value you, is liability

Treeshake, MMs, shorters, burnt investors, what manner of misinformation will you try next

The answer is simple, the flow rates were poor, they needed top tier flow rates, the gilding the lily has not worked

The market is adjusting

Skippy

They are very reluctant to move on from failure, still holding candles for Merlin, Charlie, Umiat

Barno

That was a year ago

Since then PANR have had a great flow test result, and 88e just had this bad one

SMDB 4 barrels in 16 hrs

USFS 19 barrels in the best 10.5 hours they could find

Both tests stopped before sustainable flows could be stated, I have to think that is a bad thing. Otherwise they would have flowed for longer

Who was the genius that calculated this £20 to £40 million a year

With such low flows and a $17m drill and complete cost, it just will not happen

Ssccss

There have been a number of formal complaints laid with the ASX, I think this is the result, a reluctant clarification

Openhiemer

Did you seriously think you could post a series of rampy B/S, and that would fix a production of 4 barrels of oil problem in the SMDB, one of 88Es best targets

Looks like a fresh batch of pumpers have hit the board, talking big

But the company just confirmed the numbers

4 barrels from the SMDB

24.8 from the USFS

Multiply by 12 and its still small

US $17m for a well that produces those rates will go broke

Openhiemer

Yep the numbers are clear

SMDB 4 barrels in 16 hours

USFS 19 barrels in 10,5 hours

Poor numbers

Sharebel

You ask investors to ignore the facts, and just follow your shameless ramps, MMs to blame, not the geology, and so on

I bet the ones you duped are spitting tacks right now

Taxi

The ASX close was a last second spike to .5c, look up marking the close. It is a pattern close to a capital raise to see this kind of price support

My screen shows a trading range of .004 to .0045 all day, with only one last second spike to .005

Which is supported by the VWAP of 0.00445

Taxi, you can and should dismiss the 70bopd rate, it is not sustainable, and only gets in the RNS as a fluffer, to give false hope to the gullible. The average is the only number that counts, and as in my earlier post 11 hrs is not long enough to make the average meaningful

Oil wells must have sustainable flows, if you are going to count this peak, you must also count the trough of 10 bopd.

Then average it all together for a meaningful number, after all the economics are determined by the daily production rates over a year.

Then you have to factor the decline rate over a year, eg PANR have modelled their SMDB, at 4000 bopd at IP30 (average over the first 30 days), which translates to 2000bopd average for the 1st year of production, because tight oil reservoir have a sharp decline rate, 50 to 60% being quite good

Finally 88e has been made it clear, the USFS flowed at a CALCULATED 42 bopd RATE for the best 10.5 hrs during oil flow cut, and the 70bopd was only for 30 minutes

The SMDB was much worse at only 4 barrels in 16hrs, and the 50 bopd was momentary/instantaneous

So to be clear, no sane investors can multiply instantaneous peaks, by 6 to 12x, to arrive at an expected production rate from a horizontal.

The numbers to use must be sustainable flows, and neither of these tests ran for long enough for 88e to include the words, sustained flow.

Investors are left with incomplete results, and the question, how could 88e have so mismanaged, flow testing on a pre existing well, that they ran out of time to do the job properly, on both tests.

Just another 24 hrs on each would have been much more indicative of the potential

So what are the numbers using the most optimistic assumption that the calculated rates are sustainable, and the upper range of the 6 to 12 is used

USFS 42 x 12 = 504 barrels

SMDB 6 x 12 = 72 barrels

USFS

“During the established production period of 10.5 hours the well produced at an average oil flow rate of ~ 42 bopd during the natural flow back period, producing a total of ~ 19bbls of oil. Approximately 6bbls of oil was also recovered during the clean up / non-established production period. • The USFS test produced at a peak flow rate of over ~70 bopd, which was an instantaneous rate calculated during flow back period via an oil tank volume measurement of 1.55 bbls over a 30 minute period. “

SMDB

“The well produced at an average oil cut of 4% following initial oil to surface, with instantaneous rates observed during the 16-hour period varying as the well continued to clean up at managed fluid flow rate of ~170 bbls/d with a calculated total volume during the flow back period following establishment of oil cut of ~4 bbls of oil. • The SMD-B test produced at a calculated peak flow rate of ~50 bopd, which was an instantaneous rate calculated during the flow back period via a measurement of observed oil cut and fluid flow rates”

Https://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02796819.pdf

There it is confirmation that USFS 42bopd is a calculated value, achieved by picking the best 11 hrs of production, in which 19 barrels are produced.

No explanation of the SMDB 4 barrels

It is a shocker, in the way this has been spun

Sharebel

Instead of posting huge amounts gibberish, focused on personalities, and conspiracy theories about MM holding share prices back.

Why dont you put your energy into something meaningful . like the truth behind 4 barrels in the tank v a 50bopd flow rate

Imagine the positive effect you would create if you could demonstrate that 50 bopd was a sustainable rate v the one quarter bbl per hour 4 barrels in 16 hrs calculates to

Ausnsw

When you tell a lie, dont be so nerve wracked when it gets called. Wriggling away from your lie, by recasting it as an assumption, is a poor excuse

As to your question I tend to ignore Taunts, as they are meaningless to knowledge acquisition

But here goes, yes PANR dropped from its high, and yes it was still good value there.

The reason it dropped was a dishonest sustained short attack that was able to exaggerate a few unclear results, such as the high GOR (12k to 14K/bbl) displayed in the Alkaid long term flow test, that had an IP 30 of 505 bpd of salable liquids v the expectation of 750 bpd of oil.

All of which has subsequently proven to be no problem, so no basis on fundamentals for the beat down

So in fairness, should you not also be commending those same posters that commented on the extra ordinary value PANR held at 10p ,20p, 30p and probably 40p, 50p, £1, £2 and so on

The important fact in relation to funding, is the timeline at which funding is required.

The quoted $150 m included 3 delineation/exploration wells in Kodiak, with $120m being for initial production in Ahpun, including G&A till then

What is required is a funding stream that draws, as required, with the bulk of it being at the back end, where drilling, hot tap and refrigeration plant are paid for. This will place the heavy expenditure close to receipts of oil revenues

Funding options, be it vendor, off taker, reserve backed lending, debt, or equity, will be accessed as needed, not some big pile of cash sitting in PANRs bank account earning less interest than it costs to have

More a commitment to advance services when required, by say the vendor client.

I understand the impatience by investors to rip off the plaster, pre fund everything now and tell the fudsters where to stick it. But that option would although satisfying, lead to greater dilution than required, so I am happy to let PANR follow the path they have laid out (minimize dilution) , continue to build the share price with more IERs and other progressions

Raise small amounts via equity if required against an ever improving share price if prudent, the end goal is clear $5 to $10 per barrel, of an ever increasing amount of resource, with vastly improving flow rates, significantly above the now ultra conservative modelling, used in the base case that delivered $10/bbl at $80 ANS oil price