Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Anyone that has kept their eyes open, now knows where to look for the facts, 4 barrels of oil total flow to the stock tank.
Good that the GOR is low though
Appendix A
Item J
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 stk bbls.
No measurable gas or NGL’s were recovered from the SMD-B test.
Gemstar
I see you have produced your evidence for the 10% "worrying" PANR short, without realizing it is a running total, the number at the top is the percentage that is currently held short by Mangrove
It is a pity it is only 1.53%, not the 10% you got by adding all of the running totals together, as the short squeeze would then be simply astronomical, as the stock price continues to rise
Adnauseam 14:44
Thanks for the efforts, but it is of no use in this case, as the Hickory well has been fracture stimulated, perforation is just one of the steps in stimulation. The link is for a situation where only perforation has been used, such as a high porosity conventional well.
MMO
You are being even more foolish now, and to be fair to Geodes, Tep set him up, by not including the hyper links I included to 88es study, that came up with the well numbers for the different SMD zones
Here is the entire post, reposted for MMO, who I see it was posted to in the first place
MMO
In the interest of the genuine investors here, I did a little digging on the SMDB being flow tested currently
From the facts, all to be found in
https://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02655754.pdf
Shelf Margin Delta (SMD A, B & C) best estimate 140 m barrels net to 88e
(Based on a reinterpretation of a 2d data set, no changes made post acquisition of 3D data)
https://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02612833.pdf
SMD phased development study completed
SMDA 126 producing wells
SMDB 80 producing wells
SMDC 70 producing wells
All up 276 wells for the A +B +C, which makes the 80 in SMDB 29% of the total
So how big is the SMDB estimate, 29% of the 140 total estimated by 88e, round that up to 41m barrels
Should 88e have complete success they will prove up 41 m barrels
Not such a surprise when the net pay is considered
Gross pay in the entire SMDs A + B+ C is healthy ~540 ft
Net pay (the bit the produces oil) is only ~95ft
29% of 95 ft is ~ 28 ft of net pay in the SMDB reservoir
88e will aim to fracture stimulate into as much of this 28ft of pay distributed over the SMDs assumed (540 x 29%) gross pay of 157 ft. Quite achievable as fracture heights routinely propagate over 200 ft from the perforation cluster pack point of origin. (20ft in the USFS case)
MMO
No No MMO,
The estimates red herring you threw out always was the subject, your post
"All you do is make assumptions and claim them to be facts, using 88's RNS estimates, yes, estimates to claim as your proof. You're not fooling anyone here mate."
Rather foolish, when estimates are used for the very class of resources in question, including the 250 m you just used
MMO
Your ability to misinterpret is legend, no surprises there
Back to the estimates you so easily dismissed before you dodged away on a tangent
The 250 m you so happily quoted was also an estimate, but a pity you did not use the correct number of 28 m barrels of oil and 57 m barrels of NGLs net to 88e
MMO
If you think that is a dismissal you are more of a fool than I thought, Geodes is questioning some of the assumptions, in generalizing the data on oil saturation etc across the A ,B and C reservoirs. (No choice but to do so as 88e have not given the individual data)
But makes no comment on the central component, which is taken from the 88e reservoir development plan
MMO
Obviously you are unaware that the basin figure is an estimate also
MMO
Here is your nonsense
"We have 250M alone in the basin"
88e are clear on this and have already announced their share or the basin is 85m barrels of combined oil and NGLs
Do you not know this or are you being dishonest
MMO
Can you point out the nonsense to the wider audience
Taxi
To complete the logic in your assessment, factor in what PANR are doing to get the market to recognize that $5 to $10 per barrel
They are taking the discovered, vertically flow tested, horizontal multi stage flow tested, up dip, superior reservoir to production, because right now the stock market is valuing their IER booked contingent barrels at 26p with another 1 billion of lesser proven barrels thrown in for free
Taxi yes, perfectly fair to sum all of the reservoirs that are economic,
These two flow tests, are to begin to prove up a flow rate and fluids composition, that makes further flow testing investment justifiable
The fact that the BFF has not been flow tested is a red flag on its commercial potential. I have no worries about NSAI's estimates of 85m of salable liquids to 88e in volume, but only a flow test will prove its commercial extraction value
The upper SFS, looks a poor fluid composition, and there is no guidance to recoverable volume
As to the remaining targets, SMDA and C and the Lower SFS, without a flow test in this location, they are unknowns
Note PANR have flow tested the SFS, but claim no contingent barrels from it at all. SMD A + C have not been flow tested, as they are lesser reservoirs on PANR leases, so again not claimed as contingent presently
Taxi
It is calculated from the development plan 88e put out for the SMDs
Shelf Margin Delta (SMD A, B & C) best estimate 140 m barrels net to 88e
(Based on a reinterpretation of a 2d data set, no changes made post acquisition of 3D data)
https://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/02612833.pdf
SMD phased development study completed
SMDA 126 producing wells
SMDB 80 producing wells
SMDC 70 producing wells
All up 276 wells for the A +B +C, which makes the 80 in SMDB 29% of the total
Chrisev1
Then I invite you to unwind them
At least you are agreeing the facts are real, better than some of the head in the sand pumpers
Taxi
Using your analogy, what happens if you spend the money and your house remains the same size.
In effect that has been the outcome at Longhorn, they keep spending, get a short term boost, they drift back again
Its the nature of a depleted stripper well operation, they continually spend to restore production.
Some of the wells are only doing 1 barrel/day
In the future when it stops being viable, there is then an abandonment cost for 88e to finance somehow
Chrisev1
1 fact, can you count
Facts
Flow off oil 24.8bbls
Flow of gas 1.45mmcf
Flow back duration 111 hrs
Estimated volume 140 m bbls recovrerable
29% of 140 m is 41m
Need I go on
Chrisev1
The flow rates are undeniable facts, taken directly from an 88e RNS
This is the reddit poster, that produced the last flare picture
Last pic 3 days ago, with no flare, so maybe soon,
https://www.reddit.com/user/jam1533/
Taxi
Go to the accounts, note how the asset value of Longhorn has gone up, as cash is injected to try to improve flow rates
Creative stuff, moving expense/spend into asset value
You will see they are spending more than they are earning
Its a pattern now, anyone that posts a thorough analysis, with referenced facts, or a logic backed opinion, is subject to an abusive put down of their character.
Note, not of their arguments, as the posters are unable to dispute the facts, or logic
It is the exact pattern through all of the other pump and dump cycles, food for though in the thinking mind
Back to the current facts
24.8 barrels of oil flowed over 111 hrs of flowback in the USFS reservoir, with 1.45mmcf of accompanying gas, be generous and say an average of 42 bopd for a total of 14hrs. That is a very short oil flow test, PANR did 5 days of oil flow in their test, at an average of 45 bopd, with the handbrake hard on, to minimize flashing in the reservoir.
The volume of gas 88e produced, suggests the handbrake was off, and the gas pedal was fully down
A GOR of 58000 scf to 1 barrel of oil, research that for an idea of how poor it is
Even allowing for over producing, to gain a high headline grabbing oil flow in the test, halve that to 29000 scf/bbl, see what your research concludes
Now awaiting the flow rate on the SMDB, with an 88e, info derived estimated 29% of the pre estimated recoverable 140mm bbls. That 41 mmbbls is the success case in SMDB
Reasonable to expect a flow rate, sure, the question will be is it economic
To prove that will require another drill, horizontal multi stage frack and long term flow test. Plan for a cost of $25 to $30m for this
Farm out or sell, possible, but don't expect good terms. PANR with a massive resource, in a much more favorable updip geology, with a long term flow test showing a 10000 ft production well with the appropriate frack, in their worst geology would yield an IP30 of 1500bpd. Opted to go into production to bypass the need to deal with the circling sharks