Member Info for Ssccss

If there was anything better to say, they would have put it in the RNS. It's disappointing but not unexpected. Leading with peak flow rates is such a telling sign though because it gives such an incomplete picture.

How long do you think syn has before it really needs the 2.5m USD? Hopefully, the approval will come this week. GLA

Time lines are longer than I thought. So it will be months until next news. The presentation might lift the sp so they can raise some money because I'm not sure how else they would do it. They will probably need to consolidate at some point too.

Sorry I wasn't clear. Yes I agree with you but what I'm saying is we shouldn't need another statement of fact to clear up the RNS...

The RNS says second half of this year.

"88 Energy now plans to undertake post-test studies, including fluid testing to characterise reservoir fluids, and downhole pressure and temperature data analysis to determine reservoir properties, at distances beyond the depth of investigation of the wireline logs. These studies will then be integrated into existing data sets and models to refine appraisal and development plans for each reservoir, with pre-FEED studies expected to commence during 2H 2024."

Wasn't the RNS supposed to be a company statement of facts? The whole thing is very disappointing.

Unfortunately, there isn't confirmation yet that it is commercial and the figures in the RNS dont support that premise. 88e is an Explorer not a producer, so if it can't prove the field, it will be worthless to the company. We all await the resource report...

Wouldn't be surprised if the sp is pumped to try and get a placing done and forward sold. Point is the company will generally get their cash if they can find a way at the cost of the private investor

If it was that profitable or efficient, then a major company would have the lease...because everyone would want a part of it... That's the whole point. Its mainly retail investors who are willing to take a punt... I don't see any institutions lining up lol

When it doesnt look commercially viable or profitable.

That's my point skippy. I don't feel like we have actually learned any useful information that we didn't already know. They got some oil out. We were expecting that because PANR managed it. But as to whether it's commercial or not is completely unknown at this point. There is nothing in the RNS figures to even offer a hint that it might be commercial... And yet the wording by the company is very vague and forward looking. It appears in congruent to me. Every day is a school day.

Yes Stas in exactly the same way. I'm not IN PANR

A 50 peak flow rate literally means nothing.... That's why I'm annoyed they led with it in the summary. Flow rates are transient and inevitably drop off.

"oil cut would be expected to improve once stimulation fluid was fully recovered."

The word "EXPECTED" is really not enough here for me. Anyone can expect anything. Means nothing.

Well I was hoping for a correction or clarification to the RNS, but nothing so far. They could have put out a tweet clarifying the result.

SRBS... That was my view yesterday too. But it does say 4 stk bbls in the appendix and furthermore it doesn't actually say how many barrels of oil anywhere else at all.. Just a peak flow rate and how many barrels of fluid. So there you go. We are quite frankly none the wiser after the test IMO. Now it makes sense to me why the sp didn't build much up to the second test, because the first test was also ambiguous... Which is more of a problem IMO.

Ddraig, I guess a few weeks ago there was hope of good results (better than we have seen) and people were getting in for the build up to the first result. Now the results are out and are ambiguous, nothing else is due to happen in the short term. We are expecting a resource report so will have to see what that says... If its good, there will definitely be a placing/raise. If its poor then that's a significant issue in terms of keeping the company running.

Ok but peak flow rate means nothing really... It could have been just for a few seconds. There is no information in the RNS to give any practical significance to that figure. The issue is the data in the RNS and the way it has been written I. E. Putting the 4 stk bbl figure in the appendix but not providing any context for it in the main body. This has made the communication ambiguous. Honestly, doesn't make sense to me. If it's a good result the communication should be unambiguous. That's basic business skills. So either the company are inept at simple communication, inept at testing or the result was poor.

Sharebel, what is your interpretation of it then?? Because I have read the RNS multiple times and I can't find another interpretation that makes sense

Agree WB. I have made a 5k loss on this. My own mistake. Out now because I don't see this recovering any time soon.