Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
"Even if the outcome is poor the pure data is valuable as a model input, so we do not need to agree on whether it is poor or not". Older, I was just reiterating your stance previously that the figures were poor, well head pressure, flaring, and OG ratio, not your post, so I still think it is too early to call the results poor. But I agree that all data is good data.
I guess I was listening to two stories in my head regarding the wrong side of the river, so stand corrected, but the gas pipeline potential would be huge for both companies and my mentioning a jv regarding it was to strengthen the argument for the pipeline as having two companies so close to the Dalton highway and proposed route could sway the doubters. And lets not forget the opposition to the pipeline, the tree huggers and plant lovers, a show of strength would be needed against this almighty force who I believe are ready to go to court regarding this topic ;)
Older, I'm not sure that we can agree yet that the results are poor as we only have a part of the story. If the model was based on PANR input I'm not sure that would be classed as a positive in your eyes.
Also I thought regarding increasing acreage that they had stopped due to being on the wrong side of a river, or was that relating to another target? They did say that coming down that side was too far regards pipeline but that it was still a viable target for later.
As for joint venture, I still think it is regarding the gas pipeline and not the oil as both companies need a market for what they call a liability, and a large one if your assumptions are right about ratio.
He didn't deny and said it would be "premature" before 88E told shareholders the results. It does suggest that they would not turn their back if a request came. And certainly going forward they should be thinking about cost cutting (both companies) by sharing not just data. But MMO I agree neither party could afford a buy out of the other's lease.
Thanks Older, a slight shake but not definitive, but it does confirm that DH says lets wait and see and that both parties would have to be in agreeance. Interestingly he didn't say they weren't. I'm pretty sure I did not misrepresent that.
Also noted that he said he shouldn't share 88E analysis as that should be 88E to shareholders. Does that suggest he knows some or all of the results? Again my speculation but it does make it more interesting.
Could do with an update very soon though to help the SP along.
Mystic, it is partly relevant to 88E (and worth a listen when available) as they are our neighbours, using the same reservoirs, talking about cost per barrel, funding, timelines, potentials going forward, gas pipeline. All things that 88E will be talking about after a successful 2nd flow test and analysis of the reservoir(s).
David Hobbs and he was specific to a question that was asked about 88E. I also got the impression that it related to the gas pipeline but that is my thought. It will been saved on the PANR website under latest webinar but not as yet.
Did he not say that both parties would have to be in agreeance? Did he not say lets wait until we see what the flow results are? (or words to that effect) Shame on you for saying I misled when all I did was to repeat what was said.
Thanks Older, not sure if I will make it but I appreciate the note. As far as I could make out it has a lot to do with future funding but for holders not to expect money in the bank. I could read that as farm out possibly to raise funds for development.