Xarfax, I took a step back today, many posters I didn't recognise and many just looking to disrupt.
Hoping for a release tonight, maybe wishful thinking but one would settle the sp up or down. We just need confirmation that it was a good flow test, a good reservoir, and explain the bopd figure used by a few to lower the expectations.
I wish everyone well, especially the LTHs as we can't sell at this price.
I get that Brombarb, but no harm in the company keeping in contact with their shareholders even if it's just to say after the successful two extra wells in Texas we expect to lift over 600bopd, or that we have increased the original investment in Namibia to nearer the 45% (company now a top 20 shareholder) or Leonis is closer to farm in/out. I don't get the lack of communication, even if it's just to reiterate.
As for the 10 day someone mentioned, it maybe came from the original timetable for Flow Test one, but we know that never happened, so my guestimate would be Friday at the earliest, however I did expect reservoir analysis on the first test before now.
ASX below avg volume, down 7% at this time.
No update on flow test/reservoir results, no update on Leonis, no update on Texas, no update on Namibia, silence does not help the cause.
I keep thinking maybe tonight, then maybe tonight but nothing. Maybe tonight?
Nevers, you just lower the tone by your comments, no need.
The news I expected to hear was regarding flow test one and the reservoir break down. This was to take about 4 days after the flow result so no reason why I shouldn't expect it today.
Older, 4 cylindrical fixed roof storage tanks on site, which hold a minimum 100 barrels. I assume they would also have had to leave room for the 2nd test input and subsequent long term testing later. Maybe not that much storage after all.
If there is going to be an update today it will be in the next 15 min :)
Older, it looks like I have been a bit simplistic in my well head pressure thinking, so thanks for filling in the holes.
As for barrels, the full barrel measure was just for oil with the gasses removed, which sounds like the actual lift was greater.
Also I'm guessing that the on site storage restrictions for oil etc may be a reason why the test was short? This would explain why they didn't continue testing as they expected all figures to improve with time. You can't keep pumping oil if there is nowhere to put it.
Another interesting fact regarding the amount of barrels flowed during test, this measure was only during the period when the standard atmospheric pressure and temperature were reached, so not over the full testing period. Maybe that answers the question posted earlier as it refers to (stock) stk barrels. And maybe the gas oil ratio not as high as some suggest?
If someone on this board could influence me to buy/sell 88E it wouldn't say much for me, so I don't get the ramp/deramp.
What I do get is an opportunity to question facts, figures, opinions, and go and check to see who knows what they are talking about. I learn every day I am on here just by fact checking, so nobody gets binned by me. Unfortunately that also lets a few nutters slip by :)
One fact I did learn today was that even though 88E showed 2000psig well head pressure during natural flow it could be much higher in the reservoir as it can lose up to 80% on its journey through various gauges, filters etc.
Older, I think you are being economic with the facts. You used the ratio regarding 42avg as oil flowing for 14 hrs yet you used the full gas and NGL figure for 111 hrs which strengthens your argument for an extremely high gas to oil ratio. Or am I reading your post wrong? Happy to be corrected :)