Member Info for tonynorstrom1

Tells us Botox - what is the rise in commission costs - do you know ??

Majid has stated that the wells add between $3m & $5 million in NAV and the Simonette well about $20 million and there are 2 of them and perhaps even a third by the end of the year - so maybe $150m to $180m in NAV to I3E.

Decommissioning Costs are about $40k per well - so about $1.6m in total for these 40 wells

Just take one of these wells at Clearwater that only cost about $1.2 to $1.5m to drill, complete and put into production - they produce revenues of about $4.4m each per year. The Simonette well produces revenues of about $20m - so I don’t see a problem and you have noted that despite adding more wells (which is a good thing right?) Decommissing provisions have actually been significantly reduced over the prior period.

Gusto - zip it and please work on improving the quality of your post !

Their audited results Botox - should investors be paying attention to these or some nutcase on a BB.

Did you listen to the recent presentation - 21,600 Boepd now. Another 7 wells cleaning up and on production shortly and a further 15 wells to be drilled by the end of the year - what’s not to like!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSY4Op11APM

there was no malice or intended misrepresentation - I was just highlighting what I thought was an important word in the quote you posted.

It appears that your quote is accurate and he uses both "believe" and "already" - I'm not emphasizing one word over the other.

To paraphrase - I think the jist is that he is Confident there is a Commercial Development "ALREADY" but it is not 100% guaranteed. This was my read - and I hope your happy that I have now stressed the word that you thought was key.

Aimster - thanks for that - I'm in EOG for Serenity only although EOG do have some interesting assets. So yes i'm reasonably confident / hopeful of Serenity being a success and will certainly be disappointed if it is not. I would like to know though the basis on which i3e/eog are so confident because it is not quite reflected in the CPR in my opinion. EOG are especially bullish and backed that up with a substantial investment in relation to their MC so they have put our money where their mouth is - lets hope they are right

With i3e its a long story and i'm not in exclusively for Serenity.

One of the uncertainties in the CPR is the oil/water contact which is a calculated value i.e. it was not confirmed in the original Serenity Discovery well. It is possible that the Contact point could be shallower in which case there may not be Commercially Recoverable Reserves. This is one of the main differences between TRAC's and i3e in their Contingent Resource Calculations - TRAC's have computed a range of Oil/Water Contacts points leading to lower volumes particularly in the low and mid case.

On the other hand - I'm told that Majid in the Proactive Interview a couple of day ago said that i3e were confident of proving up the "high case" - I would love to know the basis for that comment.

I don't disagree with that at all and have acknowledged that i3e and EOG are both uber bullish and have more access to information to make that assessment than most PI's including myself, however:

"Incidentally, there are sufficient reserves here WE BELIEVE, already discovered, for this to be developed."

"if the cap fits, wear it" - I know we had a little spat a year or two ago - is it not time to forgive and forget. I'm sending a cyber hug to you now !

".........it can’t fail even on a poor drill result" - is this correct and if so why has the market not priced this in?

"Serenity discovery already had 16 mbbls recoverable oil, which is net 4 mbbls to EOG.
4 mbbls x $15.6 = $62m = £53m = 5.6p"................ is this correct.

https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AJuEsm8qBoCBcKg&cid=0C8247DCFB29AA84&id=C8247DCFB29AA84%2116809&parId=root&o=OneUp

Above link to the Competent Persons Report - I would point fellow posters / shareholders to the graphs on page 66 & on page 103. These are classified at Contingent Resources and not reserves meaning that additional information (appraisal drill) is required to prove up these numbers. Also as far as I can see the 16 mmbbl is STOIIP and not recoverable reserves

The $15.6 - I know this is the number in the brokers report - but has anyone seen reserves sold at this level recently ?

On the other hand - Management of both i3e and EOG are very confident and have access to information and experts that PI's don't - so lets see.

No names mentioned, no attack on any fellow posters - just questioning where the information is coming from and how good it is.

Austin - a pretty decent report and there were a couple of snippets that caught my eye.

On the production - very encouraging numbers and I was expecting a bit more information - I suspect that may do this on the next Proactive Presentation - there are certainly more wells to come online which they did not really discuss.

Boltok is the only person that appears to be deliberately spreading mis-information with an agenda although there are a number of other posters who are not very receptive to hearing a balanced view point.

Fairdealer,

"This whole rediculous debate started there with some deliberate, and calculated posts designed to challenge the creditbility of shareholders"

If you are referring to me then you are incorrect - I am a shareholder in EOG and any posts were not designed to undermine shareholders there - the purpose was to correct some of the misinformation that has been perpetuated on that board.

Posters here know I do the same for i3e whether the information is a ramp or a deramp - I try to take a balanced view and nearly always provide a reference or a basis for any views posted.

Veryhappybunny - facts first ! dont go spreading untruths now !

Serif,

You seem to be one of the more reasonable posters on here -personally I do not know how long this side track will take - I’m hoping a lot less than 30 days - another reference might be the Blake side track just next door finishing up now - dates are available on the internet.

However - let’s say for the sake of argument it’s 30 days as per Fairdealer. Has it been budgeted for and if not what would be the approximate additional cost. Run your own numbers - but when we did this exercise in the previous liberator drill - we we looking at equipment rentals (rig plus service boats) of anywhere between $100k and $200k per day.

Yawn ??? If you think I’ve talked down EOG by harping on about a poor quality broker note - why would you not want to correct that - I don’t understand ?

Hey and just a real life example of what could go wrong and further explains the UJO loan.

If there are any I3E investors on here from a couple of years ago - they will recall that liberator was a 3 well program which included Serenity. The schedule was 90 days or roughly 30 days per well - the program actually took 110 days. So the current 30 day program is just estimate - it could be a few days shorter or it could be longer.

And as someone pointed out here - the side track seems to be a late addition to the program so extra funds are a prudent precaution.

Very happy Bunny,

I seem to recall apologizing to you once before, however, if I am mistaken, please remind me of my comment that needs addressing?

With regards to my comment on Mcfishy’s “obvious mistake” - if we’re talking about £3m v £4m - you are right - it would be difficult to make that comment because the numbers are within the range of uncertainty - but we’re talking about £3m v £6.6m - so it’s an order of mangnitude difference - so obviously someone has been pressing the wrong buttons on his calculator. If and when the results come out and I’m proven to be wrong - I will issue a full throated apology.

Finally - your colleague said the purpose of this
Board is to share information - whenever i challenge a comment and ask for the basis of the comment I.e. the information - there’s a reluctance to share. I’ve been quite vocal in highlighting the brokers reports - I would have thought that you would be more willing to share if you think the broker has got it wrong.

Bigglewerf,

Good question and if you look at my previous posts - "Cash Balances Part 1 to 3" - you have my thoughts on it.

I would suggest that you ask Selfish his thoughts on it - it would be quite interesting to get his opinion.

"We previously discussed that brokers note on this board. It was floored."

I would be interested to think why you think it's flawed - I did say I thought it would be good as a starting point which I what I've done and then corrected the flaws Iv'e seen - I still think there numbers are in the ball park particulary with regards to FCF / Cash

Veryhappybunny - I am aware of that - thanks for that anyway, but still revenue is only half of the equation - you still have to deduct the costs to come up with FCF

I would have thought a look at the brokers note in the 1st instance would have been a better starting point - Tennyson have full access to EOG Management when they prepare the research note so you would like to think the numbers come from somewhere.

Another quick check I did was look at what Tennyson had for the year end cash - from memory it was £12m, deduct the £7m equity raise = £5m and multiply by 8/12 to approximate the cash now = £3.75m