Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Nickel_Investor,
No matter how many shares a company has, if the market cap is the same, the percentage moves will be exactly the same.
Do your sums on market cap, not on number of shares, and value share moves in percentages, not on currency value.
Ignore this at your peril.
Love the numbers: "Average production rate: c. 14,400 bopd from First Oil to latest lifting on 17 August 2019"
14,400 bopd = 10 barrels / minute
I wish I could stand on the deck of the Aoka Mizu now and feel her humming...
MarinerNsea:
If you have a google account (you likely will if you have an android phone) then you could upload them to Google Drive.
If you haven't used it before, I'd suggest creating a folder and then sharing the folder, which will make the contents available with one link but not anything else from elsewhere in your your google drive account.
you could try it with a zero? ... babc0ck
2kally, it's not a matter of just "draining the reservoir". Your approach reminds me of my first house. It had a gas cooker in the kitchen, and a gas fire in the living room. We moved in and discovered that the cooker was no longer working but the fire was still working fine. It turned out that the fire was connected to the mains, but the cooker was running from a gas bottle!
It's no use spending money on production facilities, if you don't know how much hydrocarbon there is to be extracted - which is why they have to explore the reservoir fully, both physically and by indirect means, to understand more than just "we can produce X barrels per day". While the EPS is producing oil, we are still very much in the exploration phase, it's only a detailed understanding of the reservoir[s] that we will realise full value for the company.
Finally, although your responsibilities are to create shareholder value by managing the company and its resources to the best of your ability, I really think you should provide daily commentary on the share price (only positive commentary, mind you) because we, as shareholders/investors, have made a right balls up of it all so far. We know its our job to value the company but as a collective group we really suck at it. As a long term shareholder going back to about 3pm yesterday I would consider any false and misleading information that creates, say, a 300% spike in the share price to be acceptable. If you could do that by about 9am tomorrow then we should be in a position to buy some toilet paper to wipe our own asses with; although some help with that may be needed.
Finally, again, I would like to say a word about your website. It is full of information. I think you should stop this because it is not working very well. Shareholders and potential investors (along with some analysts) generally do not look at it. You could save a ton of money by getting rid of the website.
Actually I might sell my shares now as I am sure I can make more money elsewhere much more quickly.
Regards
A faithful shareholder
A superb post by carcosa on ADVFN, enjoy...
Dear management,
The period between updates is way too long. We, as shareholders, check the share price about 20-50 times a day. We have nothing else to do. If you could just issue multiple RNS's a day plus three or four press releases then they may calm down a bit. With Dr T being the main guy perhaps you could keep us apprised of what time he goes to sleep, wakes up, what he has to eat and if you could provide live GPS tracking of his location then that would help too. It would also be useful to know what the quantity of oil at offload, although it may be better to setup a live webcam throughout the FPSO showing oil flow, temperature, density and composition of the oil as it is being extracted. Of course if the control room could also provide daily planned performance criteria with the justification then that would help too.
Whilst you are doing all of that could we also have weekly psychological tests of management because clearly the share price performance is linked to the moods of the key players and sunspot activity (no need to burden yourself with the last item as we can find that last piece of information ourselves as part of our DYOR)
We would also like to see the planned helicopter activities at least a week in advance and be given a list of all personel flying to and from the FPSO and drilling rig along with their qualifications and purpose of their visit. Weather forecasts would also be useful. This is all in the name of transparency, as I am sure you will understand.
As regards the ongoing Lincoln well, I think you have a duty to all shareholders to provide daily updates as regards the progress of drilling and the ongoing findings as and when they appear.
As shareholders who own the company we think it only right that you provide us with the price realised for each offload. However we may be capable to calculate that if you just give us the oil quantity in a format which leaves no ambiquity along with the price to three decimal places. Again we do not wish to be a burden which would result in management's time dealing with inane shareholder questions when your task is to manage the company. Some of us have a calculator and between us we may be able to work out the revenue of oil at offload.
(continued...)
Given the carnage around the rest of the oil sector in the last few days, I think our sp is holding up very well.
It might have started from a low base and be in the red, but it's been far less impacted by the negative market sentiment in the last few days than others. That shows a lot of strength in our value.
you should join the new thread on ADVFN, it's moderated and all the loons have been stopped at the gate.
http://uk.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=44648680
not saying that either approach to realising profits is right or wrong, just that it's all not so absolute.
No. Kerogen, one of our longest and most stable institutional long term holders, is not "overweight".
I'm sure that like me and a few others here that I know of, our definition of overweight isn't necessarily the same as that of a gambler who enjoys a guess. As for realising a profit, there are different approaches to that, one is to continually gamble for multiple small stakes and small returns, another is to invest long term for the single bigger return on maturity.
"If all people can find to complain about is the reply to one question during a 2 hour CMD presentation then there is sweet eff all to be concerned about."
"the question was answered perfectly reasonably in my view. Clearly he's a geologist first and a marketeer second. He did, in my view, answer the question perfectly reasonably once he'd overcome whatever was the initial cause of irritation. "
Agree entirely. While the body language might have been more controlled (and that's a darn sight easier said than done), it was near the end of a very long and otherwise faultless presentation. In the same situation, I would not have bored the pants off of the audience in repeating what I would have expected most to know and understand, but referring the questioner to the source for the answer and additional information that they might learn from was entirely appropriate.
If anything, the mixture of gas oil and water will make the separation process much more efficient that the equivalent process in soil, as the surface tension between the different moving fluids will tend to exert a force on the very fine material, and there's much less resistance for it to move in the fluids than if it were mostly solids. There's also the fact that as the different fluids are moving both up and down, the disturbance will be quite efficient. Once it's been moved, gravity ensures that the small stuff will tend to end up lower than when it started. As the water is displaced from the top to the bottom of the reservoir, the smallest size rock particles will eventually all be swept to the bottom of the reservoir.
"I would have thought the soil/rock analogue would be a little to far distant to the fractures...after all we're not talking about a continuous depth made of many many 'bits' of soils but solid hard rocks which cannot self organise large to small."
But that's the point, it's not the solid rock that's significant, it's the debris in the fractures.
Any gardener will tell you that you can pick all the stones off a plot of land, but go back a week or two later and more stones have popped up. It's a well known and understood process. It's not soil in the fractures but a complete range of sizes of granite pieces, from huge boulders all the way down to fine grains of soft granite sand. The movement of water, oil and gas as the hydrocarbons from the Kimmeridge clay displace the water in the basement rock fractures will be more than enough over time to cause the size separation process to occur.
As far as dimensions go, the fracture network is an extraordinary size, Lancaster/Halifax is 30km long, and well over a km deep, the fractures are huge so there must be a considerable quantity of loose material, across that considerable height.It's that considerable height which has enabled enough of the smallest material to accumulate to almost form a seal at the depth that the Warwick Deep drill chanced to go.
Everything points to that being the cause of the disparity between the seismic and the drill bit observation.
I was a little puzzled at that stage of the CMD when Dr T said this had happened, but he didn't give any explanation except to say they had lots of data to work on. So I have written to Hurricane, asking if my theory could be correct. I'd be surprised if they aren't already thinking on these lines, but it is an unusual field, has anyone ever drilled a horizontal so deep in such a deep fractured basement?
just when I was in the flow, I ran out out space...
Big fields get bigger, and good fields get better!
"Dr R-T clearly says the WD seismic faults not seen in WD horizontal".
I think I've just worked out why...
When the granite was fractured, many times, over many millennia, each time large and small pieces were dislodged and fell into the faults. If you have a material that is all the same substance, but it in a multitude of different sizes, over time, if it is frequently disturbed, it tends to settle with the smaller particles at the bottom, and the larger ones at the top. The disturbances can be from tectonic movements, from water migrating downwards, and from oil and gas migrating upwards.
It's the same process where rocks rise and appear on your veg patch. Smalr particles are able to fall between and under large ones, but large particles tend to just sit on small ones underneath it, there aren't spaces large enough for the large ones to fall down into, so with continual small movements, the larger lumps migrate upwards, the smaller ones downwards until you have a continuous graduation of small to large from bottom to top.
So what does this mean for the reservoir, and the recent Warwick Deep drill?
The WD hole was drilled much lower in the reservoir, so it follows that the faults will have more of the very smallest particles of granite at that lower level. There's also much more height of fracture above that level, so a greater amount of small debris material that could have fallen to that level. Small particles pack together well, especially if they're of similar size. So, if you have all the smallest material, packed together tightly, with larger sized material on to of it, it's going to be very well compressed. Which means - the porosity and permeability will be much reduced from that further up the same fractures, and when you drill through it, the small particles will be almost indistinguishable from the cuttings through the solid granite. In the fracture, the drill is more likely to be supported by the packed material around it, so any physical change in mechanical feedback will be much less that if the drill head was flailing around in an open fracture. The packed material being less porous, also means that there's no sudden influx of fluid into the bore on going through the fracture.
Given that the fractures are not precisely vertical or in any sense uniform, there will be some connectivity through this debris layer, but it won't be as open as the fractures many metres above. The enormous depth of this reservoir also contributes, there would be far less material for this process to occur in a reservoir 100m deep than one 1000m deep.
There will still be some permeability through those lower parts of the fracture, the material isn't solid and fluid pressure will slowly allow fluids to pass, but there may be an unexpected advantage of having this packed layer down near the bottom of the reservoir - the sponge effect may serve to mitigate against water coning from the aquifer below!
Big fields get bigger, and good fiel
that = than
Significant shareholders can be found under the AIM Rule 26 page of any company's website...
https://www.hurricaneenergy.com/investors/aim-rule-26
One problem with looking at second hand information is that it's probably even more out of date that the authoritative source.
Another thought that I had following on from that, was that if the reason for the lack of flow was fines in the fractures at that depth, then would that act as an inhibitor against water coning from the aquifer below? Far from being a negative feature of the reservoir, it could be a very welcome feature.