The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Yes my feed on my ADVFN phone app is 20mins delayed and showing the same volume - 31m. I think another source has been posted on here several times months back. But right now I'm getting the impression Oz is about 20 weeks out of kilter so not too fussed about the odd 20mins when LSE is closed.
BigTo - just in case I'm being misinterpreted ... I didn't make that post about the time needed to recover the further 7% of FF because I was bothered. On the contrary - it was to try and point out rationally that this was all going to take several days yet and to try and nip in the bud any negative cris de coeur when there wasn't a 'eureka - mission accomplished' RNS in a week's time. Softly, softly catchee monkey!
Am I being too simplistic here - if so will some techie please correct me, but .... If they've now recovered 23% of the FF and they had recovered 20% before the winter shut in, then, if they continue to recover FF at the same rate, they are going to need approx another two weeks to reach the 30% recovery target that will give them connectivity to the source rock. However I got the impression from a Garrym post that maybe flow rate of the FF will speed up as N is introduced. All looking good and as planned but no fat cigars for several days yet?
Thanks Lefkosia (and Dazzle). I share your basic belief in 'the charts', particularly with regard to points of support and resistance, but tempered with a large proviso that, with energy explorers and all companies using innovative ideas and technology, we also have to take into account large measures of 'Events, dear boy, events!' (Harold Macmillan). I did once buy a very expensive book on TA but had, regretfully, to conclude that all the advanced stuff with Italian pasta sounding names was beyond my immediate comprehension. So I, for one, have no objection whatsoever to your posts here. If I haven't the time to read them I skip them - simples! If I do have a bit more time I skim them looking for whatever key numbers you've indicated. No harm done - it's all data into the decision mix ... Together with a tasty leavening of sentiment!
Bighow - I can understand where you're coming from and, despite being a long term holder here and with 88E being by far the largest holding in my portfolio, I also started to get a tad twitchy yesterday as the day's SP movement unfolded. In particular I recall a similar pattern emerging when COPL were sharing an important drill with Esso offshore Africa. The omens were excellent with much being said about how the computer analysis programmes available to Esso hugely increased the CoS. There was a massive rise ahead of the drill results but then the SP started to drop back in the days/hours preceding. It was a duster and I and many more suffered big losses. I suspect that, as you are saying, someone was in the 'no' (sic!). But, if you look at the intraday chart for yesterday there is an important difference from that at COPL ... The intraday low of 1.82 was reached at about 2.30pm. After that the SP recovered and we closed at 1.9 - take a look at the chart. I firmly believe that, if the drop earlier in the day reflected people being in the know of bad news we would have seen an acceleration of the drop into the close, not vice versa. Concern, doubt and worry is only natural as a counter to eager anticipation. Hence my saying that I hear where you're coming from. I respect that your concerns are genuine, but hopefully you might pick up some reassurance from the above. Similarly I reassure myself with the hard facts here as restated by Garrym et al. Nothing in this life is guaranteed though.
I was aware that the earth's atmosphere contained 80% nitrogen but, having an enquiring mind, I wondered where the N used in the AL was sourced from and whether it could be recovered and recycled. Seems it can be 'generated' on site, which is what I guess they will do here. Info from rigzone.com: "How Does Nitrogen Generation Work? Developed by Dow Chemical in the 1970s, nitrogen generation through hollow fiber membrane technology has progressed over the last several decades. Now, the technology offers onsite generation through various output and capacity generators. Achieving up to 99.9% purity levels, nitrogen generation has made a myriad of applications in the oil and gas field more economical. Nitrogen Membrane Module Nitrogen Membrane Module Nitrogen is produced through patented membrane filters. The process starts by atmospheric air being taken into a rotary screw compressor. Here the air is compressed to a designated pressure and air flow. Then, the compressed air is saturated with three to five parts per million of hydrocarbons and particulates. It is then introduced into the nitrogen generation system. The air then enters a pre-filtration system, composed of either a demister or cyclone-type water separator to remove up to 94% of free liquids. Next, the air travels through two coalescing filters; the first is a 1.0 micron coalescing filter. And immediately, the air travels to a 0.01 micron coalescing filter. These filters remove 99.9999% of all contaminants from the air, which is still in a vapor state and saturated with water and hydrocarbons. Ensuring the remaining contaminants are in a vapor state, the air is then heated, raising the dew point. The air now enters an activated carbon vessel, where the hydrocarbons are absorbed. From here, the air travels through to a 0.01 micron particulate filter, which makes the air stream a specification of eight to ten parts per billion of contaminants. This guarantees a high-quality air is being supplied to the membrane modules. Now, the air is fed to a dehydration membrane. Here, the water is removed from the recently cleansed air, reaching dewpoints as low as negative 40 degrees Fahrenheit. The dry air is then introduced to the nitrogen membranes. In the nitrogen membranes, the oxygen is removed from the air, resulting in nitrogen at a purity level of 90 to 99%. Because the nitrogen is supplied at a 70-degree Fahrenheit dewpoint, additional residual water vapor is then removed. Providing vast savings in comparison, onsite nitrogen generation is preferable over bulk nitrogen shipments. Furthermore, nitrogen can be created a various specifications for an assortment of uses.
There's been a fair bit of chat on here today about the CoS on this play and DW's having said it's 50:50. Now that implies that the outcome at Icewine is totally binary - ie total success or total failure - which is patently not true, as there must be outcomes that fall somewhere on a 'disappointment' spectrum without being so bad as for the BoD to have to say: 'We're screwed, wind up the company and all go home, zero residual value for shareholders.!' But never mind, for the sake of my calculations let's run with a totally binary 50:50 CoS. Now the point I want to make is that, regardless of our sentiment on these outcomes, we now have THREE plays, not just the single Icewine play. If it were the case that all three plays are 50:50 binary (win/lose; heads/tails; good/bad or whatever) then there are eight possible outcomes and they break down as follows: All three results good - 1 in 8 chance Two good results - 3 in 8 chance One good result - 3 in 8 chance Three bad results - 1 in 8 chance Put another way ... At least two good results - 4 in 8 chance (50/50). At least one good result - 7 in 8 chance. So having three plays, even if each is only 50/50, puts us in a totally different ball game does it not? Howja like 'dem onions!
Brombarb - You are right of course in saying that everyone knew that ops would have to close down over the winter. The key factor though, as I recall, was that, had things 'worked first time' it would have been reasonable to expect that we would have had some positive news before environmental conditions forced a cessation. I'm sure that's what the team on the ground were also hoping for. In the event teething problems meant that winter preceded the news we were looking for. It was then inevitable that the SP was going to drift downwards over several months of forced inactivity, regardless of holders' positivity about final outcomes when work recommenced. The choice then was: 'do I leave all my money in here or will I get a better return elsewhere over the next few months as other, shorter term, opportunities arise?' My personal decision was to dispose of the majority of my holding fairly rapidly before the expected slow drift, put the money elsewhere and return at the first sign of things beginning to recover in anticipation of ops rwcomnencing. Having done that and after buying back in at 1.67-1.71 I'm now happy with the tactic. I'm sure a bus load of other 88E shareholders acted similarly - nowt to do with long term confidence and all to do with pragmatic assessment of what the SP was likely to do. Back to the original point ... If one had KNOWN that winter was going to come before success then of course one would have sold a few days earlier, but that's hindsight. In all fairness I'm sure DW and PB also did not originally think that the hiccups were going to mean that winter forced their hand. No malicious intent and it couldn't have been handled any other way. Better luck this time!
FWIW I agree with Islandgirl ...most likely explanation is that that was a placee disposing of near enough 11m shares. For those who ask 'why sell now?' The answer is the seller just made around £24k profit in four weeks on an outlay of £244k or so. Not to be sniffed at! And maybe the original purchase was on 20 business day credit? Nowt to get over-exercised about.
"Early products from the Project Icewine 3D survey are expected to be received mid-year prior to commencement of a formal farm-out process related to the conventional prospectivity already identified over the Western Margin leases at the project."
Reverse order - sorry! "Site works have commenced to clear snow and ice from the Franklin Bluffs gravel pad to enable access to the Icewine#2 wellhead. Pressure gauges will then be retrieved from downhole and data anaylsed to determine if any reservoir degradation is observed, which may require remedial action such as reperforation of the target intervals. Concurrently, test equipment including separators, tanks and nitrogen lift units will be mobilized to site ahead of the scheduled commencement of flow testing on the 11th June 2018."