Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
Seems to me one should listen to waht Dave Holland stated to Morgan Stanley amd RJ and Henry Aldorf.. Oc
The high E/A estimate from GLJ is 12 T's plus.See the RJ latest report they also say all estimates for E/A could move up one level. C-1 to C-2 etc.. So since both say the same its from IOC. And those reports match what Henry Aldorf states in the Video for all to see. So STP tell us is Morgan,RJ, Henry Aldorf and Pet Engin all wrong or should you review your estimates.????Just asking..
Morgan quote below. I leave it you to look up the Pavel quote from the last report and to rereview the Pet Engineeer post about T's at Triceratops (7 t's he said). This is why IOC can give a deal to the PNG govt. They have pleanty of NG and Liquids.
Morgan quote below for you to relook at .RJ stated the same a move from C-1 to C-2 as did Henry Aldorf.
C-3 into C-2 and C-1 contingent resource). Elk-3 is between
Elk -2 and Elk-1 and is targeting a quality matrix reservoir in the
lower limestone interval, which was discovered in Elk-2. Elk 1
never reached this depth while Elk-2 (no seismic pre-drill) went
too deep in the zone and, while there was good rock quality
and porosity development, it was below the gas-water contact
producing a big water well. Elk-3 could add resource,
particularly if there is any reef or better matrix rock in gas
window. The InterOil #2 rig (heliportable) spud Antelope-3 and
the InterOil #3 rig (less mobile, 1,500hp triple) will likely drill
Elk-3.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
["See the RJ latest report they also say all estimates for E/A could move up one level. C-1 to C-2 etc.."]
That's basically what I was trying to say.
I have a feeling you're misreading Pet, and Aldorf making some comment in a tape years ago while it wasn't even clear exactly what he meant isn't really important input for me to base any expectations as to where GLJ will put the needle early next year, but that's just me.
It's possible that there is more, especially at B/T, but it has to be demonstrated by drilling, not by Aldorf comments, even if he might ultimately be proven right, after FULL appraisal.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
The Henry A comment was about E/A . Please listen to the video. It was not about B/T. How can you comment without listening to the video??????He states 13 T's at E/A . And RJ and Morgan both now say the estimates can move up one level which is what Aldorf states. Or 9.6 T's becomes 12.1 T's. Yes it needs to be drilled and A-3 is being drilled right now. E-3 has potential also and needs to be drilled.Henry states he see 13 T's at E/A and we now have 2 research houses saying 12 T's they currently think can happen.Well at A-3 currently being drilled.Fair to say Henry has more data than any of us.
Further GLJ gave estimates of what E/A would have before drilling and the drilling confirmed their estimates and KR has done estimates of what IOC might find at T-2 .Those estimates were 4.5 T's BEFORE drilling..And now its been drill one well so far and Pet Engineer states he sees with what he has data on 7 plus T's.If Pet can see 7 T's its no stretch to think GLJ and KR can see 7 T's. Therefore its no stretch based on what we know today to see 18 T's and 500 million barrels of liquids on total.
I amazed at persons posting opinions about things on these boards without reading whats here.That even fits you STP!! This is an amazing resource STP. I read whats here and suggest others shoot holes in what been posted above. Just the facts please from GLJ, Morgan, RJ, Aldorf, Pet Engin comments. Pet doesn't see more assets at E/A but others think theres more to PROVE out.-RJ.Morgan and Aldorf and Holland) Pet Engin estimates have proven conservative. Recently he raised his T-2 column from 1800 feet to 4500 feet. How he got more data.Connect the dots .
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
["The Henry A comment was about E/A . Please listen to the video. It was not about B/T. How can you comment without listening to the video??????He states 13 T's at E/A"]
Where do I state it's not??
Since when are comments from Aldorf inputs in resource evaluation reports?
What is that 13T anyway? Gas in place, recoverable, probable, best case, high case, etc. etc.?
This discussion between two people who have little idea about resources or how they're evaluated is a bit comical, if not downright embarrassing. I'll unilaterally withdraw from it.
Bottom line (for me), ultimately, after the resources have completed appraisal (which is not anytime soon), you might be right with that 18T. Depends mostly on B/T. But I would be quite surprised if that's a GLJ number early next year, a remote chance perhaps for the high (P10) number, but even that I doubt very much.
Posts: 690
Threads: 41
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
87
One other thing to note not to prolong the debate any longer but right now the biggest thing holding back the pps isn't the resource estimates but the value associated with those resources. Once we have a value to assign to the resources the debate over will be a difference btw $200 per share and $225 per share
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
So Pets wrong( 9.6 T's GLJ and 7.3 T's from his Triceratops work equals drum roll, 16.9 T's)Please tell us why Pet is wrong STP????? and KR is wrong with 4.5 T's at Triceratops and Morgan and RJ can't listen well to David Holland estimates which he gave to Henry Aldorf. Just tell us STP what does a move up in category get us size wise in T's at E/A???Is the top guess 12.1 T's or not???Thats what Morgan RJ and Aldorf are stating they see coming.If so its a question of when per the persons with more data than all of us put together which may be your arguement.
Fascinating stuff!!!
This is far from pumping . Its simple math. GLJ estimate 9.6 T's, Pet Engin estimate 7.3 plus T's is very close to 18 T's STP.. And its in writing per the research reports on the board and video tapes three persons think it happens an upgrade. First was Henry Aldorf and then Morgan and then RJ.
One can argue we dont have the data publicly to support that as Pet has stated. But RJ and Morgan and Henry have seen data that Pet has not seen. Ignoring the upgrade in category with GLJ last year and Pets work we scare 18 T's. But why deal in whats posted on the board which is not what you are doing STP.
Be specific STP who has this wrong on the T's GLJ?? Pet Engin??? Love to know!!If they are right then we have close to 18 T's.We all can have our own opinions. I chose to listen to those that have seen the data vs those that have not seen the data. Your call.
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
I read Pet as ultimate assessment on B/T (AFTER six appraisal wells, or as many as necessary), not his guess on what GLJ will include in their assessment early next year. And as I understood it, that assessment is rife with assumptions that need to be confirmed by actual drilling.
Like I said, ULTIMATELY, it could very well be 18T, but I would be very surprised if that's in next year's resource estimate.
Posts: 6,851
Threads: 697
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
441
'Petro2458' pid='11731' datel Wrote:
Hi All-
Long time reader..first time to post. Appreciate the informative and constructive dialogue. I'm a petroleum engineer and have been in IOC since May 2011. A few thoughts/comments in no particular order:
- curious if anyone has run a cash flow using the latest data from the png investor road show? The $80b in gross revenues for the expected case...would be a good exercise to see range in net present values for the project. I will do this...just haven't yet. Could be wrong but my back of the envelope economics suggest stock in 90's was close to fair value ( just for E/A) when you factor in confidence (90%) around Phase 1 (first train) development and resource estimates and Phase2 or second train of 50% confidence. I Will work this in more detail and post results.
- I am certain the phasing is to de-risk the project..very common practice...i.e. phase 1 ( 4 mtpa plant and X(?) wells) is a right sized development program (facility and wells) to get good dynamic data to assess reservoir pressure behavior and well performance..this will prove up the C2 ("expected"  case resource, gas in place, and recovery factor...and presumably underpin Phase 2.
- number of wells and recovery factor is very much an unknown until phase 1 commences production. This is just a fact. I have read some state that there isn't much uncertainty in the resource base. This couldn't be further from the truth...there is considerable uncertainty and thus the range in the C1 to C3 assessments. It's true that add'l drilling will / should narrow this range of uncertainty.
- it's very positive that after many months of evaluation processes by multiple bidders that multiple majors are involved...this goes a long ways in my mind in confirming the resource range..especially the low (highest certainty estimate).
- always a fine line messaging the points above to authorities...they prefer an 'all in'development approach, where as the majors (and IOC for that matter) will want to ensure that whatever the NEC approves gives the partnership the flexibility to develop the field over time as performance data and resource assessments dictate using an annual work program and budget process.
- I'm concerned the fraud investigations are having implications on NEC approval...thoughts? I do not know this...but time just keeps on ticking. Lets hope this happens in next few weeks.
- have been able to confirm, as of 2 days ago when I saw post on Yahoo that T Boone is in fact long IOC personally...don't know size and for how long. But no question this is true.
All for now...just speaking technically...I really like the march 100 calls here. Also like the stock action which seems to be bottoming here at $65 +/-. Hope the pain is done for now.
Best.
Petro.
Hey new Petro, had a chance to crank out that cash flow yet showing EA is only worth $90? Thought we might see that by now.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
I hope he finds Sam Tibbs model and plays with some assumptions before posting his cash flow numbers.
Posts: 190
Threads: 10
Joined: Oct 2012
Reputation:
46
'jft310' pid='11944' dateline='<a href="tel:1351890 Wrote:I hope he finds Sam Tibbs model and plays with some assumptions before posting his cash flow numbers.
Apologies...haven't had a chance to work it.
|
