Empyrean Energy Share Discussion Threads

[niceyman1] 07/12/2017 23:05

Or even- no news is good news?

[niceyman1] 07/12/2017 23:04

Xbox news is good news?

[timorg] 07/12/2017 22:59

(x4?) (x4?) (x4?) The ? mark means he does not now which zone it is

but dont let the facts get in the way of a good story

[timorg] 07/12/2017 22:25

i note strachan report says deepest target zone (x4?) note question mark, he does not know which zone this was, how good is this ? .

[rutter] 07/12/2017 22:09

So will SGC just keep their heads down tomorrow or put some more meat on the bones.

[currypasty] 07/12/2017 21:45

if the report is genuine, is the content accurate...

[starzerus] 07/12/2017 21:44

I have it from a good source that the report is genuine.

[buffythebuffoon] 07/12/2017 21:12

“...with high reservoir pressures offsetting low sandstone permeability to restrict gas flow" .

This is at best badly worded.

Buffy

[cmackay] 07/12/2017 20:35

Honestmarty, I also believe that the 2nd target is not x4

Maltby2002, I also see nothing to suggest non-commercial, assuming the report is authentic and accurate. I haven't sold anything either but am considering a top up for a few thousand sterling.

[kevjames] 07/12/2017 20:12

Brimsley

I am trying to give Stracahen the benefit of the doubt and I agree you could form an opinion that zone 2 is non-commercial from the SGC release of Monday. However,Strachan states the following:
"Sacgasco (SGC) has achieved a modest gas flow from the second zone tested in the exploration component of its Dempsey 1-15 well the most recently tested zone. It also appears to deliver gas at sub-economic rates on natural flow at the current stage of testing, with high reservoir pressures offsetting low sandstone permeability to restrict gas flow" .

At no point do SGC state flow rates or the commercial value of zone 2, so how can he state a "modest rate and sub- economic" without caveating it as his opinion (which may or not be correct).

Compare to what SGC released.
"The second zone of gas shows in the well has been perforated and is in the process of being tested. This zone has flowed dry natural gas and no water (see figure 1 below) and has confirmed initial shut - in pressures exceed ing 6000 psi . Further gathering of test data is required before we have sufficient information to meet regulator guidelines on reporting results . Analysis of the potential of this zone is still at a very early stage , but the gas flowing from this zone is most encouraging"

I think both SGC and Strachan will be thinking their next moves carefully.

[blueblood] 07/12/2017 20:12

I will be amazed if this turns out to be true and Strachen has posted inside information. If so I hope the throw the book at him and get him to reveal the source of the leak and then throw them in the clink together!

[honestmarty] 07/12/2017 19:52

Horrible turn of events on this share.

The report appears to describe the first zone tested as " {X4)?".

my understanding was that this very much wasn't X4?

Is this not a glaring error in the report, and hardly suggests a leak or insider knowledge?

Why no RNS from EME? Do they lack sufficient trust in SGC to feel confident issuing one?

Praying for a positive update tonight, but not hopeful.

Back to ETFs for me.(Maybe I should consider Bitcoin???)

[cmackay] 07/12/2017 19:45

I didn't expect to be saying it but it looks like your target is within reach, Brimsley. Congratulations, chap. You called it well. I'm still holding for China though.

[brimsley] 07/12/2017 19:39

The info was public on monday if you knew how to interpret it and Strachan delivered his interp on Wednesday fact is fact

[kevjames] 07/12/2017 19:35

Brimsley

Strachan will need to be well ahead of the curve if true - running from prison :-)

Insider information is a non-public fact regarding the plans or condition of a publicly traded company that could provide a financial advantage when used to buy or sell shares of the company's stock. Insider information is typically gained by someone who is working within or close to a listed company. If a person uses insider information to place trades, he or she can be found guilty of insider trading. Insider trading is illegal when the material information has not been made public and has been traded on. This is because the information gives those having this knowledge an unfair advantage.

[brimsley] 07/12/2017 19:19

Strachan has always been ahead of the curve on SGC/EME the report IS real and offers facts the company should have reported by now ashes to ashes dust to duster enjoy

[oilforex] 07/12/2017 18:53

Unfortunately I can't work out where the post fits into the Hotcopper board. It looks like something was posted around pages 27 -28 on the thread, but by whom I don't know.

Possibly a simliar situation on the PANR board yesterday where someone posted something from a subscription site and got asked to take it down.

I still personally believe that if it is real, that the actual contents can be open to interpretation, and may not reflect the conclusions that some are jumping to. Of course no one can be sure.

I certainly would agree that this is a major breach of regulations IF there does turn out to be any truth in it.

I'll be looking in again tonight to see what unfolds.

[wcj] 07/12/2017 18:49

I may be being dim, but the Strachan report seems to make sense, given that he (and we) have no idea which test band is actually being tested. The information from SGC started getting cloudy after drilling, when, instead of issuing logs, labelling them clearly, and maybe giving some idea of what characteristics they had, they started just referring to next band...next band... from the bottom and describing them as poor. It is hardly surprising that investors take fright. My own feeling is that we have now tested just two lousy bands at the bottom, tested in order to gain geological information rather than in the hope of commercial discovery, and that we will now move on to the main business. Strachan seems to be describing just this, but doesn't know how to refer to the band names because there is so much confusion about them.

So, SGC is at fault for failing to provide adequate information in the first place.

SGC appears to be at fault for giving Strachan inside information, and not embargoing its publication.

All surprising, in that SGC must be in need of funds, and a share price collapse is hardly going to make that easier.

In all SGC are making an absolute dog's dinner of their testing. I am sure that there are plenty of people telling them so. I hope that TK is among them.

It would be perfectly easy to lift the secrecy slightly and put out a clarifying statement disclosing logs, naming bands, describing progress to date and tghe results of testing. There may be a marginal commercial advantage in not giving information to competitors, but that seems to be minor compared to the chaos that they are presiding over.

[bskiny1] 07/12/2017 18:42

Has nobody on this BB or LSE. Subscribed to strachan