88 Energy Share Discussion Threads

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 23:43

The comments from Rabito are good imo, as written by a non 88E holder who attended the presentation and quite fair in summary - so well worth reading.

[wolansm] 03/12/2019 15:24

Yes Gow just far too much for me.

[gowski] 03/12/2019 14:07

Erm he can't read that lol

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 13:55

Wolansm, has to be the post of the month... If you filter me the whole thread will disappear as I created it... Lololol.... In which case we will never see you post on here again....

[neversatisfied] 03/12/2019 10:07

Thanks Pro.. very useful contribution.

[wolansm] 03/12/2019 09:41

Pro ffs give a rest, filtered,

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:50

RE: 88e Presentation NotesMon 19:22

d) NPV per barrel valuations: 88E’s $3-$5 v’s PANR’s $7-$12

e) Time to first production: PANR *could* be as early as next Summer/Autumn. 88E? 2025. Although it's entirely possible/probable 88E will never become a producer and will have sold out by then.

f) Flow test pointing to commercial oil: PANR @ Alkaid tick, 88E TBC in April '20?

g) 88E has negotiated a farm in partner guaranteeing operational activity from Fed-Apr ’20. PANR? TBC!

That’s it for now. I might have a stab at comparative valuation for both stocks – let’s see if the exercise is even possible. Might not be, apples v’s oranges, etc, etc.

Any 88E shareholders reading this – please feel free to correct me on this post by emailing me privately via ADVFN and I’ll correct/edit the post. I don’t propose to get into a public debate on this thread as it wasn’t created for that purpose and I don’t intend to comment on 88E again unless there’s a direct readacross on either valuation or geology. I am only posting this set of notes because when I said I was attending the 88E presentation some people requested I publish my notes - there is no other motivation other than to seek data points for comparative valuation and to understand any geological links between the two companies. Please feel free to copy this post and use it on an 88E thread for debating purposes as long as you attribute it to scot126 on ADVFN so that I'm not misquoted or taken out of context.

To be crystal clear, I wish 88E all the very best with the upcoming Charlie-1 drill. I will be genuinely delighted if it proves to be a success. GLA and good luck to 88E.

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:49

RE: 88e Presentation NotesMon 19:21

Management: I have to say that I warmed to DW. He came over as credible, passionate, on top of his brief, aligned financially with shareholders and genuinely sympathetic and appreciative of retail shareholders’ support. I didn’t feel that he gilded the lily too much. It was clear that many of the attendees knew each other, knew DW and were LTHs. Quite understandably, he did respond to some questions from the floor asking him to expand on what success in Alaska could mean when reflected in the share price. Always careful *not* to offer any guarantees, an internal management target would see 88E proving up 200-300m barrels of reserves and selling them at $4 - $5 per barrel. I didn’t pick up on any desire from DW for 88E to become a producer, rather it was the “prove up and sell on model� which was described as being the most likely end goal.

Ok, here’s what sticks out to me as being the main differences between the two companies.

a) Volume of seismic data. PANR appears to be a few years and 10's of millions of $'s ahead on this front. We know that Great Bear invested $80m in seismic across the Alaskan leases - fact. DW did mention they were using local geophysicists as consultants but he didn't name the firm, fyi.

b) Scale of OIP - looks to me from a cursory glance that PANR has outlined a greater absolute number and has also defined or identified more specific targets.

c) Proximity to infrastructure. This is perhaps the most acute difference between the two investment cases at this precise point in their respective journeys. Attendees at PANR's recent presentation in London will recall how often and forcefully Bob Rosenthal stated the importance to PANR of Alkaid literally being intersected by the Dalton Highway and TAPS. This factor has *massive* implications for timing of operations, ease of operations, capex, opex, timing of cash inflows, collection of pertinent data, etc. All of these considerations, and likely many more I haven't thought of, all feed into the noteworthy NPV per barrel differential published by each company.

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:48

RE: 88e Presentation NotesMon 19:18

Naturally, management were asked about CoS for Charlie-1. Both presenters were extremely confident that the drill would encounter hydrocarbons. It was almost a case of, “How could it not?� based on the historical data from nearby wells. This was not said in a boastful or arrogant fashion, rather a presumption based on all available well data and also including more recent seismic studies. They were at pains to explain to the audience that Charlie-1 had been designed for maximum data collection which meant that the intersection of the drill with each interval was not optimal. That said, it looked and sounded to me that the well’s top priority was to intersect the three Stellar zones at decent locations (away from the edges or periphery of those 3 zones).

I *think* a fair amount of the audience was surprised when DW stated that a flow test of 100 bopd from the primary target would be viewed as a genuine success and would be sufficient to surpass the data watermark required to proceed with more drilling activity in the block – more on that later.

I’m now going to try to describe the CoS information given:

Indigo: well not optimally located for Indigo, historical data from 2 nearby wells suggest a 100% likelihood of encountering hydrocarbons but there is insufficient data to even estimate whether Indigo will flow at a commercial rate.

Charlie: a topset with similar characteristics to Winx, "looks interesting". Geological (hydrocarbon) CoS estimated at 20-30% with no estimate given for commercial flow.

Lima: data suggests 60% oil saturation but sands are tight, 11% porosity. 100% CoS on encountering hydrocarbons but no guidance given on commercial flow.

Torok: CoS on encountering oil is 100%. 50% CoS guidance given on whether oil would flow at commercial rates within this zone.

*My* interpretation of management’s view on order of importance to 88E, from most to least is: 1st Torok, =2nd Charlie & Indigo, 3rd Lima. I swear I could not work out where to place the HRZ in that list, I just couldn’;t work it out!

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:48

RE: 88e Presentation NotesMon 19:17

If I understood it correctly, there are 7 conventional targets and the HRZ which sits below. TD is 11,500ft with the primary Torok target located at c.9,000ft. My understanding of the history of Great Bear (GB) and 88E is that they were both initially looking primarily (solely?) at the unconventional in Alaska. It *sounds* to me that Great Bear made the decision to switch their main strategy to conventional prior to 88E adopting a similar stance? In fact it was clear from a number of questions from the floor that, for many 88E shareholders, their original motivation to invest was due to their interest and belief in the HRZ. It seemed to me that some 88E shareholders (NB some, not all) remain wedded to the unconventional strategy and they haven’t quite accepted that for the HRZ to be of any value to the 88E equity investment case, the price of oil would likely have to be at least $20 higher than current levels *and* the conventional play located above the HRZ would *need* to be commercial to defray/contribute to the capex/opex required to make the HRZ work. Sidewall cores will be essential to understanding the HRZ play so these samples will be sent off to a lab for analysis and DW gave guidance indicating it would take c.2 months to receive the results back from the lab.

Charlie-1 well location: the historical Magaluk well drilled in 1991 by BP is approximately 1 mile away. Naturally 88E and PMO have been pouring over the historical data from that well. Some of the oil extracted in 1991 was sent for analysis and registered an API of 38. [Geos – I think there’s a readacross to PANR here and I’ll try later to refer to the 88E slides which point towards this suggestion which encompass sand movement northwards from the mountains to the south and the locations of various cliffs and shorelines on the sandstone's "journey" to Prudhoe Bay.]

Both speakers made it very clear the primary targets were located in the Torok....from memory three intervals named various “shades� of Stellar. DW said that the Torok generally contained thinner sands elsewhere in Alaska at that depth but the Torok data from the Magaluk well showed “good, thick sands with a porosity of 18%�. DW admitted that sands at 9000ft would normally be tighter but the data from Magaluk indicated otherwise. He did give an explanation or theory for this but I wasn’t able to follow it in real time – sorry.

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:48

RE: 88e Presentation NotesMon 19:16

DW got a fair amount of mostly good-natured stick from some attendees concerning the good-then-bad-then-good-then-bad news releases around the Winx-1 well earlier in the year. Personally I felt the criticism was a tad unfair as 88E, being the operator, was reacting to news from the site in Alaska whilst juggling with the regulatory demands for timely release of price sensitive news in both London and Australia. They did the best they could and I sympathised with DW when he talked attendees through the order of events. Just an aside to prove that other management teams cop it sometimes too!

Charlie-1 is located “30 miles from the Dalton Highway�. That’s a direct quote. Some of us on this thread, including me, had guessed, using maps, the distance was anywhere from 35-45 miles but here’s the definitive answer. We were in the right ballpark – much more on this later. DW stated the ground wasn’t yet cold enough to begin constructing the ice road (btw, I’ve seen local Alaskan guidance of anywhere from $200k-$450k per mile cost for the construction of an ice road fyi) and they’ve got sensors in place to indicate when construction may begin. I think he said they’d most likely begin construction of the road at the start of January, and mid-January “at the latest�.

The drilling schedule suggests spudding in early February, drilling to take 20-30 days, undertake 2 weeks of logging, 1 week to analyse the data collected followed by 2x 2 week periods of flow testing (NB two intervals only to be flow tested). Oil-based mud will be used during drilling. [I recall some of the engineers on this thread wondering whether the mud type had impacted the analysis of Winx-1....thatâ̈́4;™s why I mention it now]. Logging will include wireline and magnetic resonance tests. DW also stated they planned to undertake (a) “small frack(s)â€? as part of the flow test.

[pro_s2009] 03/12/2019 08:48

Posts from LSE:

Rabito79

Posts: 248

Price: 1.00

No Opinion
88e Presentation NotesMon 19:14

All,

I am sharing the below notes from a fellow PANR holder who attended Friday’s presentation. As per his closing comments, I am not looking to argue with anyone rather share what are the most detailed notes I have seen from the meeting. We both believe there is a benefit to following the activities of each other’s companies given the similarity in the plays. The post is extensive so may take a few comment

GLA

Dear All,

I attended the 88E presentation at The Globe on Friday (29/11/19). The presenters were Dave Wall (CEO) and Dr Stephen Staley. I’m going to estimate the number of attendees at 50-60. I understand more had indicated they would attend but there was a terror attack 3 hours earlier so that would likely explain the no shows.

I’m reasonably new to 88E and certainly new to the science behind the HRZ so I’ll firstly attempt just to transcribe my notes and maybe I’ll have a stab at compareâ€͐2;n’contrast in the coming days. To be clear, this was the first time I’d met 88E management in person, all videos/podcasts/RNSs/pdfs until now. I’m not going to attempt to speak to the slides which may be available on the companyâ€͐2;s website – some of the verbal content from Friday referred to a few slides but some of the content was more off the cuff and in answer to attendeesâ€482; many questions. I’m going to attempt to transcribe my notes in chronological order but there was a fair amount of dipping in and out of topics so probably best to accept this post as providing debating points or points worthy of further investigation/discussion and not gospel truth, ok?

Dave Wall (DW): “In Alaska, you can’t drill conventional targets without seismic. The Charlie-1 well is the well 88E management has been looking to drill for the last 5 years. The drilling data collected by the likes of ARCO and BP in the 70’s, 80’s, 90’s has only been able to be re-interpreted in the last 10 years or so due to improvements in computer processing power."

DW: Premier has no interest in the HRZ shale play. In a statement which may lead to some raised eyebrows on this thread, DW said that 88E’s PR since the farm out with Premier (PMO) has had to be more conservative, lol! To be clear, I’m not for one second suggesting 88E’s PR strategy is conservative/flamboyant/has changed since the PMO deal, just that us LTHs of PANR can observe a fairly differentiated tone in PR strategy, agreed?! Anyhoo, if their public statements have indeed been more conservative since the PMO deal, that’s fair enough as 88E have now got a big brother as a partner and, as DW conceded, they’ll be running the information releases alongside PMO as they, too, are of course listed.

[gowski] 03/12/2019 08:38

Drama llama :pI wish I had more at this price

[4sta] 03/12/2019 08:13

Blimey, seems like I could have been right yesterday. Dave does seem to have put a dampener on things yet again. Mass exodus today for some reason.

[davidblack] 02/12/2019 09:08

The action is the conventional and if the key target Torok zone comes good my penny purchase should see 3p. The HRZ is simply benched at these low oil prices but this well is a free test ahead of the economics coming back.

What’s not to like about that?

[pro_s2009] 02/12/2019 08:26

Ignoring the conventional, it looks like this drill is boom or bust for the HRZ shale.

Bad result in the HRZ and that will be the end of it.

Good result and it moves forward, and that is worth around 1p to 2p on the share price, so ignoring the 7 conventional targets even the bottom is something very interesting in terms of the future direction.

[4sta] 02/12/2019 08:24

Thanks David. Just didn't feel much enthusiasm coming through whilst reading the posts at the weekend. Was expecting much more to be honest, but plenty of time yet.

[davidblack] 02/12/2019 08:21

Plenty of enthusiasm was generated but most there were long the stock so it was as much as anything about making sure that people were kept informed and did not become sellers due to boredom.

The presentation on Friday was excellent and the mood of the attendees nicely positive.

[4sta] 02/12/2019 08:16

Was hoping That Dave would whip up some enthusiasm on Friday. Seems that he has done quite the opposite - not for the first time either.

[pro_s2009] 01/12/2019 01:05

Settle in a new range of 1p to 1.5p for December would be good. Then the serious buying starts in the New Year as the hot money piles in and the PR and media blitz into this massive well starts.

Should easily breach 2p by spud, and then, as 88E are the Operator, we get regular news updates and any oil strike will be RNS'd immediately they hit anything in any of the 8 target zones.

[lgraham86] 30/11/2019 19:32

1p surely is risk free entry

[gowski] 30/11/2019 18:36

Imo we'll break 1.2 by weds once titbits of the meet are out there. Imo Dyor

[gowski] 30/11/2019 16:19

From LSE RE: presentation"They said when they started the FO they were approached by one of the guys on the Malguk drill. I think who was with one of the companies looking to farm in. Apparently he stated something along the lines of "we want in as I know what I saw when we drilled Malguk". It was something like that anyway....."

[rationaleee] 30/11/2019 14:47

Is the next giant oil field in Alaska?

“Oil wildcatting is dying, and Bill Armstrong is one of the last true prospectors. Nobody thought there might be another giant discovery left in Alaska.

He gathered a team of gamblers, nerds and weirdos to find out.“