Empyrean Energy Share Discussion Threads

[currypasty] 03/5/2022 09:34

perhaps we could do a fire sale on Duyung before December

[bengal1] 03/5/2022 09:33

JJ. Presumably a placing is required to settle the Loan Note before Dec 22.

[rickyhatton] 03/5/2022 09:12

Are GB and TK going to now do a shareholder call? Or at least an in depth interview? It is a reasonable expectation to have from the company. Nothing less is needed, and needed fairly quickly.

[mostro] 03/5/2022 09:07

2 Hopes, Bob and No....
Added a few at low price this morning for the bounce. Brings my average down if nothing else!!

[abergele] 03/5/2022 09:01

Well said JJ for calling our corner...g.l.mate..

[judijudi] 03/5/2022 08:58

We need some info out there as soon as possible

Why no oil when the gas clouds indicated there was as did the upgraded GCOS a few days prior to the duster news. Why did we not have oil when other wells nearby with gas clouds did find oil

Where did the oil go if there was some there originally or was there never any oil in place

Why did the drill take 10 days sooner than forecasted

Who leaked info to the market the day before the duster rns

What’s happening going forward
Are we selling up with a divi to shareholders or going down the well worn EME track of flogging a dead horse with duff projects
If we are itending to drill Topaz I hope this time Tom sees bloody sense and doesn’t go it alone
Give your shareholders a special divi from the sale of Duyung and get a farm in partner for a free carry at Topaz if it’s his intention to drill it
At least let us come out of this year on year debacle with some funds!
imho

[aimomniscient] 03/5/2022 08:50

Anyone been on to CENKOS re a broker note, I'd expect TK to get them to issue one using our current assets to support an high single digit share price

[digger2779] 03/5/2022 08:35

Early doors run for the exit.

[helpfull] 01/5/2022 10:18

Sorry for double posting.

Be careful.

[helpfull] 01/5/2022 10:09

Tickety Tock! Fuzzy logic shock!

The "Further Exploration Risk Mitigation on China Block" RNS dated 15 May 2019 might have cost shareholders dearly:

"Comprehensive analysis of 3D seismic confirms presence of well-defined gas clouds over Jade and Topaz prospects

All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden

The detection of gas clouds in seismic data is therefore being used as a tool in an effort to distinguish between hydrocarbon charged traps and dry wells in the area"

The second statement of the three:

"All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden"

has clearly been proven to be untrue by the Jade drill. The sample quoted for the area was 9 wells. Four were discoveries and five were dry wells. Add Jade and that means that 10% of the wells show a false "positive". It would be useful to know what percentage of wells around the world in various basins that similarly show a false positive (or for that matter a false negative). Hindsight is the surest tool of all but investors used that statement:

"All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden"

to make investment decisions (and indeed often referred to it).

The "Elevated methane (C1) recorded in interpreted "Gas Cloud" zone" dated 19 April 2022 only compounded the problem. The GCoS was increased from 41% to 65% for the Jade prospect. The GCoS had already been increased from 32% to 41% based on "internal studies". With what is known now the true chance of success for Jade was 32%. Meaning a failure was more than likely.

Any failure analysis will have to include research on " false positives (there must be examples). The fuzzy logic that "the presence of gas clouds mean success and their absence mean failure" needs to be re-examined. It does not mean Topaz should not be drilled, or even Pearl, but the risk should be re-interpreted. The same risk that was always there with Jade.

Be careful.

[helpfull] 01/5/2022 10:09

Tickety Tock! Fuzzy logic shock!


The "Further Exploration Risk Mitigation on China Block" RNS dated 15 May 2019 might have cost shareholders dearly:

"Comprehensive analysis of 3D seismic confirms presence of well-defined gas clouds over Jade and Topaz prospects

All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden

The detection of gas clouds in seismic data is therefore being used as a tool in an effort to distinguish between hydrocarbon charged traps and dry wells in the area"

The second statement of the three:

"All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden"

has clearly been proven to be untrue by the Jade drill. The sample quoted for the area was 9 wells. Four were discoveries and five were dry wells. Add Jade and that means that 10% of the wells show a false "positive". It would be useful to know what percentage of wells around the world in various basins that similarly show a false positive (or for that matter a false negative). Hindsight is the surest tool of all but investors used that statement:

"All nearby CNOOC Oil discoveries show similar well-defined gas clouds in overburden whereas dry wells do not have gas clouds in overburden"

to make investment decisions (and indeed often referred to it).

The "Elevated methane (C1) recorded in interpreted "Gas Cloud" zone" dated 19 April 2022 only compounded the problem. The GCoS was increased from 41% to 65% for the Jade prospect. The GCoS had already been increased from 32% to 41% based on "internal studies". With what is known now the true chance of success for Jade was 32%. Meaning a failure was more than likely.

Any failure analysis will have to include research on " false positives (there must be examples). The fuzzy logic that "the presence of gas clouds mean success and their absence mean failure" needs to be re-examined. It does not mean Topaz should not be drilled, or even Pearl, but the risk should be re-interpreted. The same risk that was always there with Jade.

Be careful.

[rickyhatton] 30/4/2022 10:12

25% of Topaz = 50% of Jade ( but hopefully not a zero equation!)

[blakieboy7] 30/4/2022 09:57

Couldn't have put it more eloquently if I tried!!

[michmcd] 30/4/2022 09:45

Yeah me too

[t350toad] 30/4/2022 09:28

I'm with Bob....

[mostro] 30/4/2022 09:18

We need news, and a plan, either B,C,D or whatever, very bloody sharpish!!
That is it in a nutshell..

[noobiedoobie] 30/4/2022 08:40

Increased to 12% of target holding

[abergele] 29/4/2022 19:15

Blueblood,
Well said,
Could'nt express it any better mate..

try and enjoy your family over this extended weekend
g.l.all,

[bskiny1] 29/4/2022 16:22

I am pessimistic now that we will get our divi...gla