Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Gulf Keystone Petroleum Ltd LSE:GKP London Ordinary Share BMG4209G2077 COM SHS USD1.00 (DI)
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -5.80 -8.31% 64.00 62.20 63.80 70.00 62.20 70.00 1,089,352 16:35:07
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Oil & Gas Producers 196.5 62.5 27.3 2.3 143

Gulf Keystone Petroleum Share Discussion Threads

Showing 664076 to 664087 of 697525 messages
Chat Pages: Latest  26569  26568  26567  26566  26565  26564  26563  26562  26561  26560  26559  26558  Older
Broadford Bay: Adnan Sammarai said in a public domain statement years ago that the character of the gas at Shaikan was very good at helping to increase the Recovery Factor. From memory, he suggested 20% recovery without the gas injection, but 30% with it. That was been referenced on here many times, you may have missed it, Of course, at the time AS thought the Shaikan Jurassic was an aquifer-drive reservoir and he didn’t know that the gas would be coming out of solution within the matrix - leading to a gravity-drainage situation! The Gulf Canada figure is relevant because it gives a detailed cost breakdown to handle a defined volume of gas at a specified injection pressure. You will see that I increased that Gulf Canada figure. I wouldn’t argue too much with your figure, it’s all in the same ball park. I think the Amine plant and the power generator are at PF-1? Gulf even gave a figure for the value of the diesel which it was saving! The ESPs will require power and so will the engine(s) for the gas injection, my guesstimate is 10,000 horsepower equivalent to about 30 Jensen Interceptors at full tilt. With properly-managed gravity drainage, I don’t see gas production as likely. There has been none so far, despite the absence of maintenance.
Until now most of us have probably understood the Gas Reinjection project as a disposal issue - getting rid of the nasty stuff. What if, however, the gas reinjection is now being reconsidered not so much as a disposal issue but as a method of enhancing the oil recovery? Cost-wise, that's quite a different kettle of fish... IMO any similarities with low-cost Canadian scenarios fly out the window. My estimate of a gas reinjection package, with 1 new well completion and all associated equipment would be in the order of $12M. If two compression/injection sites were needed (would you really pipe the highly concentrated gas all the way from PF-2 to a single well site on the W edge of the field?) then that could easily double (much more if a completely new well were needed at the E side of the field). If the EOR scenario (miscible gas) were to be considered then you have to deal with the increased GOR - which in itself isn't a problem - but the proportion of your output which is actually crude would drop and that, as well as additional gas handling vessels at the PF) might mean you need more wells with more pumps to get back to your target bopd. So, if disposal only - one or two /injection disposal wells. If EOR then potentially more wells. Time will tell.
broadford bay
AN ESTIMATE OF GKP PROJECT FUNDING FROM 2018 TO THE 75,000 BOPD PRODUCTION LEVEL Gulf Keystone Petroleum gave a lot of information last week in their RNS and the three Presentations. I have prepared the following estimate from some of that information, together with information regarding monthly income and expenditure levels. 1. From September 2018 to December 2019 - the 15-month “55,000 bopd Programme” 1.1 Net cost to GKP at current 80% level = $160 million to $184 million (including 25% Contingency) 1.2 Baseline Cash-at-Bank as at last week = $257 million 1.3 Estimated net cash gain from 15 monthly payments during the uplift to 55,000 bopd, at about the current Cost Recovery payment level = $150 million 1.4 Current cash + estimated net cash from monthly payments = $407 million 1.5 Estimated December 2019 cash position after paying for the programme = $407 million less $160 million to $184 million = $223 million to $247 million Note: this figure assumes that the MNR do not make any back-cost payment, potentially trading those for improved PSC Terms for GKP. The company has said that these changes will be advantageous, or at worst neutral, for GKP. 2. From January 2020 to c. December 2020 12-month “Incremental 20,000 bopd programme” 2.1 Net cost to GKP at current 80% level = c. $200 million (my estimate, see recent post) 2.2 Baseline Cash-at-Bank as at January 2020 = $223 million (the lower of the two cash-at-Bank estimates above) 2.3 Estimated net cash gain from 12 monthly payments assuming a starting production level of 55,000 bopd and steadily rising to 75,000 bopd = $180 million (assuming no net change to the PSC) 2.3 Cost Recovery of the current account element of the 75,000 bopd programme, assuming recovered as Opex during 2019 = $30 million 2.4 Estimated December 2020 cash position after paying for the programme = $433 million less $200 million = $233 million These estimates assume that the oil price will remain at least in line with the ERC Equipoise projection as in the current CPR and that the MNR will continue to make regular payments for production including cost recovery. If anyone wishes to prepare their own detailed estimates and post them on this bulletin board, then go ahead. The purpose of GKP giving information in RNSs and in Presentations is e.g. to allow such estimates to be prepared. Otherwise it all serves no purpose. If these projections are anywhere near correct, it suggest the following: (A) GKP has built a very strong cash position which provides a foundation for the 55,000 bopd and 75,000 bopd programmes which should not involve any further borrowing to fund that work (B) that cash position remains fairly steady as the works progress (C) GKP would enter 2021, at about which time they commence the incremental 35,000 bopd programme to move from 75,000 bopd up to 110,000 bopd, with a substantial cash position and with substantial income and Cost Recovery from 75,000 bopd production. But with the borrowing cap now removed through the cancellation of the old $100 million Notes, adjustments can potentially be made to the funding situation via borrowings. This is what GKP CEO Jaap Huijskes and CEO Jon Ferrier signed-off a week ago: “With a clear path to future growth, underpinned by a healthy balance sheet and an outstanding asset, we can look to the future with confidence".
JB You targetting £65 still?
Good Morning 😃 Got far better things to do today 😱 Catch you later 😘
"Let's hope this PIG gets smashed back down to where it truly belongs, Sub 1.5pence!" CLEARLY NOT A GENUINE INVESTOR IN GKP !! BINNED.
GKPhero: in case you missed it the first time: oil_investor - 14 Sep 2018 - 08:49:23 - 571884 of 572076 THE NEW GKP / Drilling for Super Giants (moderated) - GKP AN ESTIMATE OF THE COST OF THE 75,000 BOPD PROGRAMME So far as I am aware, nobody on the blogs has attempted to estimate the cost of moving up from 55,000 bopd to 75,000 bopd at Shaikan. GKP clearly have the figure, but they have not released it and they say “Capex guidance to be communicated post FDP submissionâ364;�. But GKP have actually given us sufficient information to allow a cost estimate for this next investment phase - which they appear to indicate will start in early 2020 - to be derived reasonably easily. So here we go. The method is to compare the work content of the 55,000 bopd and 75,000 bopd programmes. GKP have detailed this work in a way that this is actually easy to do. This is what is said in three separate GKP presentations this week: 55,000 bopd programme: 4 Jurassic wells + ESPs ESPs on 3 existing wells Debottlenecking of Production Facilities PF-1 pipeline tie-in 2 tubing workovers Facilities maintenance 75,000 bopd programme : 4 Jurassic wells + ESPs ESPs on 3 existing wells Debottlenecking of Production Facilities Installation of gas re-injection facility So there are three common components: 4 Jurassic wells + ESPs, ESPs on 3 existing wells, and debottlenecking of Production Facilities. Remove those common components and the differences between the two programmes are then revealed. The 55,000 bopd programme has the PF-1 pipeline tie-in, 2 tubing workovers and Facilities maintenance in addition to the common components, whereas the 75,000 bopd programme has just the Installation of the gas re-injection facility. So how do these compare in cost? Very conveniently, GKP have told us in this week’s presentations the cost of the PF-1 pipeline tie-in and the 2 tubing workovers. The gross cost for this work is given by GKP (derive it by subtraction) as $15 million to $25 million, including a 25% contingency. So how does that gross cost compare with that of the gas re-injection facility which is included in the 75,000 bopd programme? Once again, there is very conveniently a useful guidance figure for that which was published by Gulf Canada Resources in 1996. I wouldn’t expect costs to have changed enough, since then, to affect the figure too much. Gulf Canada installed a gas re-injection facility at their Westerose D-3 oil reservoir near Edmonton. The facility provided Gulf Canada with an additional 18 million cubic feet per day of gas re-injection, at a pressure of 1450 psig. The chosen solution was a turbine driven, tandem compressor (centrifugal, multistage) with a 4,000 horsepower driver. The cost of a reciprocating compressor was $5.3 million, but using a reconditioned centrifugal unit the total installed cost was $3.7 million. And Gulf Canada gave a very useful breakdown of that total: Equipment $1.8 million, Materials $0.5 million, Construction $1 million and Inspection $0.4 million. The Westerose project was quickly completed - the elapsed time from project authorisation to commissioning being just 5 months. The volume of gas to be re-injected at Shaikan is not yet stated by GKP but some of the gas, which comes out of solution in the Production Facilities, is already used at Shaikan for power generation, usefully reducing the cost of diesel. There will be additional power requirements for the 55,000 bopd and 75,000 bopd programmes e.g. to drive the ESPs and also to power the gas compression facility. I canâ€482;t personally see GKP using reconditioned equipment, but taking into account the volumes of gas coming out of solution at PF-1 and PF-2 (GKP did give a figure for that some time ago) and the need to connect PF-1 and PF-2 to the compressor with gas piping, my feeling is that the $15 million to $25 million figure (see above) ought to broadly cover much if not all of it. GKP have previously said on several occasions that they intend to use an existing Shaikan well (two wells are not on production) in order to put the pressurised gas back into the reservoir. On this analysis, it seems reasonable to assume that the gross cost of the 75,000 bopd programme will probably be pretty similar to that of the 55,000 bopd programme. The net cost to GKP of the latter, at the 80% rather than the 64% contribution level, is given by GKP in their presentations this week as $160 million to $184 million including a 25% contingency. So a total cost of perhaps $200 million might be enough to take output from 55,000 bopd to 75,000 bopd. That figure would reduce if the amended PSC were to reduce the GKP Paying Interest, e.g. to the 64% level which GKP were previously using, but we donâ€482;t know. Whilst 2020 is 15 months away, and the 2018 and 2019 work programme is only recently underway, it might be worth looking ahead to how the 75,000 bopd programme might be funded. GKP already has a very strong cash position which more than covers the gross cost of the 55,000 bopd programme. So what might happen, income-wise, over the next 15 months prior to the planned start of the 75,000 bopd programme? GKP added $121 million to their cash position between September 2017 and September 2018, and the stronger oil price is resulting in increased underlying payments per barrel to GKP. During the next 15 months, there should be further substantial cash inflow because (a) the current account part of the 55,000 bopd investment programme should be recovered quickly under PSC terms, and (b) production volumes will be ramping-up during 2019 as progress is made during the year toward the 55,000 bopd level. It is very important to note that GKP recover much of the costs of their investments in Shaikan via the PSC terms and Cost Recovery mechanism. Whilst there is an inevitable time lag, the 75,000 bopd programme woukd be substantially bootstrapped from such recovery. And in addition, there is the income from production. If GKP do go to the earlier-referenced 58% Working Interest (with the MNR coming back in) rather than the current 80%, there would be three effects: (a) the profit income would drop (though the cost recovery would still be due), and (b) the income would increase because of the rise from the current production level (say, 32,000 bopd) to the 55,000 bopd level, and (c) the GKP contribution to costs going forward would reduce from 80% to 64%. Taking (a) and (b) together, the net impact on income can be assessed: Current level x 58%/80% x 55,000 bopd/32,000 bopd This nets out at a 25% increase to current income. In any case, the replacement of the 2016 10% Notes with their additional borrowing cap, with the 2018 10% Notes with the additional borrowing cap removed, makes issuing some additional Notes - even if such money were required - relatively simple. The 2018 10% Notes were over-subscribed, for example. So all in all, I am pretty optimistic! My guess is that the 75,000 bopd programme could potentially be completed by the end of 2020. And the 110,000 bopd Programme appears to be something for 2021. Quite some way off, and potentially something for another operator to tackle. The sums for that can wait for another day
FYI Angus Energy, Bergen, Liargas & The Dirty Tricks That Fooled ShareProphets! Placing Ahoy! Dan x
daniel levi bmd
Worth reading again: nestoframpers - 15 Sep 2018 - 22:37:35 - 572032 of 572059 THE NEW GKP / Drilling for Super Giants (moderated) - GKP The deramper already knows the answer; the deramper already knows what will be found. The power of this tactic is that the deramper is now in control of the actions of the shareholders; the deramper has you, the shareholder doing HIS/HER due diligence and when you, the shareholder come back to the group with a questionable finding then the deramper gains credibility. What to do??? Solution??? Well, I think it's important to find answers but on your own terms. I actually pick up the phone and call the company and talk to the investor relations person or the CEO until I get a satisfactory answer. The problem here is that the advanced deramper has you doing his bidding and his work; you have essentially joined his ranks. So, develop your own little Due Diligence package and answer questions by placing the information into the package and referring all new investors to read the answers to questions raised in the Investor InformatiDe-Rampers Handbook. . IT IS EASIER TO SCARE PEOPLE INTO SELLING THAN IT IS TO INFORM PEOPLE INTO BUYING A SHARE. Know the enemy who wishes to steal your money! . Lesson 1: Remember, DERAMPERS NEVER DERAMP A BAD SHARE. Watch the board for shares with no potential. They never have any derampers. Derampers only go after shares that are going upwards or have excellent potential to go up. Derampers get left behind, so they want to bring the price down to be able to get in at a great price. Lesson 2: DERAMPERS ALWAYS BRING UP OLD NEWS THAT YOU HAVE HEARD MANY TIMES. New startup companies always have a few bits of bad news. The deramper will post this over and over again. The stupid deramper will try to make the old news a bit fresher to try to fool you. Lesson 3: DERAMPERS POST MANY TIMES A DAY. They try to wear you out. They comment on everything, every other post, and can answer every question. THEY KNOW IT ALL! There is no positive comment they won't deramp. They try to control the board. True longs may have to address the derampers or they will appear to the newbies as being the people with all the information. Lesson 4: DERAMPERS WILL LIE TO YOUR FACE. Never trust a deramper. The truth on startup companies is that many mistakes are made and losses happen. The deramper will try to make you believe all startup companies make a profit, release financials every quarter and all aspects of the business run smoothly. THIS IS NOT TRUE. THE DERAMPERS LIE TO YOU. Startup companies can go years without profits, financials and good business, this is the nature of the beast. Lesson 5: The derampers know YOU CAN'T VERIFY THEIR STATEMENTS. That's why they make the statements they do. Lesson 6: The derampers PLAY ON YOUR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE. They can lie about information and you couldn't know the difference (unless you have done your assessment of the company and know the truth and facts). Lesson 7: Derampers play on your lack of patience. YOU have held a share for a while. You knew it will be a big share someday, but the DERAMPER CAN GET TO YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE TIRED OF WAITING FOR YOUR GAIN. That's when the deramper is best. You are tired. You have forgotten the goal for the share was to hold it for one year. The deramper is bothersome, so you dump it on a bad day. Some others also dump. Then you get mad for your loss and return to let everyone know how mad you are. Then you turn into a deramper as well. THE DERAMPER HAS WON, AND GAINED A NEW PARTNER, TOO. Lesson 8: BRING THE PRICE DOWN. That is the deramper's job. The truth is not important. Lies are the norm. Post continuously on the board every day. They are trying to hit the newbies visiting the board. They are trying to wear out the longs on the board. They do whatever it takes to wear the longs out. Lesson 9: DERAMPERS WILL TRY TO GREAT DOUBT AND GET YOU TO RESEARCH ITEMS THAT THEY KNOW WILL LEAD TO THE CREATION OF DOUBT IN YOU AND IN OTHER SHAREHOLDERS. A typical trick of an advanced deramper is to propose that there is a potential "problem" because "we" don't have the facts on a particular subject. The deramper dares someone in the on package but DON'T GET INTO A CONVERSATION WITH THE DERAMPER REGARDING THE TOPIC. THAT IS WHERE YOU LOSE. DON'T CONVERSE WITH THE DERAMPER; ANSWER INDIRECTLY; DON'T USE THE DERAMPERS NAME; DON'T GET INTO A PERSONALITY CONTEST.
22:36 Art of Noise + Trevor Horn + Fairlight was groundbreaking. Here's something Trevor did later, a lovely album.
Shhh -
Masoud Barzani: Election result shows Iraqis punished those who took unconstitutional action against people of Kurdistan Baxtiyar Goran Baxtiyar Goran | An hour ago Share share Masoud Barzani: Election result shows Iraqis punished those who took unconstitutional action against people of Kurdistan The leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), Masoud Barzani, meets with his party's supporters and cadres from Kirkuk on Sept. 16, 2018. (Photo: Barzani's media office) Kurdistan Kirkuk Iraq Masoud Barzani Iraq Elections A+AA- ERBIL (Kurdistan 24) – The leader of the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP), Masoud Barzani, has proposed the launch of a council that would prevent unilateral rule and violations of Iraq’s Constitution until a Federal Council is established. During a speech he gave to his party’s supporters and cadres from Kirkuk and Garmiyan, Barzani said the status quo of Kirkuk and disputed areas between Erbil and Baghdad is unacceptable. The situation of Kirkuk and the Kurdistani areas outside of the Kurdistan Region’s administration should be resolved through Article 140 of the Iraqi Constitution, Barzani explained. He also stressed that the occupation of those areas must not become the status quo. “We have always believed that Kirkuk should be a sample of peaceful coexistence between its components,” the KDP President added, stressing that there is no concession over the Kurdistani identity of Kirkuk. During the meeting, Barzani highlighted the Iraqi government’s violations of the constitution over the past two years that led the people of the Kurdistan Region to hold an independence referendum. Regarding negotiations between the Iraqi political parties over the formation of the new government, he reiterated three principles where unilateral rule would not be accepted. According to Barzani, the new government should be formed on the basis of true partnership, consensus, and balance between all components. The Kurdish leader revealed that parties in the Kurdistan Region are in serious talks with the Iraqi parties to establish a supreme council for policy and strategic planning to ensure major government decisions are made with the consent of the components until the Federal Council is established. The establishment of the federal council will help prevent unilateral rule, violation of the constitution, and crimes against the people of Kurdistan, Barzani explained “Those who oppressed our people have tried to spread hatred among the Iraqi people, but the elections results showed that the people of Iraq punished those who took unconstitutional actions against the people of Kurdistan.” Editing by Karzan Sulaivany
Chat Pages: Latest  26569  26568  26567  26566  26565  26564  26563  26562  26561  26560  26559  26558  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20200329 22:37:45