Hurricane Energy Share Discussion Threads

[v11slr] 11/3/2019 08:53

oh by the way

myself

filtered

[v11slr] 11/3/2019 08:51

I believe that climate is changing (as it always has) but I'm sceptical about the amount mankind has contributed to the current change. However I believe that money would be much better spent in adapting to the changes rather than in any futile attempts to reverse them.

[fatnacker] 11/3/2019 08:47

Written like a true believer

[erric] 11/3/2019 08:45

Climate Change.
On the assumption that no-one contributing to this site is a climate scientist then posters must surely divide into the two camps - believers and deniers - based on what they have read in other publications.

Investigative journalism suggests that the majority of “denier” papers, conferences and books have been funded by donations from organisations with links to fossil fuel extraction and support services.
These groups then assert that the “climate change industry” is a put-up job by academics looking for grants to fund their university programmes and keep them in employment.

Sound familiar ?
The cigarette industry first argued that smoking was beneficial to health by lowering stress, improving strength of lungs, etc
Then it went into denial phase and argued against the scientific evidence.
Then it lobbied governments to avoid punitive taxes, health warnings etc
Then it fought the early court cases.
Nowadays nobody and I mean nobody, could prove that smoking is not harmful and IMHO in fifty years time no-one will be trying to deny global warming.

Don’t follow just the arguments - follow the MONEY.

PS
I agree with deniers that we won’t have problems in the short term ( say next half-century )and the UK will get increasingly pleasant during that time but I am quietly pleased, from a selfish point of view, that I have no grand-children because it’s their generation that will really suffer.

[rayrac] 11/3/2019 08:30

It’s not about weeks buz, it’s about months. Stop being so obvious?

[fatnacker] 11/3/2019 08:25

garyitis lmfao

[buzzzzzzzz] 11/3/2019 08:13

Cullercoats
On Tuesday evening a low centred 962 Hebrides brings strong winds to the English Channel, and the southern and western North Sea. Overnight Tuesday the low moves east, centred Forties Wednesday morning, bringing gales to the English Channel, southern and western North Sea , and strong winds elsewhere. During Wednesday the low moves east. Gales will afect much of the southern north sea and severe gales are possible in the west. Overnight Wednesday a transient rridge crosses the North Sea and winds become strong. On Thursday a new low spreads in to the northwest to lie in Fair Isle at midday Thursday, and then moves east. This is likely to bring gales to the northern North Sea and English Channel , with strong or near gale force winds developing elsewhere. During Friday the low moves east, while high pressure in the south declines. Winds should ease to strong or near gale force through the course of Friday


Portpatrick
Portpatrick On Tuesday evening a deep low centred 962 Hebrides brings storm force winds to Rockall, Malin and Bailey, and gales across all other sea areas. Overnight Tuesday the low moves east, c entred Forties Wednesday morning. Storm force winds ease to gales, gales ease in the far north, but persist elsewhere. During Wednesday the low moves east, with high pressure building from the west. Gales ease in most sea areas but strong winds spread to all areas. Overnight Wednesday a new low arrives from the west, centred SE Iceland Thursday morning, bringing gales or severe gales to all areas. During Thursday the low moves east, centred Fair Isle Thursday evening, with gales or severe gales persisting for much of the day. Into Friday the low moves east and winds ease, however strong or near gale force winds are likely to persist across most areas.

So that's this week written off!!!!!!

[whitegold1] 11/3/2019 08:10

TA stuff. Macd borderline turning up as is slow stoch. Rsi just dallying. SMA.s ... means ...okay. Candles not agreeing - they see more risk for the share price Picture mixed. Being driven by short term real news not TS ie AM stuff. Waiting game. Boyzee

[buzzzzzzzz] 11/3/2019 07:43

David Black

"Hope your right Steve re future pricing, it will be nice to see Hurricane north of 100p, a place it would certainly now have been if Crystal Amber had not played short term “Silly b*ggers.”"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David

I really think your judgement is seriously impaired ( you have contracted Garyitis ) if you really believe the above.
Steve73 has laid out a good summary of the milestones HUR has to achieve get above £1.

If the share price was £1 now it would be way over valued and hedge funds would be shorting the sh*t out of it.

You keep blaming CA but you always forget the mess that the CFO made of the placing and in fact it was CA who helped get HUR and Steiffel out of the sh*t. CA have also been given cheap warrants courtesy of the Board so it makes sense to sell and realise a profit.

Yes their selling is irritating but to suggest they have held the share price back by more than 100% does not stack up.

[steve73] 11/3/2019 07:11

fn... yeah, maybe, but if it was a dead cert they'd have got the funds from somewhere... or a partner or takeover... It's always been the uncertainty that's driven the softly-softly approach.

[fatnacker] 11/3/2019 06:56

Steve, I'm not sure full field development was an option on grounds of cost.

[v11slr] 11/3/2019 06:31

telbap
"A lot of statisticians out there are forecasting a 6.0% rate for 2021.....so 2010 was at 9.5% .......30% decline......but still a nice rate of growth.... well it is actually growth!"

China 2010 gdp $6101tn 9% growth = $549tn
China 2018 gdp $13605tn 6.4% growth = $870tn

Lower growth rate but 58% higher real growth.

[steve73] 11/3/2019 06:22

ltinvestor... post 624.

At the rates the EPS will be pulling I'm also not really concerned about water ingress. We're so far above the OWC, we'd have had to have drilled into a substantial fracture channel right down to the water with not a lot else for it to suck up that far.
I'm more concerned that the fractures local to the wells could be somewhat isolated from the rest of the field, and the reservoir pressure will drop too fast. This fractured reservoir has had a couple of hundred million years to slowly fill with oil, and we're going to be sucking it out (hopefully) in a few decades. Remember there is no artificial pressure support, other than the underlying aquifer, and we have no idea how well connected that is, (although I recall reading somewhere it was thought to be in hydrostatic equilibrium with sea-level). There are some good reservoir pressure response plots from the well tests in the various presentations we've seen, but the response over a few years will be significantly different to a test over a few hours/days.... If they were confident it would keep flowing strongly for years, they would have gone straight to FFD (IMO), so there are obviously a few remaining doubts, which is why we're doing the EPS.

The FFD will almost certainly need additional pressure support, unless the natural aquifer is VERY strong. We'll find out soon enough.

[telbap] 11/3/2019 06:13

@v11slr.China's GDP is in fact still positive, Harva, the rate of its growth is slowing and certainly the rate at which it is declining has indeed increased.Harva, again, as a country, the UK would love china's slowing growth rate!, in fact, I imagine, most of the G7 economies would like it.So, you are bother right.China's economy is growing but the rate of growth is declining, and the rate of decline is increasing. A lot of statisticians out there are forecasting a 6.0% rate for 2021.....so 2010 was at 9.5% .......30% decline......but still a nice rate of growth.... well it is actually growth!Source : hTTps://www.statista.com/statistics/263616/gross-domestic-product-gdp-growth-rate-in-china/

[davidblack] 10/3/2019 23:10

The answer to when is Peak oil is not really answerable.

Adjust the price you are prepared to pay and the date moves like crazy.

If you go for the pre Arab Israelis war of 1972 at $2.80 inflation adjusted then we are long past peak oil.

At $145 2015 inflation adjusted a barrel who knows if it’s this century?

[gibso6767] 10/3/2019 22:52

Pol well it’s now 2252 and nothing’s happened !

[pol123] 10/3/2019 21:28

Consensus on peak oil is between 2030 - 2050. Dont think I will lose any sleep on "green" technologies overtaking oil any time soon. There is no need for further debate on the subject

[davidblack] 10/3/2019 21:05

Put it on the Crystal thread not here then.

Most people here have little time for Crystal Amber and see them as a “Wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

Plus his track record is pretty iffy. Sold out too early on Ocado, lucky escape on Patisserie Valerie, flops at Johnson press and Northgate.

Yep great on Hurricane but they hardly have a magic wand.

Anyway it’s really not Hurricane in any guise.

[v11slr] 10/3/2019 21:04

"China is slowing and has been for around 10 years now , but it's now slowing quicker."

Actually that is factually incorrect. China is growing, the rate of growth is slower than it used to be but that is only to be expected as the economy is so much larger.

[buywell2] 10/3/2019 20:56

Check out Crystal Amber and it's BIG holding in GI Dynamics , which makes EndoBarrier.



This is an example of a green investment

BIG Pharma will be doing all they can to stop it from becoming adopted WORLDWIDE

[rahosi] 10/3/2019 20:54

'Power density to weight ratio' comparing oil based fuel and power storage is critical for an aircraft, the topic of my post, not so on the ground.