Hurricane Energy Share Discussion Threads

[arregius] 06/1/2020 18:32

That is my position. I am the least knowledgeable here but my "strength" (hopefully) lies in trusting management and forget about noise. I cant say I am confident and that I will increase my % as it goes down and i lack that knowledge so I leave it to hold and execute my initial goal to get the management deliver. Until know I see NO reason to not trust them so I remain LoNG

[bountyhunter] 06/1/2020 18:22

Thanks for posting your response on the water cut from HUR communications Arregius, that's reassuring and my confidence remains with Dr T and HUR's technical team who must have missed ngms's one hundred or so posts since he sold out on Friday around three week's after they originally clarified that matter!

[porrohmahnn] 06/1/2020 18:20

Exrader, the PI figures have been widely reported including in the half year results published in September;

Like most of the good news from Hurricane, it gets drowned in a sea of negativity from some quarters.

[greyingsurfer] 06/1/2020 18:18

Ngms,Your reading of the risks attached to HUR at the time of the fundraising was clearly very different to mine if you are saying that you regarded the risks of failure of the EPS, before the AM was even complete, as less than 10%! I fail to see how you could possibly have been that confident?

[arregius] 06/1/2020 18:15

Response from HUR communications: "As stated in our most recent press release, Hurricane is confident that the water cut observed is related to perched/stranded water. This view is based on a number of technical observations including temperature data, lack of rate-dependency, and water production behaviour after shut-in periods. We've previously stated that it is not affecting oil production or costs and we therefore do not see it as a problem.Crude offtake tankers are used for oil offtake, not water. The fluids are separated on the FPSO vessel where the water can be cleaned up and overboarded. Our guidance is for total oil sales for 2019 of 2.8 million barrels.Kind regards,

[flyinghorse1] 06/1/2020 18:14

You asked -Have a look at PHAR ( Pharos)- results this week, but potentially 17,000bbls/ day no debt paying dividend, and recently restructured.
Been crucified in recent years but looking restructured now if they can get act together in Egypt.
FH

[aquaesulis01] 06/1/2020 17:48

So ngms, having established you are not a geologist and your 10% risk is a wet finger in the air (all being an aquifer wet finger) let's now address your related comment "which would destroy shareholders if found to be aquifer", why is this a statement of fact? There are ways to treat aquifer that retains a "good water" element that means production remains profitable, and even if the 7z well was shut down, well 6 produces average 14700 bopd. Hur has generated £78.6m free cash based on av 13300 bopd between Jun 19 - Dec 19. This equates to £157.20M per annum which well 6 alone can maintain. Now with a current Market Cap of just £608.6M do you really think a worse case scenario has not already been priced in? Show me another company making so much free cash against the Market Cap because I would like to invest in it!

[ngms27] 06/1/2020 17:44

Simple, I thought it was a banker with the EPS funded, well data and future drill / development plans. The March 2019 presentation states that no water is expected to be produced aswell.It's my opinion this started to get riskier when Warwick Deep failed and the 13/12/2019 RNS put the nail in the coffin.The reward is now also smaller.

[tournesol] 06/1/2020 17:37

NgosI think you are getting bogged down in semantics and the language of risk here. You saidMy judgement is there is > 10% risk it's from the aquifer which would destroy shareholders.That implies there is a 90% chance it's NOT from the aquifer.Trice has repeatedly said he's confident its perched water. So are you simply saying that there is a 10% chance he's wrong? He might well agree. His use of the word confident does not imply 100% certainty. What I don't understand is why you bet the farm long ago at a time when the risks must have been much greater than 10%. And now in the face of Trice's repeated assurances you find a 10% risk unbearable. I'm not in any way agreeing with your assessment of the water risk. I'm just puzzled as to why your risk tolerance has changed so much. T

[leoneobull] 06/1/2020 17:36

What happened today? 7% decline? Has SR been spreading water rumours again???

[damac] 06/1/2020 17:31

tournesol6 Jan '20 - 12:32 - 7407 of 7457
0 5 0
Step-one

No. It's a copy and paste from the article linked above without attribution or acknowledgement.

Which is not good practice.


Really? Get back in your box. There was no need to attribute or acknowledge as I never claimed to have sourced the article. All I done was as quite a few other posters before me had done in that I wanted to reiterate certain comments contained in the article. You will note that the whole article had not been posted by me.

[damac] 06/1/2020 17:26

stepone686 Jan '20 - 12:17 - 7406 of 7456

Is that a copy-and-paste from the article linked above, damac?

Yes, it was a reminder of the the pertinent points relating to Lancaster 'water cut issue(?) as certain folk continued to ignore what Dr Trice was stating.

[rahosi] 06/1/2020 16:53

For those that are interested in the crude oil prices,

Brent Crude Oil Futures- NYMEX:BZ

Light Sweet Crude Oil Futures- NYMEX:CL

[anley] 06/1/2020 16:32

During the earlier part of 2019 and with the help of Morgan Stanley and Stifel's brokers reports I bought in at around 44p but sold 56p. Now I have waited and waited but every time I think its right to get back in something goes wrong with the share price.

Today is a great example BUT the point I wish to make is what Dr T seems to be pointing to:.....wait another 6 months to a year so I can check everything - OK but in the meantime the share price will go now where so I am just going to sit and watch and so will the big oil companies who are prepared to watch and wait and then pounce and pay a fair price.

Shareholders need to make their own minds as to how to play HUR........no dividend - sit and wait and don't even bother to worry about water as that wont help.

I will sit and wait until the clouds clear and Dr T says its all going to work.

[m5] 06/1/2020 16:27

We all have a choice whether to buy or sell. Today's share price movement is normal, we are in a range. I just trade this share. No one can deny, that to date, that as an investment this has been poor. Reason we are here is to make money and I do think on a number of levels there are better opportunities out there. We have been in a bullish market and this has not performed as expected.

[buzzzzzzzz] 06/1/2020 16:25

ngms
Filtered

[ngms27] 06/1/2020 16:17

tgg, you are probably right I fully accept that.It's the risk profile that I won't accept now.

[thegreatgeraldo] 06/1/2020 16:15

ngms - that makes sense...I still don't believe coning, especially this early into production, is the explanation for the water - that view is based on what the company are saying ....& they have a wealth of data to base their judgement on.

[ngms27] 06/1/2020 16:15

Don't be silly I'm not a geologist.However a far better question would be to ask Dr T what his confidence levels are. He said confident NOT certain.In 2014 he told us Well 4 was perched water, in 2016 he told us it was likely coned water and given the connectivity data from well 6 the perched water model was far less likely.That's the reality, it's an ever evolving model and interpretation of the data obtained.

[v11slr] 06/1/2020 16:07

Are you going to answer AquaeSulis01's question?

[ngms27] 06/1/2020 16:04

Tgg,The heels are 350m apart but any water bearing fractures could be anywhere in the 1km horizontal sections.I think it's certain that the water bearing fracture(s) at 7z aren't in communication with 6

[pinemartin9] 06/1/2020 15:49

Please shut up ngms27 - you are like a broken record. This has been done to death thank you very much.

[thegreatgeraldo] 06/1/2020 15:49

ngms27
6 Jan '20 - 15:43 - 7444 of 7445
0 0 0
tgg, as coning pulls water up to the well bore vicinity and not everywhere.

Ie it’s fairly localised

...I get that it can be localised, especially if it were pulled up a vertical fracture...... but wells 6 & 7z are pretty close together & in commnication... yet one is wet, t'other dry

[aquaesulis01] 06/1/2020 15:43

ngms, this man is confident it is perched water

Dr Robert Trice

As Hurricane’s founder, Robert has over 25 years’ oil industry experience. He has combined specialist technical expertise in fractured reservoirs’ characterisation and evaluation. He has a PhD in Geology from Birkbeck College, University of London and gained the bulk of his geoscience experience with Enterprise Oil and Shell. He has worked in field development, exploration, well-site operations and geological consultancy. Robert has held the position of Visiting Professor at Trondheim University (Norway) and has published and presented on subjects related to fractured reservoirs and exploration for stratigraphic traps.

Could you post your credentials please ngms so that I can assess how much credence to your 10% Risk of it being coned?

[ngms27] 06/1/2020 15:43

tgg, as coning pulls water up to the well bore vicinity and not everywhere.Ie it's fairly localised.