Dukey said:Continuing from last post ......
Or you could ask of NT - why did they stop 300m short of the original target depth... was it because they already got what they wanted ?? or was it because they didn't think it was worth drilling??
For NT - I tend to think (and hope) its the first answer... but wish I knew for sure... any ideas folks?
Holding on ...
The most significant gas indications in the well were obtained in Cretaceous carbonates above 14,000 feet, where gas shows during drilling and wire-line log interpretation suggest the presence of potential gas pay. The timing for testing of these indications will be advised as soon as possible.
Read through the AUT announcements for an explanation of the relationship between AUT and Gawlerkevro said:Hi Agent M, I believe that is to do with the proposed sale of AUT's share of the High Island gas project to Gawler Resources. Ref ann 23/02/07. I may be wrong
Agentm said:so gawler resources, a uranium expolerer, nothing to do with the oil and gas game who's directorship includes this guy
Matthew Sheldrick is a Chartered Accountant and spent 10 years in the securities industry, advising domestic and international institutional clients on Australian resource equities. He was most recently CEO of ASX listed Eureka Energy Ltd.
they buy into AUT some 14,000,000 shares..
interesting!!!
do they know something???
Sniffer said:I lot of uranium was mined in that area of the US during the 70s and 80s. Any chance they found more that oil and gas in that hole?
Lucky_Country said:
I doubt if it has anything to do with Uranium. More to do with spreading the cost and the risk. One of the reasons I have come out of this so far is by spreading the risk and trading back and forth between AUT and ADI depending on changes in the ratio of price between the two. My current ratio is 2 Aut to 1 ADI. I am considering again reversing this for the third time. I still think Sugarloaf will produce and there will be other wells on the same field which will be financially beneficial.Sniffer said:You bet they do.
My post from 10/02/07
My understanding is Charles Couch is included as a private partner in TCO percentage of SLINORE said:Sugarloaf – Hosston – 1st phase a success
We have dug the well to 14,480’ and logged the upper sections.
Well was trying to flow back gas during the logging operations.
The Austin Chalk zone from 11,925’ to 12,200’ looks very oil productive. The log results may set us up to drill over 100 wells in offsetting lease (26,000 acres) to just produce the oil from that zone. The porosity is just about double from what is normally found NE of our well location. Some folks have successfully produced with as low as 3% porosity. We have 9 to 12% porosity.
The Edwards is from 12,275’ to 14,000’ looks tight or too dense to produce.
The Sligo formation begans about 14,500’
The Hosston (Objective) begans at 17,000’ Planned total depth is 21,000’.
This morning they are running 9 5/8” casing to 14,480’
IJH
Did couch oil used to be in the JV? Why did they report on this hole?
Agentm said:couchy is a private investor,he posted all his well info on his website, after that infamous post he was told by TCO to shut it down..
couchy investors then got their info via emails.
yes the information sounded brilliant, and to my knowlege there is nothing in the couch report that isnt correct, the JVP's have not confirmed what couchy posted, but all reports from all jvp's is that the secondaries are brilliant.
remember 3 km from SL there is a oil and gas play in the chalks, and its been said the SL intercept was the the same play by EKA on a report last year to the ASX..
so I see it as an opposition player announcing oil and gas discovery on the same play, couchy announcing the same thing, then being censured, and the JVP's saying absolutely nothing about the oil.. but adi announcing 2 wells instead and arq shooting its mouth off about it being commercial..
in light of that i have little reason to sell, regardless of the oil being there i have invested in the belief its a major discovery in the making.. bring on the frac testing..
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?