CTP - Central Petroleum
- Thread starter idribble
- Start date
-
- Tags
- central petroleum ctp
and more announcements coming - trading halt now in place.
Buy side has increased significantly over last few days trading. and SP up to 0.12 prior to halt
Making the rights issue look attractive after being only marginally so up till now (even considering the free options)
Buy side has increased significantly over last few days trading. and SP up to 0.12 prior to halt
Making the rights issue look attractive after being only marginally so up till now (even considering the free options)
trading halt today pending annoucement re oversubscription of the rights issue.
am I missing something - how does a pro-rata rights issue get oversubscribed
it mentions expressions of support from institutions - but what's that got to do with the shareholders who've applied for their alloted shares??
guess will have to wait and see the detail in the announcement.
am I missing something - how does a pro-rata rights issue get oversubscribed
it mentions expressions of support from institutions - but what's that got to do with the shareholders who've applied for their alloted shares??
guess will have to wait and see the detail in the announcement.
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 531
- Reactions
- 0
Have been buying back into CTP over the last few days as a classic BESBS play.
The company has now had a significant capital raising. This helps to secure funds and create a platform under the SP. No guarantees but for me, this is a sign that I look for.
Apart from a few CSG holes (which are a bonus for me), the real gem is the upcoming Johnstone prospect. Talk of a massive potential 998mmbl of oil (which the odds IMHO are 1:50 at best in this largely virgin country) will get the punters in once the rig starts to move to the site.
Happily holding CTP (9.2c ave) for another (hopefully) profitable ride.
The company has now had a significant capital raising. This helps to secure funds and create a platform under the SP. No guarantees but for me, this is a sign that I look for.
Apart from a few CSG holes (which are a bonus for me), the real gem is the upcoming Johnstone prospect. Talk of a massive potential 998mmbl of oil (which the odds IMHO are 1:50 at best in this largely virgin country) will get the punters in once the rig starts to move to the site.
Happily holding CTP (9.2c ave) for another (hopefully) profitable ride.
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 531
- Reactions
- 0
Still buying some on price dips.
Happy to sit and wait. To me it has all the hallmarks of a BESBS (Buy Early Sell before Spud) play.
Patience...
Happy to sit and wait. To me it has all the hallmarks of a BESBS (Buy Early Sell before Spud) play.
Patience...
- Joined
- 14 May 2009
- Posts
- 45
- Reactions
- 0
the word on the street is that CTP have a rig in place, just a case of doting the i's and crossing the t's.
So spud could be soon, and with 998 MMbbls of Undiscovered Oil Initially In Place (UOIIP), 998,000,000 bbls of oil at $74bbl is $73,852,000,000.
So spud could be soon, and with 998 MMbbls of Undiscovered Oil Initially In Place (UOIIP), 998,000,000 bbls of oil at $74bbl is $73,852,000,000.
- Joined
- 14 May 2009
- Posts
- 45
- Reactions
- 0
Conditional upon Joint Venture approval at OPCOM meetings planned by the end of June 2009 as well as various other contingencies inclusive of funding, crews and equipment, CTP plans the following programme for 2009 to commence as soon as possible but probably by late August, early September 2009:
1. Three to four conventional wells (Amadeus Basin):
• Johnstone-1: oil, Mereenie style, primary porosity in sandstones as well
as fractured sandstones
• Ooraminna-2: gas, fractured carbonates and sandstones, already flowed
gas to surface
• Magee-2: gas, condensate, Helium, already flowed gas to surface,
subsalt
• Optional Mt Kitty 1: gas, condensate, Helium, 430 km² subsalt
2. Five to ten fully cored CSG wells (Pedirka Basin)
• Five fully cored CSG wells- a further five fully cored CSG wells as an
option or follow up fraccing and flow testing
• Flow testing of CBM93001, drilled in the 2008 campaign
3. 2D seismic in the Amadeus and Pedirka Basins
• 1,250 line km
• Targeting both regional and prospect definition targets for oil, gas,
condensate and Helium
4. Cost
• $22-44 million with c. 40-60% anticipated to be provided by JV partners
MMR hold a large holding in CTP and look where their share price is heading.....think about it!
1. Three to four conventional wells (Amadeus Basin):
• Johnstone-1: oil, Mereenie style, primary porosity in sandstones as well
as fractured sandstones
• Ooraminna-2: gas, fractured carbonates and sandstones, already flowed
gas to surface
• Magee-2: gas, condensate, Helium, already flowed gas to surface,
subsalt
• Optional Mt Kitty 1: gas, condensate, Helium, 430 km² subsalt
2. Five to ten fully cored CSG wells (Pedirka Basin)
• Five fully cored CSG wells- a further five fully cored CSG wells as an
option or follow up fraccing and flow testing
• Flow testing of CBM93001, drilled in the 2008 campaign
3. 2D seismic in the Amadeus and Pedirka Basins
• 1,250 line km
• Targeting both regional and prospect definition targets for oil, gas,
condensate and Helium
4. Cost
• $22-44 million with c. 40-60% anticipated to be provided by JV partners
MMR hold a large holding in CTP and look where their share price is heading.....think about it!
- Joined
- 29 June 2006
- Posts
- 1,458
- Reactions
- 0
WHats the strike price on the options ?? 2014
why can i never find this information.. is there somewhere i should be looking ?!??
thanks
why can i never find this information.. is there somewhere i should be looking ?!??
thanks
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 531
- Reactions
- 0
Looks like some punters are realising the potential value in CTP. I think Bordercityfirm gives a nice summary...
Holding CTP at 9c ave
Holding CTP at 9c ave
Massive volume today, 42,591,875 , sp retraced a bit but looks strong at 10 - 10.5c will be an interesting open tomorrow.
25 Aug 2009 0.088 3.53% 0.090 0.085 8,920,651
24 Aug 2009 0.085 0% 0.087 0.084 3,249,950
21 Aug 2009 0.085 -1.16% 0.089 0.084 3,040,396
20 Aug 2009 0.086 3.61% 0.089 0.084 3,803,414
19 Aug 2009 0.083 0% 0.086 0.082 5,904,037
25 Aug 2009 0.088 3.53% 0.090 0.085 8,920,651
24 Aug 2009 0.085 0% 0.087 0.084 3,249,950
21 Aug 2009 0.085 -1.16% 0.089 0.084 3,040,396
20 Aug 2009 0.086 3.61% 0.089 0.084 3,803,414
19 Aug 2009 0.083 0% 0.086 0.082 5,904,037
- Joined
- 14 May 2009
- Posts
- 45
- Reactions
- 0
Just had the time to sit down and assess the recent deal with EIR so a few thoughts/comments below (all imho only).
Firstly it’s extremely positive to see Gillespie bring to the table his wealth of experience in the sector and, for central to have achieved highly desirable terms to the negotiations. As usual, I believe the market has discounted the impact this deal may deliver to CTP’s bottom line (as it seems 9/10 just want to see drilling). Put simply, the company has further strengthened its fundamentals via this potential farmin, and, the upcoming campaign will play an interesting role towards future developments in EP130 which I’ll quickly outline below.
Now using other CBM drilling models as a basis of assessment and applying it towards this deal, Central and EIR should potentially be able to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level by undertaking a series of 25 flow tested exploration wells plus a further 15 barrel cores, thus a total of 40 wells. This would be completed with two rigs at work, one undertaking the exploratory drilling and flow testing whilst the other is out coring.
For diagrammatic purposes let’s assume each well costs a total of $1m, hence the total outlay is $40m per TCF at 3P level (realistically the wells may cost around $1.2m-$1.5m with flow testing but this is indicative only). At the proposed 2.4:1 promote level (or 60:40) farmin terms outlined in this agreement, the cost to CTP to delineate 1TCF at 3P level will be a total of $16m, with EIR contributing $24m.
In addition to this, as per the announcement EIR will be paying a “Reserve Premium” of $10m per TCF of 3P reserves delineated, thus reducing CTP’s expenditure to a mere $6m per TCF. This potential financial outcome to CTP alone is one of significance.
Looking into this further, from an in ground value perspective the potential delineation of 1TCF (or 1000 PJ) per annum is quite significant, and we all know recent deals in the sector have been very compelling at the least.
"Just had the time to sit down and assess the recent deal with EIR so a few thoughts/comments below (all imho only).
Firstly it’s extremely positive to see Gillespie bring to the table his wealth of experience in the sector and, for central to have achieved highly desirable terms to the negotiations. As usual, I believe the market has discounted the impact this deal may deliver to CTP’s bottom line (as it seems 9/10 just want to see drilling). Put simply, the company has further strengthened its fundamentals via this potential farmin, and, the upcoming campaign will play an interesting role towards future developments in EP130 which I’ll quickly outline below.
Now using other CBM drilling models as a basis of assessment and applying it towards this deal, Central and EIR should potentially be able to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level by undertaking a series of 25 flow tested exploration wells plus a further 15 barrel cores, thus a total of 40 wells. This would be completed with two rigs at work, one undertaking the exploratory drilling and flow testing whilst the other is out coring.
For diagrammatic purposes let’s assume each well costs a total of $1m, hence the total outlay is $40m per TCF at 3P level (realistically the wells may cost around $1.2m-$1.5m with flow testing but this is indicative only). At the proposed 2.4:1 promote level (or 60:40) farmin terms outlined in this agreement, the cost to CTP to delineate 1TCF at 3P level will be a total of $16m, with EIR contributing $24m.
In addition to this, as per the announcement EIR will be paying a “Reserve Premium” of $10m per TCF of 3P reserves delineated, thus reducing CTP’s expenditure to a mere $6m per TCF. This potential financial outcome to CTP alone is one of significance.
Looking into this further, from an in ground value perspective the potential delineation of 1TCF (or 1000 PJ) per annum is quite significant, and we all know recent deals in the sector have been very compelling at the least.
recent deals for 2P reserves have ranged from $1.67 GJ (QGC/SHG) to $4.91 GJ (Petronas/STO) with the mean price of these transactions approximately $2.90 GJ.
Secondly (and more appropriate for CTP holders at this point in time) a breakdown of recent 3P reserve transactions in $/GJ
recent deals for 3P reserves have ranged from $0.40 GJ (BG/PES) to $3.10 GJ (AGL/SGL) with the mean price of these transactions approximately $1.25 GJ.
Now if we were to apply $0.40 GJ to reserves delineated by CTP/EIR in EPA130 and, the company did have the capacity to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level based on the drilling model specified earlier, then this would equate to the identification of approximately $400,000,000 per annum of in ground resource.
Keep in mind, CTP will fund $6-10m maximum per TCF and will retain a 55% interest ($220m) in EPA130. EIR will retain a 45% interest ($180m) through both EIR itself (25%) and its wholly owned subsidiary GSG (20%).
I personally believe that should the company find positive results in the upcoming programme of 5 fully cored CBM’s plus the flow testing of Blamore 1, this may provide encouragement towards accelerating the campaign for EPA130. With several rigs simultaneously at work, the capacity to delineate 2 or even 3 TCF per annum at 3P level is not impossible.
Clearly, achieving the 1TCF figure per annum on that drilling model is subject to successfully identifying the current unknown factors such as the gas saturation of the coals, thickness of the coal beds, properties of the coal, potential for fracture stimulation and assessing flow rates et al. (Testing the saturation level last campaign was not possible as the core barrels utilised were for oil and not specifically CBM, thus the results returned were inconclusive). Other issues such as the granting of EPA130 and CLC clearances are also a risk however I expect these to be minimal.
That said, in my opinion only, overall any CBM drilling is still a limited risk venture given the extensive seismic/geological models, successful historical/recent drilling demonstrating the blanket nature of the coal over the pedirka (and even the simpson for that matter), identification of its partial sub-bituminous qualities, and, the fact that the coals in the Pedirka are correlated to that of the Ipswich which are known to be some of the most volatile in the country.
As a refresher from memory (don’t quote me), the results of the recent campaign were:
Blamore: 132m net/233 units
CBM93001: 138m net/190 units
Simpson: 7m net/130 units
(Where the net figure is in seams >2m and the gas is measured as units of 100pm)
Anyway there’s a bit to digest for now however imo, once executed to a formal agreement, this deal with EIR will turn out to be a VERY significant and positive transaction for CTP.
Firstly it’s extremely positive to see Gillespie bring to the table his wealth of experience in the sector and, for central to have achieved highly desirable terms to the negotiations. As usual, I believe the market has discounted the impact this deal may deliver to CTP’s bottom line (as it seems 9/10 just want to see drilling). Put simply, the company has further strengthened its fundamentals via this potential farmin, and, the upcoming campaign will play an interesting role towards future developments in EP130 which I’ll quickly outline below.
Now using other CBM drilling models as a basis of assessment and applying it towards this deal, Central and EIR should potentially be able to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level by undertaking a series of 25 flow tested exploration wells plus a further 15 barrel cores, thus a total of 40 wells. This would be completed with two rigs at work, one undertaking the exploratory drilling and flow testing whilst the other is out coring.
For diagrammatic purposes let’s assume each well costs a total of $1m, hence the total outlay is $40m per TCF at 3P level (realistically the wells may cost around $1.2m-$1.5m with flow testing but this is indicative only). At the proposed 2.4:1 promote level (or 60:40) farmin terms outlined in this agreement, the cost to CTP to delineate 1TCF at 3P level will be a total of $16m, with EIR contributing $24m.
In addition to this, as per the announcement EIR will be paying a “Reserve Premium” of $10m per TCF of 3P reserves delineated, thus reducing CTP’s expenditure to a mere $6m per TCF. This potential financial outcome to CTP alone is one of significance.
Looking into this further, from an in ground value perspective the potential delineation of 1TCF (or 1000 PJ) per annum is quite significant, and we all know recent deals in the sector have been very compelling at the least.
"Just had the time to sit down and assess the recent deal with EIR so a few thoughts/comments below (all imho only).
Firstly it’s extremely positive to see Gillespie bring to the table his wealth of experience in the sector and, for central to have achieved highly desirable terms to the negotiations. As usual, I believe the market has discounted the impact this deal may deliver to CTP’s bottom line (as it seems 9/10 just want to see drilling). Put simply, the company has further strengthened its fundamentals via this potential farmin, and, the upcoming campaign will play an interesting role towards future developments in EP130 which I’ll quickly outline below.
Now using other CBM drilling models as a basis of assessment and applying it towards this deal, Central and EIR should potentially be able to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level by undertaking a series of 25 flow tested exploration wells plus a further 15 barrel cores, thus a total of 40 wells. This would be completed with two rigs at work, one undertaking the exploratory drilling and flow testing whilst the other is out coring.
For diagrammatic purposes let’s assume each well costs a total of $1m, hence the total outlay is $40m per TCF at 3P level (realistically the wells may cost around $1.2m-$1.5m with flow testing but this is indicative only). At the proposed 2.4:1 promote level (or 60:40) farmin terms outlined in this agreement, the cost to CTP to delineate 1TCF at 3P level will be a total of $16m, with EIR contributing $24m.
In addition to this, as per the announcement EIR will be paying a “Reserve Premium” of $10m per TCF of 3P reserves delineated, thus reducing CTP’s expenditure to a mere $6m per TCF. This potential financial outcome to CTP alone is one of significance.
Looking into this further, from an in ground value perspective the potential delineation of 1TCF (or 1000 PJ) per annum is quite significant, and we all know recent deals in the sector have been very compelling at the least.
recent deals for 2P reserves have ranged from $1.67 GJ (QGC/SHG) to $4.91 GJ (Petronas/STO) with the mean price of these transactions approximately $2.90 GJ.
Secondly (and more appropriate for CTP holders at this point in time) a breakdown of recent 3P reserve transactions in $/GJ
recent deals for 3P reserves have ranged from $0.40 GJ (BG/PES) to $3.10 GJ (AGL/SGL) with the mean price of these transactions approximately $1.25 GJ.
Now if we were to apply $0.40 GJ to reserves delineated by CTP/EIR in EPA130 and, the company did have the capacity to delineate 1 TCF per annum at 3P level based on the drilling model specified earlier, then this would equate to the identification of approximately $400,000,000 per annum of in ground resource.
Keep in mind, CTP will fund $6-10m maximum per TCF and will retain a 55% interest ($220m) in EPA130. EIR will retain a 45% interest ($180m) through both EIR itself (25%) and its wholly owned subsidiary GSG (20%).
I personally believe that should the company find positive results in the upcoming programme of 5 fully cored CBM’s plus the flow testing of Blamore 1, this may provide encouragement towards accelerating the campaign for EPA130. With several rigs simultaneously at work, the capacity to delineate 2 or even 3 TCF per annum at 3P level is not impossible.
Clearly, achieving the 1TCF figure per annum on that drilling model is subject to successfully identifying the current unknown factors such as the gas saturation of the coals, thickness of the coal beds, properties of the coal, potential for fracture stimulation and assessing flow rates et al. (Testing the saturation level last campaign was not possible as the core barrels utilised were for oil and not specifically CBM, thus the results returned were inconclusive). Other issues such as the granting of EPA130 and CLC clearances are also a risk however I expect these to be minimal.
That said, in my opinion only, overall any CBM drilling is still a limited risk venture given the extensive seismic/geological models, successful historical/recent drilling demonstrating the blanket nature of the coal over the pedirka (and even the simpson for that matter), identification of its partial sub-bituminous qualities, and, the fact that the coals in the Pedirka are correlated to that of the Ipswich which are known to be some of the most volatile in the country.
As a refresher from memory (don’t quote me), the results of the recent campaign were:
Blamore: 132m net/233 units
CBM93001: 138m net/190 units
Simpson: 7m net/130 units
(Where the net figure is in seams >2m and the gas is measured as units of 100pm)
Anyway there’s a bit to digest for now however imo, once executed to a formal agreement, this deal with EIR will turn out to be a VERY significant and positive transaction for CTP.
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 531
- Reactions
- 0
Happy with the SP and volume at present.
Reminds me of my LKO play a few months back...slow build up, plenty of time to get set then suddenly it was off and running.
Waiting happily here with CTP (9c ave)
Reminds me of my LKO play a few months back...slow build up, plenty of time to get set then suddenly it was off and running.
Waiting happily here with CTP (9c ave)
) rang up JH, who had no idea what was behind the rise.
- Joined
- 14 May 2009
- Posts
- 45
- Reactions
- 0
No idea what is behind the rise the best thing I have heard in a long long time
the best thing I have heard in a long long time
- Joined
- 29 June 2006
- Posts
- 1,458
- Reactions
- 0
options are really on the move this morning .. I think people have realised that with 2014 expiry these are really really attractive with drilling commencing now..
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 531
- Reactions
- 0
CTP are now starting to appear on the radar for many.
While it is important to note that they are in largely virgin country and drilling wildcats for oil (Johnstone), they do have the following attractions:
* bucket loads of cash (recently $31m)
* huge potential targets (Johnstone)
* several targets (both CSG and conventional oil/gas)
* action hopefully in the next 6 months
These are signals for many to get set
Holding CTP at 9c ave
While it is important to note that they are in largely virgin country and drilling wildcats for oil (Johnstone), they do have the following attractions:
* bucket loads of cash (recently $31m)
* huge potential targets (Johnstone)
* several targets (both CSG and conventional oil/gas)
* action hopefully in the next 6 months
These are signals for many to get set
Holding CTP at 9c ave
- Joined
- 14 May 2009
- Posts
- 45
- Reactions
- 0
Fundimentals are there for all to see......came across this technical chart info today:
Technical Analysis
Targets
Six months: 0.17 One year: 0.20
Supports
Support1: 0.10 Support2: 0.07
Resistances
Resistance1: 0.14 Resistance2: 0.17
Pivot Point 0.09
Moving Averages
MA(5): 0.11 MA(20): 0.09
MA(100): 0.10 MA(250): 0.10
MACD
MACD(12,26): 0.01 Signal(12,26,9):
Stochastic Oscillator
%K(14,3): 87.05 %D(3): 81.51
RSI
RSI(14): 85.01
52-Week
High: 0.18 Low: 0.06 Change(%): -13.3
Average Volume(K)
3-Month: 7202 10-Days 13141.879883
Price and moving averages
Price and moving averages has closed above its Short term moving average. Short term moving average is currently above mid-term; AND below long term moving averages. From the relationship between price and moving averages; we can see that: This stock is BULLISH in short-term; and NEUTRAL in mid-long term.
Bollinger Bands
CTP.AX has closed above the upper band by 15.8%. If the price is in a uptrend; then this upward trend has a good chance to continue. above the upper band by 15.8%. If price is in a uptrend band; this upward trend in price might continue. However a short term pullback inside the band is likely.Bollinger Bands are 96.9% wider than normal. The large width of the bands suggest high volatility as compared to CTP.AX's normal range. The bands have been in this wide range for 1 bars. This is a sign that the current trend might continue.
Technical Analysis
Targets
Six months: 0.17 One year: 0.20
Supports
Support1: 0.10 Support2: 0.07
Resistances
Resistance1: 0.14 Resistance2: 0.17
Pivot Point 0.09
Moving Averages
MA(5): 0.11 MA(20): 0.09
MA(100): 0.10 MA(250): 0.10
MACD
MACD(12,26): 0.01 Signal(12,26,9):
Stochastic Oscillator
%K(14,3): 87.05 %D(3): 81.51
RSI
RSI(14): 85.01
52-Week
High: 0.18 Low: 0.06 Change(%): -13.3
Average Volume(K)
3-Month: 7202 10-Days 13141.879883
Price and moving averages
Price and moving averages has closed above its Short term moving average. Short term moving average is currently above mid-term; AND below long term moving averages. From the relationship between price and moving averages; we can see that: This stock is BULLISH in short-term; and NEUTRAL in mid-long term.
Bollinger Bands
CTP.AX has closed above the upper band by 15.8%. If the price is in a uptrend; then this upward trend has a good chance to continue. above the upper band by 15.8%. If price is in a uptrend band; this upward trend in price might continue. However a short term pullback inside the band is likely.Bollinger Bands are 96.9% wider than normal. The large width of the bands suggest high volatility as compared to CTP.AX's normal range. The bands have been in this wide range for 1 bars. This is a sign that the current trend might continue.
Looks like it's straight from Stoxline(t/a for the lazy lol):
http://au.stoxline.com/q_au.php?symbol=ctp&c=ax&Analysis=Analysis
http://au.stoxline.com/q_au.php?symbol=ctp&c=ax&Analysis=Analysis
