Leverage, from what I can see this is good progress and the Pad...

Leverage, from what I can see this is good progress and the Pad approach also delivers an upfront benefit through reduction in Capex which is temporarily offset down the track when the shut in occurs through delay in revenue. The Pad approach also seems to maximise oil/gas recovery on the lease for the longer term and gives efficiencies through shared infrastructure.

Currently there appears to be roughly 600boed shut in however large capex savings were delivered months ago pre spud. Rough guess I think the capex savings (permanent difference) are greater than the revenue delay (timing difference) so all up should be a positive effect on the bottom line.

I Found this article which prompted me to think about the shut-ins differently particularly as more may occur in the future with Rainbow.

From the article: "The fast adoption of multi-well pad drilling, or the ability to drill several wells from one location, should reduce the average cost per well to $7.5 million on average in 2014, allowing companies to make more off each barrel of oil, Wood Mackenzie analyst Jonathan Garret said."
see: Bakken crude Breakeven prices

Does this sound right or have I missed something? Also do you expect flow rates on start up of the shut ins to be same as when they were shut in? I have assumed same for my number but only going on the op reports so could be out.
Cheers