operational reports - error, page-8

David1475,

No they have done proper fracs at NS before, they just did a bigger one this time, maybe added a few extra stages and pumped much more propant into the well bore than before.

Yes it's quite possible the larger frac, has opened up some sections of the formation that weren't producing in previous NS wells and that theses sections contain waxy oil.

However to me that wouldn't explain it all, as they would only account for a certain percentage of the overall well production.

As you say, they may simply not have informed shareholders about it previously, but they were bullish about a couple of the first wells initially, before they underperformed.

The truth is we simply don't know the answer to the question we are mearly guessing.

Some here don't want to look at the latest data, as it doesn't suit there point of view. Ray 5 was a fabulous well from the outset and did really good production numbers then after 4 months, production dropped very rapidly, much more steeply than one would have expected.

The 1st Lonestar well Antares drilled was initially average at best, had a really strange production profile and I openly called it a dog, yet after that poor start its decline curve has been very shallow and it would appear to me to be one of the best wells in the area, when you look at what it's EUR's are likely to be.

So as I have learned a high initial number is not always what it appears to be, neither is a low or average one. Its the perfomance over the 1st 10 months that's key especially the decline curve, the shallower the better.

That's why I'm not taken in by initial flow rate numbers, because there might have been a void (or natural fracture near the wellbore that the frac allowed conectivity with) that gives the high number, once its drained production drops quickly.

Archers at NS reported at over 140 bopd but never actually produced over 900 barrels in a calander month.

So yes that's why I'm watching the latest info so carefully and the 1 day difference is important to me as it makes such a difference to the decline curve. The overall 30 day production number is the same but not the steepness of the curve.

The last 8 days would mean production of 900 barrels for an average of 112.5 - if on the other hand its only 7 days its 128.5 a big difference when your plotting the decline curve and its implications further down the line.

LOTM