Ann: Atzam 4 - Project Update , page-41

Lani62,

Nice research. In a short time you probably know more than many of us who might have been in CTR longer.

The projects have been changed hands a few time. Other operators left after investing millions, of which, we now have the infrastructures and drilling equipments in place to drill wells and produce oil. The early operators left because they can't deal with the complexity of the reservoir making it difficult in drilling. Atzam-2 confirm oil flow, good initial production but water influx, cementing wrongly reduce it flow substantially. When Quetzal decided to leave, a few of its managers created LAR to purchase this asset and CTR farmed in.

With this historical issues, why we are here? If we discussed this before the 610 bopd flow, it's all hopeful and guess. With the 610 bopd flow, I think you know the answer.

I once mention "luck" in a post and an angry poster, who sold for a loss probably, made a bitter joke. As I believe in science, "luck" is not what I believe in. However, I understand it as the side of the chance we might end up in a situation that we are not in control or fully understand. When dealing with mother nature (oil reservoir), we made prediction, assumptions, modelling. We have formation damage in the C18/19 due to mud and cement but not in the C17. Nobody knows for certain other untested zone until we perforate them. If Schlumberger interpretation of wireline logs are right for C17, it highly likely is right for the rest. I agree that C18/19 are productive too if the drilling was right.

I have seen 5000+ bopd in the oil field and the wells typically 2500m deep with 50m+ perforated interval. We are producing from a 2m interval. Probably 500 bopd is all I ask for for the 2m interval from a shallow well. If the reservoir is large and thick enough, we can go more without risk of having water influx so early (due to high permeability).