So Strike says water may be caused by localised water lens. WGO, a possible gas water contact.
Both agree more testing is required to get to the bottom of the water issue.
But why oh why didn't WGO just go along with Strikes interpretation (as operator). What possible upside is there from having divergent stories, when more analysis is required anyway?
This smacks of fragile Scottish egos getting in the way of mutual success, yet again.
Ann: WE4 Production Test, page-24
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 242 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add STX (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
18.5¢ |
Change
0.015(8.82%) |
Mkt cap ! $530.0M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 17.0¢ | 18.5¢ | 17.0¢ | $2.155M | 12.01M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | 851855 | 18.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 18.5¢ | 131078 | 7 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 06/09/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| STX (ASX) Chart |