dear mel

After I have read your Kingfisher well test anouncement I am realy disappointed.

In my opinion your well test is a waste of time and money.

MEL, you finished drilling in November 2009 and more than 6 months later you are still testing!!

I even have got the impression and suspicion you are not good in applying good old standard oil field practice.

Yes, you are in the business to produce unconventional gas from CBM reservoirs, but in my opinion you got vacancies when it comes down to handle and operate a conventional gas discovery as Kingfisher.

You are testing tight gas formations and the only data you collect is: "gas present, slow pressure build up" - HAHAHA, what a joke, for the price that you punch holes into the brand new casing and paying (our) money (too) for the oil field service for more than 6 month.

As it should be:
Core the formations, you think are interesting for you. You should have known the formations that should be cored, because already you drilled the casino well before. Ok, I accept the excuse that this is a new play, basin for you, but at the next well I want to see many cores. This cores you will need to plan the fracs for the tight and not so tight sdst.

Please, do the testing, before you run the casing. It hasn`t to be an open hole drill stem test, a wireline formation test will deliver enough data.

Please do a complete geophysical open borehole logging program BEFORE you run the casing.

When you collect the data as suggested you do not need to perforate your brand new casing (well integrity issue - although it`s no HPHT well, but perhaps we need this well for the next 30 years as a production well)

When I think that you perforated the casing 6 times already, man that sounds like a nightmare to me.

Did you do a cement squeeze after every test or
did you do zonal isolation with packers or
are you allowed to have cross flow between the formations in Australia?

I do not like these options: A cement squeeze is more an art than a technique; so many plugs in a well = failure rate of 25%; in the countries where I have been working, such a cross flow is forbidden by the authorities ;

Do not get me wrong, I own MEL shares but it shouldn`t be done as MEL has announced it.

Go for the low hanging fruits and the sweet spots first as the Riple Rd Sdst. Drill the well deeper to get 100% of this sweet spot instead of testing tight gas sdst.

Ok, perhaps you test the zone, where we had a formation pressure a little bit higher than hydrostatic pressure, too (= the next expected results). I do not expect any extraordinary results from this future test, just some nice flow rates perhaps, as you expect from a conventional sdst with gas.

If you would have done the open hole logging, you would know excactly where to perforate instead of testing this crap.

Core, do open hole logging, perforate the sweet spots (or perhaps do better abrasive jetting if you decided to frac as you should do, when the formations are good for fracs), frac this zones and we are ready with the whole work program instead of testing for more than 6 months !

Sorry mates, but when you know that the logging, and WL formation testing would have been done within less than a week with the same or even better results you get mad when you hear they were testing for more than 6 month and the only result was : gas, no CO2, small rate, slow pressure build up.