Well... if they knew the pressures in A-1 were not good enough to get oil to the surface, they might have thought Zapato was a better option, considering shallow reservoirs like Amistad were not that productive (consistently only ~300bbl/d). I don't believe their emulsion theory, I think they might have known Alameda/Marti was not good enough to flow, hence the lacklustre ASX publications leading up to the results, (to possibly prevent false expectations). They demonstrated the least amount of excitement possible, which absolutely baffled me at the time, now their behaviour makes complete sense.
The next negative news catalysts coming up:
1) API of Alameda which may be published in the June Quarterly.
2) Announcement about mobilisation of the rig.
3) Credit raise.
4) Webinar/Explanation for what they will do about Alameda/Marti which will be 'x' time periods away.
5) Flambeau predicts Marti/Alameda will be abandoned completely in order to chase Amistad for the foreseeable future.
The bottom line is...
"pressure built to 3034 PSI"1, (this tells me reservoir fluid entered the DST tool [no signs of emulsion/blockage.....])."oil samples were recovered on reverse circulation of the DST string"1, (how did the fluid samples get into the DST string if there was an emulsion blockage [...there probably isn't an emulsion blockage in my opinion, instead the pressure is probably just too small for flowing to the surface]).Reference:
1- 27/06/2024, ASX:MAY, Block 9 Alameda 3 Appraisal Update (Alameda reservoir) https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02821740-3A644961
