Interesting read, page-2

Quick answer - NOT RELEVANT IMHO and neither at this stage would be the following

http://www.niobraranews.net/production/decline-curves-niobrara/


Long answer - we had savage discussion on this topic 18 months ago. I simply do not accept that Wattenburg field comparisons, especially in Weld County.

This is not "just up the road" (unless roughly 150 miles falls in that category).

I accept AKK statement of "prospectivity" that logging exhibits similar properties of some of the (best?) locations in Wattenburg field. But that doesn't make it so from an E&P perspective.

Unless proven otherwise (and a "discovery well" simply movable/producible hydrocarbons are present in the known formations and hasn't migrated NE which I think the geologists say it flows - so for example to Weld county).

The other thing is APC, NE, BCEI, BBG, CRZO,PDC... and more are not dummies and in some cases multiple orders of magnitude larger. Spending $50M to wildcat is nothing for APC. Don't see a land rush in Fremont county (of course I'm not looking all that hard)

The Comfort zone is EFS.
A comfortable zone is Wattenberg field
A good place to develop is Weld County
A reasonably prospective place to explore is the Niobrara (but lots of companies have been in and out)
A fair area might be Fremont County

Always happy to debate this one.

Whats the worse thing that can happen? I think as an investor in AKK you should/need to know this.