Geogypsy53, in terms of the "missing 200'" you mention, how did you get that figure? I easily could have missed it. There may be a missing 1500' of pay from what they originally mentioned when drilling FP#1, because they haven't referred to any pay sections for quite some time, due to salt baffles and subsequent shutdown. The last production zone for FP#1 was a 10' section.
I agree, they haven't spoken of the lower formation below the FP#1 pay zone in recent info. The last time they mentioned was the quarterly on the 29th of October;
"There is also evidence to suggest that these hydrocarbons may be connected to larger hydrocarbon accumulations with the potential for a significant financial outcome."
The latest FP release in May may be explaining away the lower zone we're referring to. I hope not;
"Although the original 1994 3D seismic data has excellent signal quality, it contains various acquisition design problems. This initially created some minor interpretational issues, however using modern day reprocessing techniques the data has now been adequately reprocessed." Just a guess.
On the positive side, I do like the last page;
"The structure appears to be of considerable size and could potentially contain a significant volume of hydrocarbons. The final bottom hole target will be accessible from the existing TGR‐1 location with a sidetrack from the original well bore.?This will significantly reduce the well drilling costs."
I guess we'll see soon enough in the imminent release . . .
I have no idea on how to interpret logs, but could anyone add any opinion on what they read in regard to those maps and charts in the 7th April presso? You around Dis?
Mug.
GGP Price at posting:
1.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
