I thought i'd make this post compiled with some research i done on this play vs others who failed (88E + ReconAfrica).

88E failed to make a discovery.
ReconAfrica made a discovery (geological success), but was not commercially viable.


Lets start with 88E:

I want you to see Merlin-2 Well as a point of reference from 88E:

*The geological chance of success at Merlin-2 is/was 56%

*Chance of development is estimated to be 60%

When they reached total depth, they announced the following:

All three target reservoirs - Nanushuk 20 (N20), N19 and N18 - were penetrated with elevated gas readings while cutting samples revealed oil shows in all target intervals, said a statement.

"Initial observations of LWD [logging while drilling] logs and drill cuttings collected throughout the drilling operations revealed target intervals are thicker than those encountered in Merlin-1 as anticipated pre-drill, with oil shows noted under white light in the three target Nanushuk reservoirs," added the company.

"Finally, significant mud gas peaks were detected across all target sequences in the Nanushuk, with marked increases in the heavier carbon compounds (C2-C5) observed in each."

"Fluorescence has also been observed in numerous samples when placed under an ultraviolet light, an indication of oil presence."

---------------

Do those terms sound familiar? These are the positive signs that IVZ has announced. The fluorescence, the mud gas peaks, the carbon compounds C2-C5, the elevated gas readings.

Now i want you to see a timeline of announcements/events from 88E's Merlin-2 well:

9/3/22 - they kick off the drilling campaign

17/3/22 - they announce they are en route to target depth

23/3/22 - total depth reached, wirelogging to start (and in this announcement they state all the positive things i mentioned above)

29/3/22 - they announce they have failed to obtain a fluid sample. they commented:

The company, in a statement, noted that whilst its tool was unable to obtain a sample it previously encountered encouraging oil shows and logging while drilling data.

It added that there were results consistent with the prior Merlin-1 well - fluorescence and petroliferous odour in cuttings, elevated mud gas readings and evidence of mobile hydrocarbons during MDT sampling.

----------

That was the end of 88E's Merlin-2 Well.

From first look - i became extremely worried. But as i dug deeper, i found that IVZ is definitely more promising than 88E.




Here we can see 88E had weak readings that they hid in their following announcements.

"Relatively weak to moderate dry fluorescence " . That was 88E's original announcement. 88E were not very transparent in following announcements.

You can also see that when a well fails, they write it off pretty quickly (refer to timeline of ann's on 88E). I have noted from people smarter than myself, that the longer things take, the more positive it can potentially be. Because when a well is looking like a dud, its usually written off really fast to save whatever left of cash the company has.

In comparison: IVZ has full fluorescence up to 135x background levels + have outcrop readings implying good porosity/permeability leading towards there being a higher chance of being able to move hydrocarbons. Not forgetting the years worth of data/work on the basin including promising findings from Mobil data and Invictus. You'll have to go through the old data and research reports to see

Here's one old report from Envoi: http://envoi.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/P255Invictus(Zimbabwe-SG4571)EnvoIProjectIntroduction.pdf

There's a lot of older reports that you can dig up with info that references the Mobil findings/data


-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------

Why IVZ is also different than other plays:

This point in particular is what attracted me to this play along ago.

The Geology (Karoo/Permian)

At least 18 basins within Sub-Saharan Africa play host to Permian to Triassic aged sediments generally referred to as Karoo aged sediments. To date 12 discoveries have been made which are understood to be sourced from Karoo aged sediments within these basins (this is the same as IVZ basin)

ReconAfrica is one of them
KKO is another one
as recent explorer examples

In other words, this petroleum system is known to be resource rich, and many countries have made discoveries around here that hold this geology

I recommend you to see this from S&P Global: "The Permian Wave"
https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/ci/research-analysis/the-permian-wave.html

Here it's worth noting that of the 12 discoveries only three are oil discoveries, all located in Madagascar and sourced from Triassic aged source rocks. Perhaps more polarizing is that eight of the 12 are unconventional (all coal bed methane (CBM) with the exception of the Madagascan tar sand discovery), one is a combination of unconventional CBM and conventional gas and two are conventional. To be fair one of the two is reservoired in fractured shale so closer to an unconventional discovery than one might think, and the other is reservoired in the Triassic. Ultimately only two fields have a conventional gas component and two have a conventional oil component (both in Madagascar and Triassic sourced) (IHS Markit Basins content).

----------------------

-----------------------------------------------


Lets move on now to ReconAfrica's most recent headlines:

RECONAFRICA WELL NOT COMMERCIALLY VIABLE

The well did find a working petroleum system, it said, finding methane and gas liquids. It found the liquids at a depth of 1300 to 1335 metres, while the gases were found between 838 and 1807 metres, and also between 1990 and 2058 metres.

ReconAfrica said the well was a geological success but did not find economic amounts of hydrocarbons, blaming this on the likely absence of a trap of four-way dip closure.

This is again where IVZ differs.
IVZ has all the components of a working hydrocarbon system, including trap / four way dip closure."The Mukuyu-1 new-field wildcat will target Upper Karoo sandstones in a 4-way faulted anticline present in license area SG 4571 of the Rufunsa Basin. The structure potentially contains multiple stacked reservoirs with the primary target consisting of fluvial sandstones of the Triassic Angwa Formation."

The only thing missing which remains the key risk of making a discovery / proving moveable hydrocarbons is permeability. And this is what we are gambling on

Why im taking a punt here:

A working hydrocarbon system consists of a mature source rock, migration pathway,reservoir rock, trap and seal. To date IVZ have proven that they have all five. All they are missing is proof that the hydrocarbons are moveable (current stage) and that any discovery is commercial (next stage).

(key data missing is Permeability)

there's still significant risk and i still consider it a calculated gamble