Very interesting. If I didn’t know better I might have mistaken...

Very interesting. If I didn’t know better I might have mistaken you for a Strike employee or other insider. “We” is a very inclusive term not usually used by an investor of actions by the company. Are you an insider?


my suspicions are further inflamed by the statement that “ the A sand in W7 is looking analogous to W5 as predicted, only much thicker”. That is a big hmmm, I struggle to find anything to ground this statement in already published material on W7. So, either you are making it up or you have a source of information not available to the rest of us mere mortals. Which is it? Do tell all.

While you are about it tell us about W6 and the slick line unit. Just what was it doing? How well is W6 performing generally at the moment? The lack of reference to W6 and any individuated performance data for W5 and W6 is becoming more and more obvious. The most likely reason for that is that W6 might have watered out - am I right? Remember W6 doesn’t have a viable A sand layer at all. so, the test was across the B&C sands and the Cadda formation which is only 4m thick. On testing the B sands produced water, so the focus was on the C & D sand and the Cadda formation. Presumably those were all completed for,production as it would have been madness not to. So, A sand no good, B sand no good, C,D and Cadda completed for production. so what “unproduced reservoirs” was the slick line unit opening? Nothing previously mentioned in an announcement for sure. Is someone telling porkies??