Link to the Cenkos note https://ufile.io/d6ckatsb A couple of...

Link to the Cenkos note

https://ufile.io/d6ckatsb

A couple of points to add

There is some mismatch around porosity within the note. the text below at 11-12% is not supported by the data table which shows around 8% for the data cluster (red squares circled in blue) Compare that with Alkaid 1 (black triangles circled in blue) which show around 11% for the data cluster. Porosity is a key to flow/viability and this 3% difference really counts.

The referenced 100bpd flow test from Alkaid 1 has not been linked to any particular data point. We simply do not know. If it is the yellow highlighted triangle, it cannot be considered representative. I would understand the company would aim for a best target to flow test, as if the best fails, it's back to the drawing board for the play.  

Similarly, whilst the porosities are still relatively tight (11-12%), they are comparable to other wells on the North Slope which have achieved good flow rates on stimulation, such as the Alkaid1 well, which flowed at a rate of 100bopd from a 6ft interval. Higher permeabilities and oil saturation at Charlie-1, when compared to the Alkaid-1 well give further evidence as to the flow potential of the Charlie-1 well.