I asked TB some questions regarding the Roosevelt project, its...

I asked TB some questions regarding the Roosevelt project, its well positioning and evaluating the play

Mat,

Thanks for your recent email.

The two Roosevelt wells were designed to evaluate either end of our land holding so given that they were both successful then that would prove up everything in between. Putting them there also allowed for one to fail and it would not condemn the other location. So if they both work then we have come a long way in terms of proving the play, however a well to the north (completing the triangle) would be useful. So really depends on the results.





I also asked TB a few questions regarding SOA, the salt domes, and its revised drilling plan



The SOA well failed not because of a salt dome as this salt is flat lying and it was the sloppy shale immediately beneath that salt that caught us. Our current plan is to re-drill at the same location but just do a better engineering job of the well.

And yes we will put in a bigger, better equipped rig, size does matter when you are getting stuck, our intention though would not to be stuck at all, by using deeper set casing and a much higher mud weight along with an oil based mud.

Regards

Terry



The fact the salt domes wasn’t the real problem in the drilling of SOA is great news, so as you can see size does matter when it comes to drilling rigs, the casing and the type and weight of mud used.

SSN has now spent $4.5 million on SOA alone and will re-drill the same location which will cost SSN at least another 3.5 Million. With $8M spent on one location or 11% of their total proceeds from the sale to CHK you can see how much this play means to SSN. In fact TB puts the vertical play at $1Billion.



Cheers Matsim