Hi newtraderJust my thoughtsYou said"Hi, that statement was made...

Hi newtrader

Just my thoughts

You said

"Hi, that statement was made in the report on october 12, which was before the akali gulch and pinkerton trail intervals. For the independent consultant to say such a statement on the gas shows they had seen at that stage, he must be very confident in the upper zones which they will be testing after the lower barker creek interval. This was before they found the lower barker creek interval.

Why would they make such a statement which is on public record? They must be confident in the upper intervals to say it is one of the most significant wells to be drilled in the region in 2006-2007.

We havent found out the results of the upper intervals, i would think its still relevent till the testing says different. The company has to be confident with some of the intervals of gas or they wouldnt still be drilling the well.

Thanks."



Warnie- the statement made was based on prior data that gave the impression of a decent sized well, however this analysis does not for one minute mean anything and should be taken with a grain of salt imo. The person whom made that statement would have been thinking Leadville was not water induced and that Pinkerton etc had some decent gas intervals which is clearly not the case, even pros get it wrong, they cannot see what is underground, unfortunately.

The company would drill the well anyway regardless as they cant abandon it until it has been drilled and all data has been collected and assessed. Its their only real major asset they cant afford to just throw it away unless there is no choice whatsoever.

By doing this it is 2 fold, for one they can milk the holders for a while which gives them time to put up further things for holders eg: Uranium spinoff to counter the fact it may not be a very productive well afterall and no.2- maybe it will be productive but without conducting the drilling or further testing they would never really know, so they are in a catch 22 of sorts.

This part of the well may be productive but with the funds spent so far, still may not be very attractive, therefore they have no choice but to continue on to well 2 and hope to not make the same costly mistakes along the way, and by doing so in turn reduce their overall production and drilling costs to make the wells as a whole a more viable opportunity...........which is fair enough.

I still dont quite understand what takes them so long for a word on the flow rates...........but going by previous anns Im putting my money on half baked flow rates which will then in turn be........................well we have these flow rates but we belive it will be better in well 2 for reason a,b and c....................which will keep the holders interested to some degree and the uranium spinoff may have the same effect..........I bought in some more Friday but as I said, for a quick trade not for a long term hold..............why u ask?...................lack of trust in management is the only reason............its like me sacking an employee for being hopeless but still letting them working weekends for half the pay............I put the risk factor back towards the green in my favour.

Maybe a bad example but i hope u get the picture

Cheers