trader,yes I do understand the difference in decline types and...

trader,

yes I do understand the difference in decline types and that is why I'm highlighting the fact that the actual well data may show exponential declines.

There’s a number of things to consider with the plot you posted – firstly it is an old plot first issued in May 11. Secondly, it’s clear from the initial rates that this plot only represent a few of the very good initial producers. The average initial rates on the plot in the first 3 months are ~ 1,000 bpd, but only a small handful of wells have achieved that sort of initial rate so far. The average initial condensate rate across all wells is ~ 550 bpd.

So I would argue that this plot does not currently represent the average AUT well because it’s a vintage plot just showing a small sample which includes some of the best AUT wells. Some wells do decline hyperbolically, but there are numerous examples of wells which decline exponentially, or worse than exponentially.

For wells with exponential declines or worse, try looking at Kowalik, Turnbull#2, Turnbull#4, Urrutia, Luna. Morgan’s decline rate/Q was pretty much the same in 2Q and 3Q 2011, which would not have showed up in your plot.

So it’s not a clear case of saying that the wells perform hyperbolically.

The plot you showed has not be updated by AUT in subsequent presentations, despite the fact that average well performance is critical to AUTs future. Maybe it’s because the wells are performing worse than they expected...