RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Why is the head honcho only talking about 5-600 billioncf'sI think you're bang on there, now that we know we have a clear path to cash flow that is more than adequate to cover exploration and G&A longer term we'll get a lot more value creation from drilling new prospects and building reserves than we would get from drilling off the known reserves simply to increase cash flow.
But still these guys are killing me, we have these teasers below Cascadura and Chinook that we may not drill for another year or more and now we are going to drill Royston but maybe pull up short of finding a massive pool of oil beneath the gas even tho it's right there on the map.
It's some sort of plot against me, they don't mind making me a lot of money they just don't want me to make too much too soon.
Starting to develop a love/hate relationship with these people...get two drills for God sake and go deep.
Anyway, success at Royston should add another $ 1.00 at least and that's not too far away.
Chreca1 wrote: One more thing regarding their MO post-Royston, now we have one reason why they would not do more development drilling on the already discovereded pools (Coho,Casca, Chinook, see my mail from yesterday), but one more reason and I'm just thinking out loud here, could be that maybe deep inside Paul and the team think there's a good likelihood the suitors may start moving and acting sometime during this year and that it's high time to prove up as much as possible before they strike and then the best way to prove up should be to go full throttle on exploration wells instead of development wells, right.
And if a good chance the company will not live to see the first Casca/Chinook production anyway then there's no time to loose here in proving up as many of those already identified prospects as possible asap ?