Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Second Wave Petroleum Inc SCSZF



GREY:SCSZF - Post by User

Comment by kootenion Jul 03, 2011 3:05pm
328 Views
Post# 18791321

RE: I hate to be the bearer of bad news

RE: I hate to be the bearer of bad newsYou claim the BHL may not be economic needs facts which your post lacks.

From news releases and their June presentation I get the following;
- Ultimate reserves - 250k Boe which does not include waterflood which could increase recovery by min. 30%
- Cost/well - $5million
- 15-36 has produced 32,000 boe, was pumping at 350 boepd with fluid level at surface.

Payout of well at $60 netback is 83,000 boe
Economics look great to me and ultimate recovery of 250k looks very conservative.
Nowhere did I find any mention of porosity or formation thickness that you claim
you did calculations from.

ARN wells may have more reserves than SCS but economics is not only based on total recovery
but also how fast you recovery these reserves. Looks like 15-36 will have a payout of approx. 6 months
production and would still be producing in the range of 200 boepd.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>