RE:RE:WelshGeo, you seem to know your stuff. Do you thinkone poster likes long ramblin posts and talk about what usually happens in a reservoir. now, he cannot use water drive recovery as a basis for this royston can he? so he uses the excellent reefs that produce with a long heavy oil from the venezuela basins... that is ridiculous.
I never said gas adds to the already sealed reservoir, that is your theory. I suggest a gas drive is way better outcome, alas it ain't so, it is a mega water producing hole and I know, you don't, that water flows better then oil thru rock, making the well a long term water source not a producing type well, iunless they mitigate issues or improve recovery or something, cuzz right now all indicaton are the well is not worth spending on. they will spend, they need to pump it, they need money and admitting chinook then followed by royston are a big waste of money with no cash flowing flowing.
I never said txp would go bankrupt cuzz they work in a jungle, that is a sad use of double talk by a wanna be oil player. and actually you did not add anything to the discussion. so you can make up a long rambin post about what I said, all wrong of course...
where did I say 90% decline? that is so stupid of that poster to say.
sorry wannabe, if you think water handling is nothing to worry about then go on buy a lot more shares.. those, like me that know, understand a starting point with up to 90% water cut ain't great, even the best 50% they had is dubious. the flow tests of flush virgin reservoir of maybe 1000 bpd when it is mostly water is not a great producer, to inject water is another $10 mill hit, do you spend all that money to produce this well? nope, not until they can improve the economics.. many ways, not just water as wannabe says, but what the hell, he is another wannba that seem to need to quote me or misquote me, guess those wannabes see a real oil guy and think they wannbe so go after the one real oilguy here
sad sack of jelly.