RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Mm disengaged?I'm sure thats a good reason as any.
It's always about money, isn't it?. Maybe it has to do with price or cost depending on ones perspective. Certainly, SGE wants something from Sonoro. What could that be?
RoyMax123 wrote: Because SNV own 25% of it like the rest of Selat Panjang PSC
ark88 wrote: ark88 wrote: StratCap wrote: ark88 wrote: SlyFox1 wrote: Assuming Bakau is a quick restart like we all believe it is, it benefits SGE and SNV. Gets cash flowing to aid in funding the work program.
Have to assume the work program is more around additioanl development and increasing production output, rather than just the restart of Bakau.
Seems logical Bakau was not part of the work program
Here are the reasons why I think you're right about cash generation as a priority:
1. Bakau was the last to be shut-in in 2016 (presumption that its the therefore easiest to reopen)
2. Lastest to be discovered of the 3 fields.
3. Best production rate of the 3 fields at the time of shut-in.
4. Best transport infrastructure of the 3 fields.
5. Closest to the 2 refineries.
seems like a reasonable decision if this is the case.
The had 9 production wells shut in from ALL fields.
The news release of June 20 states that SGE had workover on 3 wells at Bakau.
Bakau production peaked at 680 BOPD before shut-in in 2016.
I bet the 3 wells mentioned could produce close to or over the preshut in production numbers.
Now, do the math on 600-1000 BOPD...............it all kind of makes sense.
So the question remains.
Why would SGE tell Sonoro that they've been working at Bakau?