Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
OT Looks like all of RB is down AGAIN.
OT Looks like all of RB is down AGAIN.
Am I interpreting the application correctly...?
There are five oil fields named, and different depths (except two are shown at the same maximum well depth). I assume they hope to hit five pay zones with this well?
I also assume this is not the test well where the rig is now, because I think its depth was to be 3000 feet.
Merry Christmas to you too, Unknown Factor.,..
And thanks once more for helping me find Biophan, and thus Atlas. Still long Torbay, and hoping for it to succeed in time.
Magicfingers, two: drilling rig and a rework rig..
Drilling rig can drill 8000 feet vertically, and laterals up to 3000 feet.
That's GREAT NEWS, Hawk! Thanks...
Just for interest, do you know if they had the equipment to drill the conductor hole and rathole, or did they contract that out? Apparently there is also a mouse hole, which can be drilled after rigging up.
Holy cow! So many deleted posts...
Starting with post #4301 only 10 of the next 23 posts survive! What's going on?
Better, I think, that you be damned if you do and damned if you don't than CB be distracted by phone calls day and night pestering him for information.
Agree completely with company man and hawk. Lay off the calls to CB during such critical times as this when he's focused on getting the drillbit turning right. The news will come when it comes.
Hawk, congratulations and thanks for taking on this additional responsibility to help us know what we own here.
And Czech, best wishes for a safe and productive deployment to Iraq. Thank you greatly for your service to your country.
NG Jan. futures $14.44, + .74 /em
NG Jan futures $14.04, +.34 /em
Beigledog, NNAN did NOT do a reverse split!
It will drift down to where it ought to be, and will then be an attractive buy, IMO.
FWIW, Oil&NG nearly back to 60&14.
ThSeeker, in researching your question about valuing BDCs I found, quite interestingly, that Harris & Harris of "tiny" nanotechnology venture capital fame is structured as a BDC.
They tried to clear up the BDC valuation confusion in their annual report (see below).
"Our raison d'etre is to endeavor to earn a high return on our shareholders' investment in our Company by making profitable investments in tiny technology. Our Company is a publicly traded venture capital firm and, as such, we are regulated as a business development company (BDC). Most venture capital firms are organized as private limited partnerships. Because there are very few BDCs, it is understandable that relatively few investors are familiar with their structure, and many wonder how to measure a BDC's performance and how to think about valuing a BDC.
The accounting conventions used for BDCs are different from those used for operating companies. BDCs do not report "net income"; instead, the measure of a BDC's operating performance is called "net increase in net assets resulting from operations." This figure is the sum of: "net operating income" (which is the difference between "total investment income" and "total expenses") plus "net realized income from investments" plus "net increase in unrealized appreciation on investments." Similarly, BDCs do not report "shareholders' equity" (book value); instead, they report "net assets." An operating company seeks to grow by earning high levels of "net income" relative to its "shareholders' equity" (book value); if successful, it increases book value and/or dividends rapidly. If an operating company is expected by investors to be successful in rapidly increasing book value and/or dividends, its common stock may sell at premiums to "shareholders' equity" per share (book value per share). Similarly, a BDC seeks to grow by generating high rates of positive change in "net increase in net assets resulting from operations." If a BDC is expected by investors to be successful in rapidly increasing "net asset value per outstanding share" (often abbreviated as "NAV"), and/or dividends, its common stock may sell at premiums to NAV. And of course, if investors expect a BDC's NAV to be stagnant or to decline, they can be expected to value the shares of common stock at a discount to NAV. Indeed, our Company's common stock has often traded at discounts to NAV, and may do so again in the future, especially during periods of adverse economic and capital markets conditions, when there are in general very few initial public offerings or acquisitions of privately held, technology-based companies."
http://www.tinytechvc.com/shareholder_information/annual_report_2003a.html
Rock... see today's PR. Answer: on its way.
WSJ article today- Big Oil US gas exploration...
This a front page article in today's WSJ.
November 29, 2005
Big Oil Firms Join Hunt
For Natural Gas in U.S.
Independent Producers Pave
Way for New Kind of Field;
Unlocking Fuel From Rock
By RUSSELL GOLD
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
November 29, 2005; Page A1
The world's three largest energy companies -- Exxon Mobil Corp., BP PLC and Royal Dutch Shell PLC -- are stepping up their hunt for natural gas in a place they have largely ignored in recent years: the continental U.S.
After years of selling off aging U.S. fields to focus on the global search for huge oil and gas deposits, the industry giants have been drawn back by high natural-gas prices, advances in extraction technology and increasing competition for resources abroad, often in politically risky parts of the world.
"This is an about-face," says Art Smith, chief executive of John S. Herold Inc., a Norwalk, Conn., energy research and consulting firm.
The turnabout is likely to boost crucial U.S. supplies of natural gas. Recent difficulties in ramping up domestic production of the fuel, which heats most American homes and generates much of the nation's electricity, have led to fears of shortages as early as this winter. But the big companies' plans are also expected to squeeze the smaller independent energy developers who have pioneered new gas-extraction methods and have thrived in the absence of competition from the majors.
Big Oil's new interest highlights significant changes in the U.S. onshore energy industry. Gone are the days when companies looked for big reservoirs of oil trapped underground in places like Texas' Permian Basin. In fact, the oil giants largely lost interest in the U.S. when these deposits began to be sucked dry. This time, they aren't looking for oil because they think any untapped pools would be too small to be worthwhile.
Instead, the majors are homing in on so-called unconventional gas fields, where gas is locked in giant swaths of coal, sandstone or shale. Using new technologies, companies can crack open these rocks and coax out large quantities of gas. Making the economics more compelling is the fact that, unlike oil, the large quantities of gas needed by the fuel-hungry North American market can't be transported from overseas. Already, the search for these new gas fields is fueling an energy boom throughout the Rocky Mountains.
Unconventional gas fields "can cover a large area and hold a tremendous amount of reserves," but the difficulty is finding the technology to get the gas out, says Trevor Rees-Jones, president and chief executive of Chief Oil & Gas LLC, a privately held Dallas company that produces gas in the Barnett Shale, a hot unconventional field outside Fort Worth, Texas.
Five years ago, the Barnett produced negligible volumes of gas. Today, new technologies -- like using high-pressure water to break open the rocks -- have turned it into one of the nation's largest gas producers. Still, only about 10% of the gas known to be locked in the shale can be extracted with existing methods. The industry expects the majors, with their deeper pockets, to figure out ways to wring out more.
If successful, the effort to get more gas out of previously unproductive formations could be tried elsewhere around the world and might yield much-needed energy supplies. Concern about the oil industry's ability to keep up with galloping global demand is mounting. Last month, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman asked an advisory committee of industry executives to provide him with an outlook for global oil and gas supplies. His chief question was whether incremental oil and gas supply could be brought online at a reasonable price to meet future demand without jeopardizing economic growth.
In 2004, Exxon, BP and Shell, the industry's biggest companies in terms of market capitalization, spent $6.9 billion on U.S. production, according to John S. Herold, although costly Gulf of Mexico projects accounted for much of the total. The companies are expected to spend considerably more in 2005, as they move ahead with new projects and exploration costs rise.
In the past few months, BP and Exxon have committed to long-term development of U.S. fields they have held for years but haven't given much attention. Shell is taking a different tack, and is intent on acquiring new fields to establish larger U.S. natural-gas holdings.
While tapping these new gas reserves probably will require costly technology, the high price of natural gas in the U.S. makes the investment attractive. In New York, natural gas has been trading well above $10 per million British thermal units since late August, more than quadruple its price at the beginning of the decade. Prices are expected to stay high for years.
"The pricing outlook for North American natural gas is so favorable that these projects are very attractive," says Tom Ellacott, a senior analyst with Edinburgh, Scotland, energy consulting firm Wood Mackenzie.
In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the last time energy prices boomed and there were widespread fears of shortages, the big companies scrambled to develop giant fields in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska. The new fields sparked a surge in production and technological innovations in the oil patch that ultimately helped drive down global energy prices. But they ushered in an era of megaprojects, which took years to execute and required billions of dollars in investments before production could begin.
The new crop of wells differs from the megaprojects of the past. Production from unconventional wells can begin months after the initial investment and continue for decades. Megaprojects, by contrast, can produce huge scores if they hit a large pocket of oil or gas, but they also can be quickly depleted.
In their latest U.S. push, the big oil companies are facing more competition than in the past. They are moving into regions already crowded with competitors and using techniques refined by independent energy producers. In recent years, companies such as Calgary-based EnCana Corp. have demonstrated the potential for strong returns and production growth from unconventional wells. Competition for rigs and specialized oilfield services "is already tough," says Shannon Nome, a J.P. Morgan oil analyst, but service companies will likely favor the majors, making it tough for independents to execute their drilling programs.
In the Barnett Shale field, independent operators already have a new neighbor: Royal Dutch Shell. The Anglo-Dutch company says it is "rediscovering" unconventional gas as a way to increase production. In August, it became the first major oil company to enter the Barnett field when it bought the rights to explore 25,000 acres. It also has another agreement with a privately held company to jointly explore in several more counties.
But Shell doesn't plan to stop there. Linda Hubner, the company's head of U.S. onshore exploration, says it is evaluating other ways to acquire more U.S. natural-gas production. "The growth in the onshore is coming from the unconventional plays, and there's a significant growth potential there," she says.
Ms. Hubner says Shell plans to use its large research operations to drill better wells more efficiently and capture more gas. Shell is so bullish on the economics of U.S. natural-gas production that it recently swapped an interest in the offshore Tahiti field, one of the most anticipated deep-water fields in the Gulf of Mexico, for natural-gas fields in South Texas.
BP plans to invest $15 billion over the next decade in U.S. exploration and development, including $2.2 billion announced last month to double production in the Wamsutter field in Wyoming. The latter investment includes $120 million for technology field trials to test out better ways to drill and operate wells in unconventional gas fields. "I think there's a bit of subsurface magic that the majors can bring to this," says Alan Hopwood, BP's vice president for North American natural gas.
Exxon Mobil is taking a different approach. Like BP, Exxon holds the drilling rights to a large number of acres in the Rockies that it isn't aggressively developing. In June, it finalized a deal with XTO Energy Inc. to allow the smaller company to drill gas wells on some of the land it holds in Colorado's Piceance Basin. In effect, Exxon outsourced the work required to develop the acres. XTO will do the drilling and split the revenue with Exxon. On the rest of its acres, Exxon plans to use proprietary technology to break open the sandstone. The company believes it can extract more than 35 trillion cubic feet of gas from its Piceance land -- more than one year's consumption in the U.S.
Last month, Exxon made a similar deal with Newfield Exploration Co. for 52,000 acres in South Texas.
A spokesman for Exxon declined to discuss specifics of the transactions.
--Maya Jackson Randall contributed to this article.
Write to Russell Gold at russell.gold@wsj.com1
URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB113322944410008696.html
HUGE thanks for Hawk/Tharmon's initiative and results...
I'm certain most here agree that 1greeneyedhawk and tharmon51's initiative and dedication in visiting CB and JC and posting photos and commentary of the Ideco rig and of the AMEP scene is phenomenal and of immense value to the rest of us. Thanks, guys!!
Unknown, respectfully that's non-responsive to my point.
Finally learned how to ignore Jagman and Wildpig.
More sloppy, confused marketing.
Unknown, I appreciate your listing those six distributors' GSA listings of our mouse.
You may recall that I have sometimes posted personal criticism of the confused or lack of branding strategy. I am wondering and would like to see yours/Tom's explanation of why in four of those listing our mouse is called the Ergonomic Quill Mouse, manufactured by ACP - EP Memory. The other two call our mouse the E Quill Air02bic Mouse and the E Quill Ari02bic Mouse (no doubt a sloppy typo) manufactured by Kare Pillows (!)
Now tell me how, after people have read our PRs about the studies that have shown our mouse to prevent, even cure, fatigue and RSI, they are going to know that these products are indeed our mouse?
Please don't ignore this post, as you have my others. This is hurting the shareholders, of which I am sorry to be one.
Wing/Chuck, I think hawk posted that he gave his word to wait for CB to put pics of the rig and whatever else on the AMEP website before he posted his and began posting new info here or on RB.
Ballyhooo, why is it replicated four times?...
And why did they not catch the typo "cost effect" instead of "cost effective" at the end of the first, third, fifth, and seventh paragraphs?
Not true. T/A is not gagged by AMEP.
It has been reported by people who have called the T/A that it is THEIR policy not to release information on any of their clients.
You're beigledog on RB, aren't you? I'm on your side. Your error is that you don't recognize that there are different points in time. The filing reflects the situation on September 30; we are interested in what the O/S is today, nearly two months later. They were sold. No doubt they have been issued by now.
To Whom It May Concern: Outstanding Shares
Although it is hard read the 10-Q, it is there in black and white. Between June 24, when they filed a form 1-E announcing the intent to sell up to $5 million in new shares, and September 30 they sold nearly 111 million new shares. Some technicality prevented issuance by September 30 of about 78.6 million shares -- BUT THEY WERE SOLD and undoubtedly issued by now. End of story, almost.
The story really ends when you decide for yourselves whether using the proceeds from some or all of these shares to buy the Ideco drilling rig was a wise investment for the shareholders. I believe it was.
Ole vern absolutely correct, O/S now about 413M.
Beigledog, I take it that they must register their new shares with the SEC before they trade on the OTCBB. The options issued under their new incentive plan have a strike price of $0.10, so I guess when the stock trades it will be in the penny range.
Given this is essentially another Mike Weiner / Technology Innovations enterprise, I think the prospects for its stock are great. Just my opinion.
My view (from my post on RB)...
My take is that the vertical drilling will occur as planned. As I read the PR, the 3D data will be used first to prepare for the two Bend Arch horizontal reentries. Joe C.'s statement about "drilling on the first well of our program in the next several weeks" refers IMO to the first OAG partnership well, which will occur AFTER the two Bend Arch horizontal reentries. So, I don't see much of a timeline hit from this, and I think we'll all benefit from use of this 3-D seismic technology.
B9, I suspected a date problem on RB...
The "reply" or "post a new message" screens had EST time stamps, while they reverted to EDT when added to the message board servers. The outage is now around 18-20 hours ... on a global service! Can you say INCOMPETENT?
Hellzhub, what do you mean "botched AMEX"?
Unless I've missed something, it's simply taking typical bureaucratic time to get done. I called the AMEX last spring to see how long it typically takes and they said 8-12 weeks, unless there are questions to be followed up that could extend the time.
Jagman, Huh??
Why say 20% increase when it's 30%?
"Total gross revenues for Bend Arch Petroleum and Production Resources Inc. totaled approximately $409,775 for the 2nd quarter."
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/050816/165280.html?.v=1&printer=1
"Total approximate gross revenues for Bend Arch Petroleum Inc. and Producction Resources Inc. totaled $533,898 [for the 3rd quarter]."
http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/051027/275298.html?.v=1
Simple arithmetic: ($533,898 - $409,775) / $409,775 = 30.2%
I think I've seen other arithmetic errors in the past. What gives?
Gateway, posts/dd have said 80/160 acre spacing /EM
Sumaria, revenue/well based on Chesapeake Energy article.
"Chesapeake also stated 'We expected the northern wells to get up to 3 million cubic feet per day and they've actually produced about 10 percent more." "In the southern part we thought we'd get about 2.5 million cubic feet per day and again we've exceeded that.'"
Is my arithmetic wrong, or is 3mmcf/day equal to 3000mcf/day; and is 3000 x $13.00/mcf equal to $39,000/day; which times (say) 320 production days/year equals about $12.5 million/year?
That seems 6 or more times the revenue/well estimates being used in some AMEP DD.
Thanks curious_joy, but I don't see it in the slides.
Curious_joy, "a small percentage of the clay...
after Natural Nano's separation process, are nanotubes, but the byproduct/rest can still be used in the ceramics industry".
I missed that good news ... would you please post a source confirming that? TIA.
Anyone...why the hell down $.10? Geez....
Hi Kaz (from BIPH board)- "sex sells"...
And so does good branding. I've posted the opinion that there is a very confused brand picture here, and I've had at least one person agree.
Read the Brakemoor launch PR. "Torbay Holdings", "Designer Appliances", "Anti.Fatigue", "AirO2bic mouse", "NIB software" are interwoven throughout the PR in a jumbled and confusing way.
Add to that the thematic phrases "It's All About You", and the "Fun, Family, and Fabulous" that "asserts family values".
In my opinion too, "Brakemoor" is simply too contrived. What would have been wrong with "BreakMore"? "AirO2bic" is sometimes spelled "Air(O)2bic", and sometimes is accompanied by a guide to its pronunciation, which is non-obvious. What was wrong with "Quill mouse", or what would be wrong with "Anti-Fatigue mouse"?
Brings to mind "Who's on first, What's on second". Like Who's what?
Very sorry about double post (eom).