InvestorsHub Logo

midtieroil

04/30/17 12:26 PM

#11980 RE: sneak-attack #11977

OML40 was a producing oil field with proven reserves. Many of ERHCs properties have been drilled but none of those wells found commercial oil and none have any proven reserves. 6 wells drilled, 6 dry holes in their blocks.

Comparing a producing oil field with proven reserves to acreage that thus far has proved to be noncommercial is like comparing swampland in Florida to Manhattan real estate. There really is no comparison.

kingpindg

04/30/17 1:16 PM

#11981 RE: sneak-attack #11977

sneak, could you provide a source for this Block 11 information. I know they are due future consideration if certain conditions are met but was unaware that any further details had been provided.

Thanks.

$2.5 million fee from block 11 if drilling warrants






.

midtieroil

04/30/17 9:21 PM

#11983 RE: sneak-attack #11977

By the way, why would anyone say Chad may be dropped when, in the last 8K, it was clearly said it was dropped. That awful news was the only concrete fact announced. Everything else was fantasy about things that might occur some time in the distant future if all the parties owed money agree to release liens and other claims on those blocks.

You do know that most of those blocks that ERHC has are in the JDZ where 5 wells were drilled and all 5 were dry holes. Nobody has been interested in The JDZ in the six years following that fiasco. Can't say I blame them. Who wants blocks that have been shown to contain no oil?

At least in Block 1 of the JDZ they did find some oil. ERHC owns no interest in that. But,even in that block, the two wells turned out to be noncommercial. I guess that makes the JDZ 7 for 7 in dry holes. Nobody wants to pay anything for that type of failure. Can you blame them?