News Focus
News Focus
icon url

Bobwins

05/31/07 10:26 AM

#118 RE: MSGI #117

Somebody owned this Deep Tuscaloosa project.
Somebody drilled a well based on the seismic that he thinks is so important.
Somebody didn't hit anything in the "flank" well or he would be crowing about it.
So having 2D seismic and even hitting 389 feet of reservoir quality sand didn't do them any good.
They sold it after spending millions on the seismic and the first well. Why? Because it's worth trillions?

No production. Three long shots. No production.

0 fer so far. No revs.

$3 is an expensive lottery ticket. PFM.v has a possible 500 million barrels in an undisclosed location for a 1.70 price tag. I think they have more chance than scey.ob. Bobwins


"Sun Cal's Deep Tuscaloosa Prospect is located in the shallow, state waters of Louisiana not far from a gas well owned by BP Americas that produces 50 MMCF/d, making it the largest gas producing well in North America.

Sun Cal's prospects for hugely profitable wells are backed by nearly 200 miles of 2d seismic in a 2 mile grid and an earlier flank well which was logged and cored potentially productive sands with 389 feet of reservoir quality sand. This same well also provided extensive a synthetic seismogram and velocity data.

Just one productive well could be worth $-billions!

And the data and production history of adjacent wells are all in Sun Cal's favor. Don't wait another minute to load up on Sun Cal while it's still trading below $3.

When their first Deep Tuscaloosa well comes in, neighboring Amoco, or Chevron or Occidental is likely to step to the plate with a buy out offer that I think would have to come in around $90 a share.

Given that the stock is trading now below $3, a jump to $90 would be a fortune-building gain of 3,000%! And for certain, the stock will start to move on rumor, long before an actual take over. "
icon url

nsomniyak

05/31/07 8:00 PM

#129 RE: MSGI #117

I distrust any "analyst" or "guru" dealing with stocks in the energy sector that can't spell "Exxon Mobil" correctly! :)