Faris >> I guess I should continue my "petty" exchange with Taylor who claims that he has never heard of Huddleston. Funny, nobody else, even the other critics on this thread, has claimed not to have heard of Huddleston. And further, I have been told that Huddleston is a well-known, respected, and, by reputation, conservative oil surveyor. In fact, I was told that Huddleston and Schlumberger are among, if not, the key players in oil evaluation business. Was I misinformed?<<
I don't mind the petty exchange if no one else does ---- I just don't wish it to turn too much one on one and not be beneficial to others.
It just doesn't seem like anyone is interested in facts; I really think the right thing to do is to let Geneat now offer the expert opinion.
>>.....Taylor who claims that he has never heard of Huddleston.<<
That's close --- I said I was not "familiar" with them thus can offer no opinion whether they are "a respected" firm as you asked in your last post. I would assume tey are respectable unless I hear reason to believe not.
>> I was told that Huddleston and Schlumberger are among, if not, the key players in oil evaluation business. Was I misinformed?<<
Yes you are misinformed --- Schlumberger is most widely noted for its well logging business and various other services.Huddleston ????? --- a firm apparently of no widely known reputation --- apparently a small family run business. Nothing wrong with that ---- just not a "key player".
>>Why didn't Taylor and his fellow experts inform us peons that it is standard industry practice to value "potential" reserves at between .50 and 1.00 a barrel as did the analyst from Robert M. Cohen. <<
Because I suggest to you it is NOT standard industry practice. I have seen it done before on a rare occasion though ---- just as I have seen probable reserves valued at half the rate that proven reserves were valued.
In fact I would say there is no industry practice other than to establish a risk profile for non proven, possible or potential reserves and value the risked quantity at an anticipated NPV per barrel. If this person wishes to suggest that non-existent potential reserves are worth .50 per barrel that is okay ---- that's not much different than saying potential means 10% of the hypothetical x $3 per barrel or .30 per barrel as "my" math works out. Until a well is drilled , it is all hypotherical anyway.
By the way --- I would suggest Bossey is not an Oil and Gas analyst; perhaps a "generalist" if anything as I have seen the guy write opinions on a variety of companies.
Read his comments -- -he doesn'yt know the business or the company very well
>> American International Petroleum Corp. explores and produces oil and
natural gas in South America. The Company also has refining activities in
Louisiana.
Potential reserves are typically valued at $0.50 to $1.00 per barrel. By
taking the Company's 70% share of the already discounted potential reserve
figures for the Kazakstan find, Bossey arrives at a figure of 770 million
barrels. "In using the more conservative $0.50 figure, we come up with an
approximate $10 share value of the Kazakstan find," Bossey concluded.<< |
