Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian Oil & Gas Companies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kerm Yerman who wrote (6630)	7/10/1999 6:32:00 PM
From: Stan Treacher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24905

I posted some info on BTU when it was trading at .65 now it is trading at 1.17. I guess you will look at it when it is trading at $1.50?

To: Kerm Yerman who wrote (6630)	7/12/1999 10:22:00 AM
From: CIMA	Respond to of 24905

Pan Ocean Explorations to participate in EKHO project Curion Ventures Corp CUV Shares issued 11,041,146 Jul 9 close $0.62 Mon 12 Jul 99 News Release See Pan Ocean Explorations Inc (POE) News Release Mr. Brent Jardine reports Pan Ocean Explorations Inc. has entered into a letter of intent with Tri-Valley Oil and Gas (TVOG) and a consortium of junior companies to earn an interest in and to carry out exploration on TVOG's EKHO project. The EKHO project is a deep oil and gas exploration project in the San Joaquin Valley, Keria County, Calif., a prolific oil and gas province. The area of mutual interest (AMI), which forms the basis of negotiations, covers approximately 261 square miles (167,000 acres) and is east of the now-famous Bellevue No. 1 blowout well. The Bellevue No. 1 well hit an uncontrollable high-pressure gas zone in November, 1998, at 17,657 feet and blew out and ignited. The well flowed uncontrolled for two weeks at an estimated rate of 100 million cubic feet per day. Under restricted flow the well averaged approximately 10 mmcfd and more than 400 barrels condensate per day for several months until it was plugged on May 28, 1999 (Source: Bakersfield Californian Online). Prior to this blowout, the deepest onshore producing oil well in California was at 14,570 feet and the deepest producing gas well at 12,576 feet. The Bellevue No. 1 blowout demonstrated that California's Great Central Valley has the potential to exploit even deeper reserves of oil and gas and the flow rates indicate that giant reserves of oil and gas are possible. The consortium of junior companies (the participants) participating in the EKHO project and their respective interests are as follow: Stock Exchange Company Symbol Trading % Aster Ventures Corp. VSE ASV 20 Curion Venture Corp. VSE CUV 20 Berkshire International Mining Ltd. VSE BKR 10 Luere Ventures Ltd. VSE LVD 10 Consolidated Bradbury Intl. Equities Ltd. VSE CBN 5 Curlew Lake Resources Inc. VSE CWQ 5 Pan Ocean Explorations Inc. VSE POE 5 Prairie Pacific Energy Corp. ASE PRP 5 Royal International Venture Corp. VSE RIL 5 Reserved for other parties - - 15 TVOG has a 12.5-per-cent carried interest to pay-out which then converts to a 25-per-cent working interest. To earn its workings interest, each participant will be required to finance its proportionate share of the reimbursement of certain of TVOG's property acquisition costs and the proportionate cost of the initial work program. All subsequent work programs will be carried out as a joint venture and will require a pro-data financial contribution from each participant or the participant will be subject to dilution. TVOG based in Bakersfield, Calif., has been active in Kern County for more than 36 years. TVOG began leasing acreage in the AMI in 1997 after identifying the potential for deep hydrocarbon reserves in the project area through the interpretation of extensive data. To date TVOG has leased all or part of 26 sections and negotiations are continuing to acquire additional acreage in the AMI. The EKHO poject's primary targets will be the Vedder and Upper Phacoides sandstones, which are part of the Lower Miocene Temblor formation. It has been reported that the Bellevue No. 1 well is producing from the upper part of the Temblor formation. The high-flow rates in the Bellevue No. 1 well are attributed to fracturing. Proprietary data held by TVOG indicate that similar geologic structures, including significant fracturing, may be present within the EKHO project area. The similarities that exist between the stratigraphy and structure of the Bellevue No. 1 and the EKHO project area, coupled with presence of oil and gas in surrounding wells, indicate that the EKHO project has the potential for a discovery similar to Bellevue No. 1. A work program to test the various targets in the Temblor formation to an estimated depth of 18,000 feet is currently being prepared. The cost of this work, program and property acquisition is estimated to be $9-million (U.S.). The estimated cost to be incurred by the company to earn its interest will be $450,000 (U.S.), which is to be paid within 21 days from the date of entering into a participation agreement with TVOG. Halliburton Energyy Services, a Fortune 100 company and the world's largest oil field service firm, will provide TVOG and the participants technical services and support on a preferred basis during drilling, completion and production of the EKHO project well. Subject to the parties completing a prticipation agreement and a joint operating agreement, it is anticipated that activity in the field will begin in August, 1999. Pan Ocean has arranged the exercising of 1,636,362 warrants at a price of 38 cents for a net proceeds to the company of $622,000 (Canadian). Use of proceeds will meet all of the company's financial commitments for the EKHO project. (c) Copyright 1999 Canjex Publishing Ltd. canada-stockwatch.com

To: Kerm Yerman who wrote (6630)	7/14/1999 5:54:00 PM
From: johnlag	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24905

Kerm / All / Canadian 88 Kerm, thought you might want to take a look at this info from the analyst at Peters that recently downgraded EEE. I don't have a position, but I don't think I'd want one. There are some references to the EEE thread: Subject 9153 EEE's NAV Peters & Co.'s NAV is $6.33 per share, at 10% DCF, and $4.48, at 15% DCF. Because independent engineer firms have not correctly forecast oil prices for the past 20 years, and are perpetually too high (until this year), we put the greatest weight on 15% DCF. Also, M&A transactions are historically closest to 15% DCF. Note that the NAV estimate is highly dependent on the reserve volume estimate. Even if it is by McDaniels Engineering, there is a giant red flag in the reserve/production ratio of 19.0 years, when the industry is under 10.0, even for growth companies like Berkley. A large amount of EEE's new reserves just began production. The largest error in reserves estimates comes from estimates made before you have production history. EEE's debt level. In Q1/98 debt was $132 million and cash flow was $8.5 million, for an annualized ratio of 3.9x. At December 31, 1998, debt was $189 million. Q1/99 debt was $212 million and cash flow was $10.7 million, for an annualized ratio of 5.0x. We have reduced our 1999 production and cash flow estimate at least four times since December 1998. If EEE is doing so well, why has production been flat since January 1999 at about 15,000 boe/d? Why is Waterton at less than 60% of the company's projections? Why is production through the Olds/Crossfield sour gas plant (the single largest source of EEE production) falling? Everything that looks good about EEE, is because of reserve volume estimates (reserve growth, F&D, depletion rate). The problems are caused by production growth not keeping up to reserves, debt and capital spending. Which is more accurate, estimates of reserves or of production? Analyst's contact with EEE. I have known Greg for over ten years, and we talk to the company al least monthly (more often when he isn't mad at us, which is the case now). The senior management isn't allowed to return our calls. Despite this, we have used public reports of other analysts' BUY research to downgrade our numbers. Historically, our estimates were based on the company's Year 2000 plan, until we determined that you can't rely on their budget. There are only two variables that you need to watch: reserves and production, and I know what production is doing. GVTucker made a lot of astute comments in his posting (389), but the one that says,(concerning U.S. selling) "you wouldn't find out until October", is also true of reserve estimates (except it will be May 2000).

To: Kerm Yerman who wrote (6630)	8/11/1999 12:55:00 PM
From: SofaSpud	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24905

Kerm / Crestar I believe you still follow this company, so I was wondering if you've looked at the Q2 results, and if you have any impressions. The following things jumped out at me: - Production in Q2 was 76,600 boe/d, vs. 84,500 boe/d in Q1'99, and vs. 90,000 boe/d in Q2'98; - Production was down 15%, and was lower in 1999Q2 than it was for the 1997 average; - The production decline was in part (3,400 boe/d) due to asset dispositions (to reduce debt); most of the assets sold were gas; - at the same time, the capex focus in 1999 is gas targets. From the results, it is possible to form the impression that CRS started the year scared by their debt levels, and focussed on that at the expense of all else. I applaud their prudence in trying to improve the balance sheet by constraining capex to less than cash flow in light of $500 million plus debt. OTOH, I'm a bit taken aback at the size of the decline, and wonder if the $200 million capex program will be enough to get them growing again. I've followed the company for the last couple of years, and have wondered if management was really doing a good job with the assets (250 mm boes of reserves and 2.8 million acres of land). I'd appreciate comments from anyone else who follows the co.