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.

Biotech / Medical : Biotech Valuation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: technetium who wrote (21210)	9/9/2006 6:11:16 PM
From: IRWIN JAMES FRANKEL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 52153

OT - I am no O&G expert but that post and the quoted section 8 don't seem right to me. It is clear that a greater depths the finds tend to be gas not crude. That is the general rule because higher temperatures and pressures turn the hydrocarbons into gas - even if they started as crude. But the test well (normally these are smaller diameter wells than production wells) flowed light sweet crude at 6,000 brl/day. So the suggestion that the well cost needs to be defrayed at $7 ng prices is a disconnect. Try the calculation with 6,000 brl/day and $60 crude. When you figure that the upper end of the reserve estimates make this field as big as Exxons entire reserves - it suggests lots of value for DVN. BTW - news reports that the find means the world is not at peak oil production is amusing and misleading - IMHO. ij