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 : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Salt'n'Peppa who wrote (123362)	8/17/2009 12:05:35 PM
From: cyesp	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206325

Hyperbolic or catastrophic decline - it would be interesting to see some specific examples of the catastrophic decline. I have not seen this in my cursory reviews except when wells are infilled and interfere and this is generally anticipated and accounted for. I have seen some companies use "n" factors in excess of 2 in their projections, and in these cases there would be a catastrophic departure. Using "N"s in the 1.2-1.9 range seem to provide a more valid long term projection. I agree that caution in estimating reserves is warranted and a caution in developing new field is a given. I don't think the article gave enough facts and examples to convince me his concerns (catastrophic declines and 15% outer declines) are valid to large portions of the Barnett Shale play.