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 : Bearcat (BEA-C) & Stampede (STF-C) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Schwartzenhauer who wrote (1320)	7/17/1998 1:54:00 PM
From: teevee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2306

Hi Dale, I have seen corrected and processed siesmic data for one hell of a lot of this area. I can tell you that the largest structures are on RLN lands. In addition, there are untested second and third slice Turner Valley Formation. Also,if you happen to like the deep Crossfield/Devonian potential on BEA lands as demonstrated by their Hartel well, you should just love RLN, as the Crossfield structures on RLN lands appear on siesmic to be much larger and higher amplitude. I hope this will dispell the notion that RLN is on the "wrong" side of the old Turner Valley oil pool. Should you wish to take a district scale perspective, look at the Quirke Creek and Jumping Pound gas pools and gas plants to the north and on trend from RLN lands; how about new "second slice Turner Valley Formation" 20-30mmcf/day gas wells drilled by petro Canada to the north? Also, Canadian 88 is having major success to the south. If I were you, I would hedge my Turner Valley bets and also get a position in RLN. Best of luck with your investments. Regards, teevee