Hi Rossir, Firstly we were all surprised of the result of the...

Hi Rossir,
Firstly we were all surprised of the result of the Pukatea well and there are still unanswered questions on this.
However remember we were not operators in NZ we did not select the drill location or the drilling plan and trajectory, this would have been done by TAG oil, albeit with some input from Melbana.
What I still do not know , is why we did not intersect the limestone target, was it simply not there at prognosed location or did we actually miss it and drill into a fault ( overhang), the former suggests the Geos got it wrong, the latter suggests the directional Drilling team got it wrong..
Company has been very unforthcoming with answers and I wholeheartedly have pressed them that shareholders deserve A full overview of our New Zealand operation , what happened, why it happened and where are we going now with it.
The last response I got from HQ on this as they have also disclosed openly to the market, was that there is a development case study undergoing but this has been taking far to long IMO, Oil is rising and I fail to understand why we are procrastinating on releasing information here unless there is a bigger picture that as yet we do not know..
What was frustrating more than anything, was we still do not know if the deeper limestones at Pukatea are oil charged as we did not even intersect them..
I made a post some months back that IMO a low cost side track must be mooted here, surely TAG oil cannot just walk away from what they touted as a potential large oil play of 12-15 million barrels in these lime stones as they have not even intersected the formation to prove it does or does not exist.
Wether Melbana will be a part of any further drilling here, if they decide to do it is a completely different question now NZ is not core in our portfolio.I would imagine and IMO we are looking at divesting this asset , potentially to TAG.. just my view though..

As Sinnikel alluded, from info from someone he knows at Maersk, modern drilling technology is such where well targets really do not get missed ( unless there are major hole issues , stuck string, formation cave ins etc...) , there is ample opportunity whilst drilling to steer, build, slide the drill string to stay on target and commonly if it does stray a few meters, then at a pre targeted depth the directional team will just correct the path to get it back on the required track. Modern Technology means they have a full overview of the path the bit is going unless there is a down hole sensor failure etc, which if that happens, they just pull the string out of the hole and replace the tool.( there will always be a back up on the rig site)

I have absolutely no fear we will not drill where we are meant to be drilling in Cuba, Alameda is a 3 target deviated well, we will drill vertical through first target and then Deviate and step out to targets 2 and 3 with 3 being the primary..the reservoir structures our geologists ( and now also independently collboarated by a professional third party with extensive knowledge of Cuban reservoirs ) say we are aiming for our very large... we will not miss the targets, what we will need to be on our side though is are they are charged with hydrocarbons and do the structures have the required seal and trap and the porosity for the HCs to flow.... there is a very decent chance that they do and we must remember this is not wildcat , it is open to debate whether it’s actual exploration, with the high COS and the already proven oil recovery from near by wells, this could even be construed as near “appraisal “ drilling.

I tend to waffle at times, so excuse me, however to answer your main question, I felt I need to give some additional info and text..in a nutshell.. there is a 99% certainty that the required target should be hit unless there are hole issues and they get stuck which is something we certainly do not want but we must also be aware of, as we have learned some valuable information from the Sherritt drills, .... this is also an area where there can be extensive losses of fluid/ mud , so we will be prepared for this as well.We also have a very good relationship with CUPET and it is in their interests we are successful, they are the ones who have the most knowledge of the drilling conditions.

We must also remember we just may not be the operator here ........... the farminee who ever it is , may be even multiple, may operate these drills, at this time we just do not know the make up of how it’s going to work , but I am confident it will work.
Drilling programmes for both Alameda and Zapato will be if not complete, very advanced....

Just to close, if we are going to drill Alemada in Dec, them things need to be moving now..... it will need to move rapidly for sure ...TBH, I Feel April Is more likely...however even then , it is not far away and we will still need to be moving fast..
For the company to announce this dates, we must be bloody close to a commercial agreement giving us the means to drill..
Not only that, but giving us a plan in what we will do hopefully on success .
I cannot emphasise enough, the massive and exciting opportunity here for shareholders in Cuba alone....this is a unique situation if we do what we say we are going to do..throw in Beehive, NZ , the naughty child of Tassie shoals etc, hopefully it’s going to be massive for us all.. the Biggest question for me currently is, will we use the farmout news to dual list.. that’s when it will be come global new very quickly !

Best to all holders, long term and new....