oldye Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 From Devon's last CC Seismic has played a key part in the early success for our Woodford drilling. Of the 27 Woodford wells brought online this year on our joint venture acreage, we have seen more than a 100% increase in 30-day IP rates in our wells drilled with the benefit of 3D seismic as compared to those wells drilled without. We are also achieving some encouraging results in Mississippi Lime on our joint venture acreage during the third quarter. Our Miss Lime results were highlighted by 14 wells brought online with average 30-day IP rates of nearly 500 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including 345 barrels per day of light oil. While our Miss Lime results across the trend continue to vary depending on the location, reservoir quality, landing zones and completion techniques, we fully expect the integration of 3D seismic into our geologic modeling to optimize our Miss Lime results over time. To-date, we have acquired 3D seismic over majority of our acreage inside the joint venture area. We’re also seeing encouraging results outside the JV in both the Miss Lime and the Woodford oil shale formations. In Grant County where we have approximately 79,000 net acres, we completed the well subsequent to quarter end in the Miss Lime with an average 24-hour IP rate of more than 920 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including over 800 barrels of oil. Additionally, during the quarter we drilled our first Woodford oil shale well in Grant County. This well had a 30-day IP of 225 barrels of oil equivalent per day and was drilled without the benefit of seismic. With this well confirming the existence of an oil [ph] charged Woodford interval comparable to that of our wells in the JV area, we are excited about obtaining seismic in Grant County. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
investor-man Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 From Devon's last CC Seismic has played a key part in the early success for our Woodford drilling. Of the 27 Woodford wells brought online this year on our joint venture acreage, we have seen more than a 100% increase in 30-day IP rates in our wells drilled with the benefit of 3D seismic as compared to those wells drilled without. We are also achieving some encouraging results in Mississippi Lime on our joint venture acreage during the third quarter. Our Miss Lime results were highlighted by 14 wells brought online with average 30-day IP rates of nearly 500 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including 345 barrels per day of light oil. While our Miss Lime results across the trend continue to vary depending on the location, reservoir quality, landing zones and completion techniques, we fully expect the integration of 3D seismic into our geologic modeling to optimize our Miss Lime results over time. To-date, we have acquired 3D seismic over majority of our acreage inside the joint venture area. We’re also seeing encouraging results outside the JV in both the Miss Lime and the Woodford oil shale formations. In Grant County where we have approximately 79,000 net acres, we completed the well subsequent to quarter end in the Miss Lime with an average 24-hour IP rate of more than 920 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including over 800 barrels of oil. Additionally, during the quarter we drilled our first Woodford oil shale well in Grant County. This well had a 30-day IP of 225 barrels of oil equivalent per day and was drilled without the benefit of seismic. With this well confirming the existence of an oil [ph] charged Woodford interval comparable to that of our wells in the JV area, we are excited about obtaining seismic in Grant County. Oldye are you implying that since Devon is getting decent results in Miss Lime that SD may as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogermunibond Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 RRC and DVN presentations on Mississippian/Woodford. Note where their acreage is versus where SD acreage is. It's tough to draw comparisons because of different geology. Perhaps SD is working like mad to acquire Grant and Kay county acreage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldye Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 They have a lot of leases in Grant and Kay county, prior cc they even said they own a % of one of the Devon woodford wells. All I'm implying is that the 3 dud woodford wells were done without the benefit of seismic and that Devon is having success with their Woodford wells in the same area. This slide shows our lease position in and around Grant County. In this area, we have selected four industry wells to illustrate how rich the Woodford can be in this emerging play. Of particular note is a high performing well drilled by Devon. This well IP'd at 295 barrels of oil per day and is situated in the middle of our leasehold. In addition, Plymouth, Marcella and Thompson wells are located within a few miles of our acreage. Both are highly productive. In order to test the Woodford, SandRidge is drilling a total of nine wells in five different counties in 2013 We have mapped the Woodford to be across a vast majority of our acreage. As you know the question is just as you go further North, what level of productivity you will see still needs to be tested, so we don't an exact acreage count today and we might try to share that by Analyst Day, but in general the Woodford is across virtually all of our Oklahoma acreage and we are pretty excited about it. Thank you. We have captured key learnings from the early wells and we are putting together large 3-D seismic shoot that we expect to launch in 2014. We are confident that our wells will improve as we increase our knowledge of the play. From Devon: Seismic has played a key part in the early success for our Woodford drilling. Of the 27 Woodford wells brought online this year on our joint venture acreage, we have seen more than a 100% increase in 30-day IP rates in our wells drilled with the benefit of 3D seismic as compared to those wells drilled without. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted December 17, 2013 Share Posted December 17, 2013 Anyone else noticed the collapse in the share price of SDR, SDT and PER? Pretty awful charts! Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_Buffett Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 http://www.gurufocus.com/news/239531/leon-cooperman-discusses-his-favorite-picks-sprint-and-sandridge-energy-plus-3-others leon cooperman talks again about sandridge. sees a double Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordoffh Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Regarding trusts would the rise in nat gas not be a material positive for them - recent prices recognize reduction of oil assests but are they ignoring a possibly higher sustained nat gas price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 Forgive me but aren't the trusts wasting assets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldye Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 http://www.amazon.com/Frackers-Outrageous-Inside-Energy-Revolution-ebook/dp/B00C5R7CHK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1387826027&sr=8-1&keywords=the+frakers Very interesting book for anyone who wants to get some insights and perspective into the industry and especially Tom Ward and Audrey.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordoffh Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 with the action in the last couple of weeks in SD and pre market today perhaps we long time holders of SD might finally be rewarded - the cold weather can;t hurt - i did offload some to buy additional LTS but still kept quite a large position - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskin212 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Sale of Gulf assets - unwinding of Ward's plan? http://www.cnbc.com/id/101315383 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrofan Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 market seems to like the sale.......TPG continues to make steady progress. Looking forward to the conference call. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sandridge-announces-sale-gulf-mexico-123000710.html cheers Zorro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_Buffett Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 finally another step in the Transformation and also new guidance for 2014 26% production growth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordoffh Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 my first reaction on seeing this is that it seemed cheap - i believe they paid 1.2 b - anyway if the market likes it and this stock finally moves up good on them - increase in guidance good news - perhaps they have this play figured out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefatbaboon Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Seems pretty dismal. They paid $1.3bn in the initial deal $680m cash + 70m shares), plus another one or two hundred over the years tacking on additional properties. I guess with the $750m in cash, at least they get back their cash outlay. The 70m shares…well…seems a mere drop in the Tom Ward bucket of dilution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Well, they did get some cash flow out of it, now down almost 3% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 It is a shitty price at around $32,000 per flowing boe/day and when something is sold to a financial buyer you get an idea pretty quickly that it is not a great deal. It also shows that paying over $1.2 billion for that was pretty bad. Reserve life was low so I guess that is why no E&P jumped on it and might help explain the low bid. The good news is that they retained a 2% participation on what might have some good potential. On the other hand, it was likely near impossible to sell this entire company to another E&P company until this transaction had occurred. Based on another recent situation that I have been involved with, it is clear to me that managers of operating companies don't want to buy messy or complicated companies even if the price is low. They prefer to buy a more expensive firm but, that is simple to understand, is already profitable and firing on most cylinders and that will easily integrate with their existing business. It allows them to keep their guidance intact, not shock the Street and they can claim a few pennies of incremental EPS or cash flow or whatever. It is conservatism approaching stupidity but, that is how it works. I mentioned Repsol before and they seem to be getting ready to do the North American deal that they talked about before having completed this deal: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/repsol-completes-sale-of-gas-assets-to-shell/?_r=0 They may or may not be interested in Sandridge's mid-continent assets. However, any big deal in that sector would help investors IMO re-evaluate all other firms with many that trade at depressed valuations. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 Just added some today. I like the simplified story going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_Buffett Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 do they want to pay a Little debt back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 do they want to pay a Little debt back? Don't quote me on that. My understanding is no as most its debt are not callable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil_Buffett Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 do they want to pay a Little debt back? Don't quote me on that. My understanding is no as most its debt are not callable. ok thanks :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 my first reaction on seeing this is that it seemed cheap - i believe they paid 1.2 b - anyway if the market likes it and this stock finally moves up good on them - increase in guidance good news - perhaps they have this play figured out Yes a bit disappointing from a capital allocation standpoint, but it makes the company more focused. I have shifted most capital to Canadian oil and gas but its nice to see the CEO continuing to clean things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myth465 Posted January 7, 2014 Share Posted January 7, 2014 http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2014/01/07/sell-high-and-buy-low-a-lesson-from-the-gulf-of-mexico/?mod=yahoo_hs Interesting that the sale was to Riverstone again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alertmeipp Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Anyone has any idea how much of the 2% royalty would potentially worth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ourkid8 Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 Can anyone care to explain what the following means: assumption of $370 million of abandonment liabilities? I know the purchase price was $750 million but is this $370 million a cash penalty for not drilling or additional drilling required to meet its obligations? Thanks, S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now