Your TMS Information Source Since 2012

Have a TMS tip? Share it here and keep up with latest on our Facebook Page or Twitter!


Daily Report 9-13-2014

Posted by bernell on September 13, 2014

I’ll admit I still pay attention to reported initial production numbers.  They are relevant.


Let’s examine a few IP reports from wells brought in this year along with production during the 1st three months and mull over what we learn.

But before we do, let’s recall a little from this year. 

First up was the GDP CMR 8-5 H-1.  This well was the first well Goodrich reported after the dissolvable plug debacle from late 2013 and early 2014.  The IP (peak daily production from this well) was reported as 900 barrels of oil and a 950 BOE. (BOE includes the energy value of the gas produced).  This well was considered a major relief and some confidence in Goodrich Petroleum was restored.

Next up was the Goodrich C. H. Lewis 30-19H-1 with a reported IP of 1,387 oil and 1,450 BOE. Folks really liked this well report.

I don’t recall seeing a report on this next well, the Pintard 28H-1.  Encana doesn’t report most well results.  The Pintard 28H-1 was rumored to have had a lot of drilling and completion difficulties and ended with a shorter lateral than originally intended.  This well was not seen originally as a positive result for the TMS.

The next well we’ll look at was the first reported result by Halcon, the Horseshoe Hill 11-22H-1.  Peak production for this well was reportedly 1,208 barrels of oil and 1,548 BOE.  This result was considered exceptional for a first attempt.  Everyone was happy.

Then the Goodrich Nunnery 12-1H-1 reported as 785 oil and 815 BOE.  The stock market shuddered from this result.   It didn’t matter that this was a delineation well in a thinner portion of the TMS…this was an awful result!

So, now let’s look at the oil production during the first three months of these wells.

Name of Well                            IP       Days    Cumulative      Lateral   Average         % of IP

GDP CMR 8-5H-1                      900      87           44,511         5,300       512                57%

GDP C H Lewis 30-19H-1        1,387     72          52,505         6,600       729                53%

ECA Pintard 28H-1                  None      72          39,539         5,627       549                N/A

HK-HH 11-22H-1                     1,208     64           31,253         7,060       488                40%

GDP Nunnery 12-1H-1               785     63          25,695         6,000       417                53%

 Is there a correlation between the reported IP and the production in the early going? 


But, it isn’t as direct as we first think. 

And, just because a well result isn’t announced doesn’t necessarily mean the well is a bad one.

Halcon Fassman 9H-1 (6,030 foot lateral) and Goodrich Bates 25-24H-1 (5,000 foot lateral) will likely announce IP's soon. 

I’m expecting both wells to provide reasonably good IP’s. 

But, let’s not consider these initial results to be the end of the story. 

Some wells hold up nicely despite having a shorter lateral (GDP CMR 8-5H-1… 5,300 foot)  and some wells drop fairly quickly despite having above average laterals (HK Horseshoe Hill 11-22H-1… 7,060 foot).

What do you think about it?