% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

SandRidge Energy, Inc. Message Board

  • stockjunkie26 stockjunkie26 Jul 9, 2013 8:45 AM Flag

    Second Qtr Cumulative Well Results

    I think I have captured most if not all of the wells here so I would appreciate if anyone has any other data to provide input as appropriate - I show 106 Wells that I have data for - 69 In Alfalfa County, 1 in Garfield, 26 in Grant, and 10 in Woods County. I show the average Barrels of Oil to be 248.7 Bbl/D, and Nat Gas to be 1051 Mcf/D. As Nikos pointed out to me these may or may not be reflective of the 30 day averages for the wells....The type curve for 30 days per the last presentation was 140 Bbl/D and nat gas of 790 Mcf/D so you can see that these results are clearly above the curve. I will admit the last wells drilled in Alfalfa were not as fruitful as the first 50 but the results out of Grant County were stellar......As an example the last 4 wells from Grant yielded 453 Bbl/D and over 1080 Mcf/D..........I would love to know more detail on the multi pay zone information and still awaiting a response to my email to I/R on the ESP's (utilization, timing, etc).......All IMHO, good luck longs.....

    Sentiment: Hold

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Great work! Thanks!

    • One other item to consider if you are trying to calculate revenues, while all the wells listed were reported in the 2nd qtr, only 13 of the 28 Grant wells actually completed in the 2nd qtr - the rest were 4q2012 and 1q2013

    • IP's reported by SandRidge to the OCC are 10 day averages, not 30 day. Usually, but not always, the first 10 days after completion. When looking at a completion report, it shows the completion date at the top then it shows the test date on the next page where they report the numbers - usually 10 days later.

      • 2 Replies to msf1man
      • Good responses here guys - I was hoping to have an intelligent conversation on this board for a change and I sincerely appreciate the input on this thread....What I see is our numbers are very close which is good.....When you look at the 30 day numbers that SD put in the last presentation for 80 wells drilled in the focus area - we appear to be very close to those and perhaps a little higher with the complete number of wells for total second quarter.....I did take the intial results and discount them utilizing the decline curve parameters and factored in the current hedged price of nat gas and oil and I still see these new wells cash flowing in year one, worst case 13 months......I like what I'm seeing in Grant County.....and we have alot of land there..... IMHO - good luck longs....

        Sentiment: Hold

      • Its still a 24 hour test... thats how it is in Texas. Completion date is the day they rig down and set up for flow back. So the 10 day period is drilling out plugs etc.

        msf1man i could be wrong, but are you 100% certain those are 10 day averages of actual produced product?

    • County Breakdown - forgot to put that in original Post:

      Alfalfa - 69 Wells - 235.8 Bbl/D, 1185.6 Mcf/D
      Grant - 26 Wells - 334.7 Bbl/D 813.6 Mcf/D
      Woods - 10 Wells - 97.3 Bbl/D 587.8 Mcf/D
      Garfield - 1 Well - 167 Bbl/D 1521 Mcf/D

      IMHO, good luck longs

      Sentiment: Hold

      • 4 Replies to stockjunkie26
      • Hi stockjunkie,

        I have an Excel spreadsheet containing the last 370 SD wells along with another 1845 OK wells from other producers at the Investor Village SD board. I'd provide a link but having attempted that last night and seeing my post isn't even showing I'm guessing maybe Yahoo doesn't approve of posters providing links to their competitors.(Just a guess as I haven't used Yahoo in years)

        In any case I've tried to add some other features to the spreadsheet (it's a work in progress) that you or others may or may not find useful but like you I'd love to get some feedback or compare notes where we can.



      • FWIW I got the following for the named Counties:

        Alfalfa - 70 wells - 220 Bo/d - 1086 Mcf/d
        Grant - 26 wells - 346 Bo/d - 817 Mcf/d
        Woods - 9 wells - 104 Bo/d - 610 Mcf/d
        Garfield - 1 well - 167 Bo/d - 1521 Mcf//d

        Only real difference is in Alfalfa, but that's not enough to worry about, One of us probably had a typo. As you pointed out the numbers are well above the type curve.
        Also interesting to note that the averages are about the same as the 1st Q and they drilled the same number of wells with less money.

      • I only track Grant but for 2Q, I have 28 wells (and 1 SWD). Average 334.38bopd, 783.43, 464.95boepd with 71.9% oil. Only 15 new wells in Grant were permitted during 2Q.

      • I have similar numbers for IP's for 2nd quarter.
        The wells are better on average for sure. Woods County has always been a tougher play for some reason. With the flattening of the curves these wells will be nicely economic. I'm excited to hear about how well costs have continued to go down (hopefully) and how the ESP's are working. Finally someone at SD put the b factor out on these wells on the latest presentation... that way we know what the declines really are. The 1.5 on oil means that this reservoir is a tight reservoir like the other plays out there, but its not any worse than Bakken, Eagle Ford or Permian plays. Really the only other factor is the water production, which is a negative. Hopefully we will be using that produced water and treating it for frac water. Again, if we can just get 30,000-40,000 barrels of oil in the first year we are golden in the play.

24.97+0.39(+1.59%)Oct 21 4:02 PMEDT