ART

Maybe you're not so good at reading SEC fnlgiis and conference calls. Or maybe those things contain misleading or wrong information. Either way, it looks like these wells are operating well within the black. You mean to tell me that the companies are deliberately lying to the SEC to make their operations look WORSE? On what planet do you live?"In those 29 years the average 2011 Bakken well will... [g]enerate over $20 million in net profit".Let us look at the claims on the blog, where people don't lie the way they would to the SEC. :)We read, "A typical 2011 Bakken well will cost $7,925,000 to drill and complete, and will produce oil for 29 years (27 years longer than the average stimulus-funded "green" company, as Che comments)."Shale wells deplete rather rapidly. Those $10 million wells will lose 65% of their IP rate within the first year and by the time a decade has passed you are looking at 20 bpd or less. That is a steep hill to climb and given the costs there is no chance that the companies will be able to turn out a profit unless taxes and royalties are reduced by a significant amount. Let me note that your 'source' is North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources which cares more about the state's take than it does about the company profits. To look at how the companies are doing we have to pay attention to what they tell investors in the SEC fnlgiis and the conference calls. And in those fnlgiis and calls the companies admit that the large payouts to service companies, governments, and royalty holders are making it impossible to generate positive cash flows from operations. Instead of the hype coming from all sources I suggest that you take a look at the 10-Ks.

Not Given