Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Checkmateking on August 4, 2009 at 5:12

Awesome news here Les, nice find.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Checkmateking on August 5, 2009 at 11:29

No discussion on this? This is great news!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by bigball N1/N2 on August 5, 2009 at 13:01

that is awesome news. pretty far south i would say. 10-14. hmmmm...great info.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on August 6, 2009 at 15:26

Some more color from Comstock regarding the Upper Haynesville

Ron Mills - Johnson Rice & Company

A couple questions on the Upper versus Lower Haynesville. I know that you talked about that in the Toledo Bend North area. One, how big is that field; and secondly, do you see the Upper Haynesville in other areas, or does it tend to be somewhat localized?

Mack Good

Ron this is Mack. Our Toledo Bend North acreage is approximately 12,000 acres. I can't go into detail about where we think the Upper Haynesville is prospective, because as Jay mentioned earlier, we're still trying to acquire acreage. Not everybody interprets it the same way as you know, but we think the Upper Haynesville is in certain areas not in others, it's too thin and too clay rich in some areas, but it's highly prospective as confirmed by the well that we announced today in our Toledo Bend North area with the 11.6 IP rate and that with great pressures as well. So, we're excited about the opportunity to pursue the Upper Haynesville in those other areas that we think are correlative to the Toledo Bend North result.

Ron Mills - Johnson Rice & Company

It's very early and you don't typically discuss this much, but based on what you're seeing from rock qualities and pressures and initial production rates, do you all at least internally think that the Upper Haynesville can be somewhat equivalent in terms of prospective size as the Lower Haynesville and is there any appreciable cost difference, because it looks like it's only 300 or 400 feet shallower?

Mack Good

Right, Ron. There's no appreciable cost difference. The Upper Haynesville part of the play will be smaller than the Lower Haynesville. I think everyone that's looked at it would agree upon that, the Lower Haynesville acreage, the prospective acreage is through the roof, depending on who you talk to, you'll get a different number on that. But certainly the Upper Haynesville is a sizable acreage play, and it's variable as is the Lower Haynesville.

Ron Mills - Johnson Rice & Company

I guess my, Mack I guess my question is in the areas that you have the Upper Haynesville, you would need two wells to develop it, but do you at least based on what you're seeing from the coring and your pressures and rock qualities to date think that the Upper Haynesville can have the same reserve on a per well basis potential as the Lower Haynesville?

Mack Good

I think the potential exists for that, sure in what we consider to be the core areas of both the lower versus the upper, the reserves would be fairly similar. But as you know, Ron we continue to be conservative. And as you mentioned at the very beginning of your question, it's very early, there's only, to our, as far as we've been able to gather the data that there have been only 14 Upper Haynesville flow tests that gave enough data to assess in any form or fashion, and only about six or seven of those tests have been horizontal wells. So the flow performance of production and performance from the Upper Haynesville has very little history. But given all the data that we have available to us right now, we continue to be very enthusiastic and excited about the opportunity it represents.

Jack Aydin - Keybanc Capital Markets

Going back to Upper Haynesville, you got say 12,000 in North Toledo Bend and am I correct that you got about similar amount in South Toledo Bend?

Mack Good

Yes, sir. This is Mac. Yes sir.

Jack Aydin - Keybanc Capital Markets

Mack, is this South Toledo Bend also lending itself to Upper Haynesville?

Mack Good

You want me to extrapolate the Upper Haynesville plate where we haven't drilled yet?


Jack Aydin - Keybanc Capital Markets

Well, I mean, you could talk about it. I'm pushing a little bit.

Mack Good

I know you are and I appreciate that. We think in several of our acreage footprints in the play are prospective for the Upper Haynesville, and I would not exclude the south block certainly.

Michael Bodino - SMH Capital

Okay. And then I have one follow-up question on the Upper Haynesville. I know you've drilled one well, and you're in the process of getting some production history there. Are there any other Upper Haynesville wells planned in the foreseeable future?

Mack Good

We're targeting the Lower Haynesville for the remainder of the year. Obviously, every Lower Haynesville well we drill will penetrate the Upper Haynesville. We'll be gaining some additional pouring data. We also are data trading with some other partners, and we'll be getting additional data that way. So, the short answer to your question, Michael, is that we're going to target the Lower Haynesville for the remainder part of the year.

Michael Bodino - SMH Capital

Okay. Of the 14 Upper Haynesville flow tests that you've analyzed, and the 6 to 7 that have been horizontal, where are they predominantly located?

Mack Good

Well, I can give you this. They're across the play. Predominantly they're in the western part of DeSoto, there's a couple over in Red River Parish, there's a couple in Sabine and there's one in Shelby County, Texas. So, a concentration of those tests are in the Logansport region.

Michael Bodino - SMH Capital

Okay. I guess from a kind of a geologic or maybe even geographic standpoint, it sounds like the upper Haynesville is more of an [on lapping] structure above the Lower Haynesville as it gets deeper to the south. This kind of develops and gets thicker, and more prospective as you move into the term maturity window. Is that a fair statement?

Mack Good

I think that's a fair statement, although there is some exceptions to that rule.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lee on August 6, 2009 at 15:58

Great job on these excerpts. I listened to this conference call also, and the repeated references to the Upper Haynesville reminded me of the Q1 conference call by Encana where they kept bringing up the "Bossier Shale" as a separate play above the Haynesville in the southern part of the play. Like Comstock, Encana was touting a horizontal completed in the upper haynesville/bossier (I think it was the Colbert well #238108, but my recollection may wrong on that). Unfortunately, in the most recent conference call, Encana had very little to nothing to say about it. I'm not sure if they cooled off on it or were just playing their cards a little closer to the vest, but they had nil to say about it. I guess the focus will continue to be on the Lower Haynesville, but these bits and pieces on the Upper H are going to be worth watching.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on August 6, 2009 at 16:39

Lee, as you may recall EnCana did mention they are "currently pumping a well" (frac'ing) in the Mid-Bossier Shale and will have results in the 3rd Qtr. I am just not sure which of their wells this was referencing. And yes, it was the Colbert Lands 16 #H1 Well that is producing from 3 frac stages in the Mid-Bossier Shale.

Regarding Comstock, I was particularly intrigued by the statement about the Upper Haynesville developing and getting thicker as the Lower Haynesville gets deeper to the south.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lee on August 7, 2009 at 8:33

Les -- I missed that comment from Encana. Thanks for mentioning it. Aubrey McLendon mentioned the Bossier briefly in the CHK conference call, but he only mentioned that their Haynesville fracs penetrate into the Bossier also. Didn't re-wind that part, but I believe that's what he said. I'm interested in the southern part of the play, so I hope this develops as a prospective play.

• ▶ Reply