I had emailed Jason about some general questions and some about rates and how they vary with time.

He mentioned that the Barnett took 20+ years to develop into what it is today and the Fayetteville shale took about 4 years. Of course the Barnett took a long time because the frac'ing wasn't nearly what it was today. He made a mention:

"Southwestern Energy for example is a well recognized leader in the Fayetteville shale play. When they started working on the play 4 years ago, the best rates from vertical and horizontal wells were well under 0.5 mmcf/d with a couple over 1 mmcf/d. Four years later, these are closer to 3.5-4 mmcf/d. Each shale play is very different and while we can learn from the development of others, it takes time to determine the unique solution that works best for this play."

As Forest mentioned, the first wells are always the worst...but being that we've gotten up to 1 mmcf/d rates with forest and 800mcf/d on a 30 day sustained basis, it's clear we're doing pretty well. Basically Jason was saying that as time goes on, the frac'ing process is refined and optimized (higher flow rates)...ie. type of sand used, correct perforating technique used etc. Our play is different than others I would imagine on some levels, but it's good to be in a time were the technology is at it's best in regards to drilling and taking seismic survey's etc...

He said again, they expect Tuesday's conference call will be a day were Forest will talk about the results.

I am remember back to Mr Binnion's comment during one of the presentation. He mentioned that there isn't a "eurika" well, but more of a tipping point in shale plays. BUT, he said that if you were to look at one well that could be shown as this, it was the gentilly at 800mcf/d for a full 30 day sustainted basis. I think he said "what are the odds we frac that well and hit our best results?". The 30 day test is important in the long term deliverability as Jason told me.

Anywho, just thought I'd share:).

Rocco