2013 market context and nen, page-11

Surely, there must be a distinction between being kept informed and management obtaining better results. I am not certain that some holders distinguish the two points.

For instance, there is a mark difference between saying that mangement ought to have gone about testing Paloma a certain way and saying, because management has not adequately informed the market they are to blame for the barren land, should that pan out. The two issues are independent. You can have the announcements you like but if there is nothing there, there is nothing there. If someone says well, why didn't they do one zone rather than 6 then we can thrash that point out. Currently, no one can say anything about the results of what the results show, so it is a moot point at the moment.

The other point to be made is that hindsight bias is a problem. The reason I include it that in the civil law, particularly negligence cases, there can be a conclusion that by reason an accident occurred, the court can when trying to determine causation look back and attribute bias to that task. There is a discussion of hindsight bias in SHIRE OF GINGIN -v- COOMBE [2009] WASCA 92 (25 May 2009) paras 43-47

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/wa/WASCA/2009/92.html

So in NEN's case, if the land is dry, some might say they should have tested one zone at a time and by the fourth zone worked out there was nothing there. The problem with that hindsight may include difficulties in accessing drilling equipment, personnel, timeframes etc. So it is easy to be critical.

Maybe a I am a lightweight, but I am forgiving of management because I am not in a position to say if they have have done XYZ rather than ABC the result would have been different. Sure, with the last announcement, it would have been better practice to say that results are expected in mid Jan, rather than remain mute on the point. If the results are not out by Jan, then the management could have announced a new date. Obviously if the dates are extended then criticism is heaped on management, but the way they have gone about it now draws criticism. So why not the frank way rather than the mute way?

In any event, I have come this far and I am not jumping ship. I respect those who do, they have their own positions to think of.

As to what KC said, I would prefer the sound of Normie Rowe singing...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUmA3jDNqbU