if they only had a rig, page-12

Coalboy I understand the farmout approach, agree it is necessary with the size/number/area of our prospects and have no problem with the company operating in this way. If we can get a farmin partner to fund and operate exploration that is 100% fine (at the right price, of course!) as we are cash poor.

I'm talking about our currently 100% held prospects where we have several targets waiting to be drilled, especially around Surprise. I am unimpressed with the company yet again delaying drilling due to rig unavailability. Hurry up and wait doesn't really apply to these targets, because if CTP doesn't drill them no one will. If we can farm them out at a reasonable price that is fine, but we are IMO not making the most of our assets if we do nothing.

I agree we don't have the cash to drill these targets ourselves at the moment, hence the suggestion of a relatively small cap raising to allow exploration to occur consistently over a short-medium term. Other O&G explorers certainly do long term leases of rigs like this. If it is more economical to buy and staff a rig than a medium-term lease then obviously that would be the way to go, I would only be ruled by the numbers, no attachment to CTP owning a rig specifically.

The negatives of a CR as I see it are obviously a likely short term SP drop, the positives are potential cashflow, less delays with associated less cash burn and the ability to clearly plan and achieve drilling. To me the positives outweigh the negatives.

I am concerned that our cashflows are still not strong enough to sustain admin costs and any exploration of our 100% held tenements, which leaves us relatively more at the mercy of our farmin partners and in a weak negotiating position if a T/O were to come about. It also allows them to delay exploration to some degree to strengthen their position if they were thinking about the same.