Ann: Roc-2 Well Confirms Hydrocarbons-CVN.AX, page-27

I mean put it this way. I don't believe anything non-definite a CEO says during drilling as they always accentuate the positive, even on a duster. But "good quality reservoir sands" is something no one can really mislead too much on. It can be a relative term but should be within certain parameters. That removes a ton of risk even if some had already largely made the assumption the 1-4 sands were going to be ok. I certainly hadn't as I try not to assume too much so it was a relief for me. Maybe less of a relief for those that already assumed success and maybe why I'm more positive than some.

When you look at the resource modeling we should be able to assume that it's closer to the P50 than the P90 if the reservoir sands are "good quality" given porosity is one of the larger variables in the Monte-Carlo simulation used to arrive at those figures and they have a gas water contact from ROC 1.. . Although certainly not definite we can also *more safely* assume the 5-7 sands are also likely to be "good quality" in this location and it becomes more about the net height of HCs and how thin the sands are..

So to me it's not like he's describing one and a half farts in a single sand but that the top sands will probably pull their weight.. which is at least half the equation.