Ann: Investor Presentation, page-52

Nothing to do with "not liking it" - your response just missed the mark so completely that didn't see the point in responding to it, except with a bit of banter at your expense. But I guess since you're determined to keep going with your alternate reality, I'll do so now.

I never claimed it was anything but my opinion - an educated opinion from somebody who's spent 9 years interpreting geological data and turning it into presentations like that one from CVN, but still an opinion. It's only your straw-man argument putting words in my mouth that I'm claiming things as fact. If you had actually read my post properly you'd have noticed it's full of phrases which clearly indicate an interpretation based on data presented, and not a statement of fact.

Interesting cross section on page 8 - seems to be a trace of a seismic section and the oil-water contacts seem to be accurately marked judging from what we know about Dorado-1 intersecting an OWC in the Crespin.

Only the Milne sand appears to be full to spill. The Crespin and the Caley are nowhere near full which would seem to explain why the oil resource estimate came in so much lower than many were predicting

The post generated some good discussion from several posters, as intended, which was a really positive result. That and my follow up post have over 60 likes and 18 "great analysis" and all in all, everybody seemed to get value out of it, except you who went on a rant about waiting for a 'lab' report. As if you'd have the faintest idea how to interpret any core, pressure or logging data when it came anyway.

I didn't worry about explaining this previously as everybody else had obviously understood it already except you. Hope this clears things up for you. Champ.