Phone conversation with Scott - Jan 12th 2023., page-208

I would like to add that at M-1 the Upper Angwa interval amounted to about 900m, of which 225m was considered gross pay. VOGC stated in his slides that SM would not have referred to 225m if he didn't believe it was close to the true net pay thickness at M-1".. There is obviously a glaring contrast between 13.9m net pay in M-2 compared to about 200m in M-1.

The report I referred to earlier stated "potentially thicker intervals shown by velocity model" i.e. was expected at the crestal M-2 location. In reality, we actually intersected thicker shales at M-2 compared to M-1 rather than thicker gas bearing sands. The M-1 fault block contains several cyclical sedimenary features and each depositional cycle consists of source, reservoir and seal. So, given the cyclical nature (thinner sands and thinner shales) at M-1, a similar sequence of cyclical thin shale bodies has not been encountered in the M-2 region.

My understanding is that compared to 900m at M-1 the total thickness is actually greater at M-2 (approx 2000m to 3100m = 1100m )