ann report, page-10

I'll leave the reserve question to the more in tune guys, but MEL is easy. Acreage, potential reserves, proximity; and now substantial holding by LNG which would indicate a fair chance of them supplying Fishermans Landing. On a price per PJ of 3P basis MEL are 9 times cheaper than ESG. I hold ESG because they are clearly the biggest of the little guys. I hold MEL as I believe that they have some of the best acreage and potential for growth. MEL potentially has enough gas to supply a 3mtpa LNG project, which was conveniently announced a few days prior to the LNG substantial holder notice. A strong implication from the management.

The one thing I have not been able to work out is why ESG have MEL acreage shown on some presentation slides. I would love ESG to team up with MEL and LNG and do 8mtpa out of Fishermans Landing under the ICN contract. Baseless, baseless, baseless...but who knows. ICN are a forgotten one in this puzzle I feel; 2mtpa for 20 years is their deal with SinoGas.