Ann: Quarterly Activities Report, page-52

An alternate explanation as to why PCL may be less-than forthcoming with releasing 3D seismic insights into the current prospectivity of PEL-87, is that in the absence of farm-in Partner, PCL are perhaps trying to maintain some level of competitor advantage in one of the hottest contested basins on the planet to date. With no farm-in Partner "on the hook" to drill a well, this is possibly a wise move.

When we look back at the pre-drill prospects of Graff/Jonker et.al, Venus et.al, Mopane, very limited, if any, subsurface information was made available to the public by Shell, Total or Galp. And post discovery, there is still precise-little real subsurface data released, from what I could find. Chevron has shared nothing on the prospectivity of PEL-90, and neither has Rhino Resources on PEL-85. Perhaps the sheer size of these Companys means that they don't think twice about releasing anything, so they don't. Shell, Total, Galp and Rhino are all publicly listed Company's and are clearly holding their cards very close to their chests to maintain their competitive advantage. So why should a minnow like PCL, tell these giants what they have found in PEL-87 before a drill commitment has been made? Sintana has access to what has been found to date in PEL-87 but are not releasing anything of significance to the market as well.

Anyway, just an alternate explanation for the lack of "information sharing". Perhaps what the JV are seeing in PEL-87 has them quaking in their boots; hence radio silence until a drill buddy has committed. One can only hope.

Regards OldGeo