an unpopular dose of industry perspective, page-3

"Happy to swap metric with Bow if we can have the doubling of the share price like they did.

Bundy, yes, "I'll have what she is having". That is what BOW shareholders would like - what WE are having.

We would all like the share price to double. But starting share prices are arbitrary. Transaction metrics relate to the value of the assets, which is the gas in the ground.

And when we are talking transaction, we can't just expect to double our share price unless we can justify that in terms of the value of what we are selling.

So even if you take OUR reserves, then double them, and then apply the BOW metric, you still end up with a deal that is well below the current Santos/ESG deal.

We (ESG) were already trading at a higher metric than BOW. Our share price had already assumed that are coals were worth more per GJ, and that we would have strong reserves growth. The reserves growth didn't happen.

We get paid on a price per GJ of gas reserves. These metrics are not absolutely comparable (because the devil is in the detail). But as a starting point, our 'deal' is at a robust price.

But Bundy , keep fighting the good fight, if you think that ESG deserve an even higher price still ... without the reserves growth, I just can't see how that can be justified, though.

ALL companies have reserves upsides. This is the comparison

ESG - (a 'deal' at) $0.50 per GJ of 3P, with reserves upside....
BOW - (a 'deal' at ) less than $0.20 per GJ of 3P, with reserves upside...
MEL - (trading at) less than $0.10 per GJ of 3P, with reserves upside...

Sorry mate. We may have been misled about our reserves progress in the last 18 months. And our coals may be good quality and strategically valuable. But our deal isn't underpriced on a comparable metric basis.

Yaq