reality check, page-3

Okeefe,
Good attempt to set a conservative base line. I am somewhat more optimistic (realistic ?).
As you said, this is for liquids only.
#There is likely to be significant additional multiples of the oil value for the gas , including the Alcoa contract which is now likely to be a reality.
#Secondly, I have a problem using $14/bbl for liquids in the ground. NGL's are worth as much or more than oil and need not be discounted by 30%. Correct me if I am wrong.
#The use of $20/bbl for in ground liquids is quite conservative given that it is a high quality crude , and Tappis is currently selling for approximately $130/bbl. What I am saying is that onshore developments are much cheaper than offshore developments and leave a better margin after development costs etc. I feel that $30/bbl is conservative and certainly more appropriate.
#There will also be development and production cost synergies between all of BRU's fields that will result in significant savings over and above any traditional onshore stand-alone oil/gas field. This will further enhance the current value being attributed to in ground oil/gas.
Finally, I realise we are talking about NPV's, or should be, so any values have to take into account the development schedule and cashflow profile. Hard to predict at this early stage but I am still happy to assign $30/bbl in ground.