quarterly, page-49

Thanks for the support Wasabibarako, John Junior and Focused.

I have seen this type of thinking before (my training is psychology based) where, due to one huge discovery (in this case), someone in management makes a 'great leap forward' in their mind, to some (actually) quite illogical thinking - but they think they are being logical.
Maybe the conversation at a dinner table was fuelled by a nice drop or three of vino and suddenly it's a case of:

"Mate, if we can get this kind of discovery in the US, imagine what we would (never 'could' at this stage) discover in a untapped market like Myanmar. It's an oilfield waiting to be discovered (which may be true, just no mention of the foreign risk at this stage). We could make Millions" (etc.etc.etc.)

(strange looks from others around the table at about this point and probably comments of: "Where?" and/or: "Isn't that the place they used to call Burma - where that woman is/was imprisoned? Where they have a military Govt? Next door to Thailand isn't it?" etc.etc.etc.

Anyway, you get the idea - and to tell the truth, I am making this up as I have NO idea where this idea of Myanmar suddenly sprang from? (Same as I have no idea where BCC suddenly came up with the not so bright idea of leases in Afghanistan). I am only warning TTE shareholders to be careful.
In psychology 101, they call this kind of thinking 'Groupthink'. i.e. where one influential individual pushes an argument (no matter how insane)in a meeting - and the rest of the group fail to speak out against it. So it goes ahead. The example always given in Psychology 101 is the Cuban missile crisis, where one individual nearly forced the US Govt to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the then USSR.
Fortunately, President Kennedy had more sense (and life experience).
You can see (imo) 'Groupthink' in action in Australia's Federal Govt, with their constant 'policy on the run' announcements of late. Or, any Govt Dept, at any level, any week of the year - as in:

"Mate, I think we should give the new payroll system implementation to IBM - and let's trial it in Qld Health for starters. They have heaps of shiftworkers, so it should be a good test of the system. No mate, we will just go 'live' with it - it's IBM, what could possibly go wrong".

I am waffling as usual. I don't think management would take any notice of me. If there is enough shareholders in agreement that Maynmar is a bad idea, then someone who they do listen to, should put the message from us shareholders to them - as in all other respects, they seem to be a very good and logical management team.

Maybe 'Tui'? Or, 'Fulham Footy'? (assuming they agree with my point of view - which they may not).

Anyway, as always, the above is just my personal opinion. Feel free to disagree. DYOR.