quarterly, page-70

Footy, you surprise me. I would have thought you would foresee the dangers of spreading a company too thin? If we are going to spend profits from the US Allen Dome, into pie in the sky exploration blocks in Myanmar, then it becomes a casino type company.

Why not simply increase assets in the US of A - the best country in the world in lots of ways, rule of law, no one is going to repossess your lease, or ask you to pay 'tea money', an staff will not be abused.

I did a quick read of Myanmar - and I am not going to even begin to pretend an hour's reading makes me an 'expert' on anything to do with the country.

I did note that you MUST partner with a local firm and there was one website I came across which listed so many human rights abuses over the years of oil and gas exploration, I actually felt sick and stopped reading (documented examples from International human rights organisations included forced labour, land taken by force for projects such a pipelines, forced repatriation to other areas, disappearances and killings etc.etc. There are riots in and around mines in the NE of the country. The new civilian country is going to have a tough job - and the population is going to be very, very angry over past abuses - there are already claims for compensation for land that was lost to oil and gas companies. It is sounding a bit like a future Malaysia, where LYC has had so much trouble.

All the major international corporations seem to be lining up to get into the off shore leases, so I guess the onshore will be the same (BP, Shell, Chevron, Woodside, Statoil, Petronas were all mentioned). China seems to be BIG in the country and gas pipelines are being built to China.

I did look into one in depth research report on onshore oil and gas. Reference is (for anyone interested - but it is very reading):

pub.usgs.gov/bul/2208/E/pdf-E.pdf

A quick summary of the basics is that the formations seem to be similar to the Louisiana coastline and at similar depths.
Oligocene and Miocene, at depths of 3,000 to 4,000 metres plus (the depths we need to go down to in the Perth Basin),
very low TOCs - 1.7 per cent or less (Perth Basin is far higher TOCs), mostly Gas discoveries - which may be due to the depths of the discoveries.

Anyway, at this point, I really do not see how the risks (the foreseeable risks, not actual) could warrant it.

Why not buy more leases in the Texas/Louisiana/Gulf of Mexico coastline - where none of the foreign country risks exist??

Anyway, as always the above is merely my personal opinion and it is only after one hour's reading. Feel free to argue against me, as I am interested in the 'Why'?? of Myanmar.
DYOR.