charo plot, page-13

Success Ratio

As Mark Twain (or more correctly Disraeli) said 'There are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics'

When one starts with a 90% success statement you suspect they have included development and appraisal wells in the pot instead of just exploration wells.

Then there is the matter of what is a success. Most agencies go by whether the well was cased. But of course every cased well does not flow and even if it does it may not be economic for years because of reserves, flow rate or development access.

South Australia though has a great government agency and you can get access to a wealth of material free and easy.

for historical stuff
http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/petroleum/prospectivity/exploration_and_development/historical_highlights

for 2008 and 2009 they list 24 wildcats (exploration wells) with 10 listed as dry holes (so a still impressive 58% success)

The Hollomen Energy figure also differentiates 3D wells from 2D and this is not listed by Pirsa so the success rate on just 3D is probably higher. But certainly the advent of 3D in most basins in the world has had a substainial impact on drilling success.

Most exploration wells target potential reserve large enough to break even on 10% success so an overall success rate of 58% would result in healthy EMVs. Even the quoted 45% success on 2D drilling would give a large reward for the money invested.

So the Cooper/Eromanga is a good place to drill for modest reserves especially on 3D but no true exploration program will deliver 90% economically successful wells unless the sample group is very small or the criteria is very selective.

On the matter of whether any block is MOOSE PASTURE, this is very complex but in this case it is a matter of oil migration which has been a hotly debated topic here for decades