interesting result, page-21

goodaye again,
Nervous, did you know what was the final number of shareholders who were eligble to vote?

in the last AR the total number was just under 10,000, but with all the institutional buying, that number would have reduced significantly i guess.

*****************

whilst we appear angered by the capitulation of ESG Board, it is pertinent to note that the Board of BOW has proffered exactly the same reasons as to WHY they too chose to sell out.

What I still cannot get my head around, is the REASON why there is such a big apparent price differential between the metrics of ESG vs BOW !? 50c vs 16c for 3P/gj.

it seems to me, that whilst these CSG coys previously said/inferred that there is a big transitional change in funding requirements when the coys are required to move from Exploration to Development - I am thinking that this transitional change may have been brought forward now ??

Each of ESG and BOW had the aim of proving-up sufficient gas reserves to support LNG projects and/or supply a meaningful quantity of domestic gas supply.

Neither of them got there.
For both thet were hit by problems of flooding/rain, rising costs of drilling, labour shortages maybe and environmental issues and govt intervention.

So maybe we are seeing that it is such a big funding requirement now to get to that point of material reserves level, that these coys now need a far,far greater level of capital than they did maybe 3-5 years ago???

ie so they "have to get big, or get out" much earlier now than they used to?

and of course, once that above decision is made, its then a question of price and metrics.

am just trying to understand what is happening now in this sphere.

cheers