It is a bit complicated, so bear with me.
Previously I made the argument that they technically don't need to report their appraisal results for each reservoir, one at a time. However, they were previously reporting the results as they eventuated. Although once they intercepted what they previously thought was Amistad subunit 2, we didn't hear anything...
After the gap down, obviously it would have been catastrophic to say: "Pre-drill prognosed Unit 2 DST did not demonstrate moveable hydrocarbons to surface at the location tested" source: 28/08/2023, ASX:MAY, Alameda-2 Appraisal Update Webinar Presentation
https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02703276-3A624548?access_token=83ff96335c2d45a094df02a206a39ff4 The funny part about this comment is... they don't mention anything about seeing any hydrocarbons at all in unit2, let alone to surface...
Now knowing that the next announcement after the conclusion of Alameda-2 was going to be an AGM announcement (because they need to give notice [at least 21 days]). And knowing that votes will be taken at the AGM which directly affect directors, they obviously wanted to paint the results of Alameda-2 in the best light possible, right before the AGM announcement.
The chairman of ASX:MAY said to us there was no holding bad news back (in the most recent webinar).... well... lol....
(20min delay)