DanglingPoint,I gave you a thumbs up in regards to your...

DanglingPoint,

I gave you a thumbs up in regards to your rationale - but I think if we are doing some balancing out information on JAWS vs. PB we also should be noting the negatives of JAWS as they stand for people to include in their risk analysis.

The potential upside is easy to see, but the probability of the potential being realised and at what cost and what likely time-frames when we have refocused most of the capital into PB is what would be worth knowing.

If we ran with the scenario that JAWS looked marginally commercial with the desorption rates met, in that situation what kind of time-frame would be required to have it producing revenue and at what cost? At that point, I guess SN would need to assess the business case of investing to commercialise JAWS as a marginal commercial operation (under this scenario) versus the business case for taking those business case funds to focus and expand future commercial operations in the PB.

Even if the $$ business case for investing only in PB looked better on paper I imagine SN would be interested in reducing their risk profile by diversifying their gas supply and markets they can access.

Maybe you can help with providing some thoughts into the risk and cost models of JAWS along with possible time-frames to commercialise the first holes as you see it.

Sadly, whenever I write any posts on SN I feel like I shouldn't be writing anything - due to not having worked in or studied O&G investments beyond this investment.