Ann: Chair's Address to Shareholders and Presentation, page-14

Minim Cove, concept well costs are irrelevant in my view, they differ quite a bit from a development program perspective and generally a company experienced in high volume drilling would understand that. Just from a longer contract and volume you start saving significant cost. the key IMO is well productivity and how it compares to the other regions which seems on par based on ATS data set. We have to accept is all ATS is trying to achieve is prove concept , not generate revenue from production (albeit that pays for the years we have been waiting) or host a huge drilling program.

From all the activities that has happened, it makes sens that focus of the companies remains within their portfolia as long as they could. Infield drilling, going back to drilled but not produced wells is only natural for cost efficiency purpose, its only when they run out of that or anticipate to run out of that they would look further afield.

For share price to come down, its very obvious, no partner , limited revenue or atleast cap on the revenue and the long wait.

I think we would have already had a 2.5c offer and that would have been rejected straight away. I would be suprised anything less that 10c as a bare minimum. ATS board will want to spin it off, it will take a fair while to drill 200 wells and get some revenue and don't see them waiting that long.

All in my humble opinion. The main thing is wells are producing, well intervention is under control and as long as producitivity lines up with other regions eventually a deal should come through.