Ann: Metgasco to commence court action and field activities, page-77

Maybe a buy out should be based on 2C, but if that was to occur, MEL would want to push for compensation on the capitalised 80 million plus in addition to this. The only reason that the 2P turned to 2C was the governments poor decision making. Ultimately the sum of compensation and buyout should equal the value of the reserve/resouce as 2P - whether that is comprised of compensation to the value of 2P, or compensation for 2C plus damages for 2P is ultimately an exercise in semantics.

Ultimately #1 can happen as a standalone, but if #2 was to occur, the value would have to be inclusive of a figure attributable to #1. Otherwise, the government has acquired the assets of the company without any uplift for the damages that occurred due to it's illegal actions.

The government has nothing solid to stand on from a legal perspective when it comes to compensation. The only questions are "how much compensation?" and "will they buyout the company to save face?".