Ok guys, here is my take on the update starting off in the order...

Ok guys, here is my take on the update starting off in the order on the update.

Cuba Block 9.... .very interesting...” including a turnkey bid from an established Cuban operator “ Sherritt do not run rigs, the Chinese do, and they are long established in Cuba....we use this model in Rumaila , essentially turnkey is a well delivery mode where the operator pays x amount to a drilling contractor for a successful delivery of a well ...the rate is agreed up front and covers all scenarios... there is not a rig rate...tangibles and services are not paid for by operator , the drilling contractor pays it all for a fixed sum from the operator .
Now then this is where it is interesting,.. the Chinese drilling Operators / contractors are all tied into Petroleum China or CNPC they are all the same entity, under the same corporate umbrella, Bohai, Daqing, Great Wall Drilling, all under CNPC..
So is this telling us something.....
Turnkey payments do not need to be in cash, they can be in equity swap ( farm out in essence) so are we nogotiating a fully carried drilling programme with Possibly the Chinese ...They will use their drilling operators to fully fund and drill the wells in a swap for x amount of equity in block 9 ........
if this plays out as I have described it will play out fairly quickly...Chinese do not hang around and procrastinate.
Farm out negotiations still also ongoing it seems, so I feel we have a number of avenues in play here, turnkey being one and a traditional, farm out equity for cash to fund drilling as another ..high interest at the Apexx Conference in London......bodes well for my views on the corporate side..

Santa Cruz......also moving quickly.... are we soon going to be in a position where we will be the party advocating production and drilling programmes to Cupet for this field , remember we do not have to fund these optimisation changes, we have to advise and consult where and how production can be increased in the field, where drilling or workovers need to happen etc... if we do this and it works we will receive payment in form of oil revenue on a pre agreed contract... Melbana must come up with a plan to increase production, seems they are on the path now for that.......the field will have a base production rate which will have been agreed by Cupet and Melbana , I do not know what this is.... ...let us say 15,000 bbls a day for ease of numbers.. how it will work likely there will be 2 key figures , one key figure is a dollar per barrel that will be paid to Melbana ( let us say $2) the other figure is an increased production target which must be met before they get this figure let us say 20,000 bbls....so if Melbana as an advisor can actually get field production to a physical 20,000 bbls per day , they will potentially receive $ 2 per barrel for the increment increase of 5,000 bbls over the agreed base rate, the higher they can get it , the more they will get over the agreed base rate..
This has absolutely not been grasped by the market or many investors I feel and is why Peter posted on linked in just how absolutely stoked the team was in this agreement with Cupet.
I dont know the numbers and the above is s scenario only , however the Santa Cruz oilfield was discovered with a lighter API oil tagged to Brent pricing....I believe initial production was around 30k per day and a number of successful wells were drilled by Sherritt and Pebercan in early 90s, there has been a lack of progress here as has been the case in most Cuban oil fields operated by Cupet, clearly there is a high potential of increased production here..
Cupet obviously like Melbana which is evident in what is happening here and in block 9...
There are a number of fields I believe where Cupet could potentially look at similar model to Santa Cruz, so if we prove ourselves successful there, I think we could be on to something a lot bigger.


Beehive.... so seems to me , we are going to be operator for the 3 d seismic and choose the vessel / operator for it, we will bill Santos and Total for the costs . This is good as means we are driving this and we will be able to release lots of news on this and not be reliant on the big boys.. ...great news 1st of May commencement .
I have already given an overview previously of how the 3D campaign news flow over Beehive will likley playout with a detailed overview of key timelines and headlines after commencement, all hopefully being positive ..
Brief overview again.. actual commencement, completion, indicative quality of data, date processing began, high quality imaging and data being mapped giving far more detailed overview of the prospect, completion of interpretation and results, hopefully resource upgrade and detailed postion of sweet spot, updated Cos, independent resource assessment from professional third party of the prospect, decision to go ahead and drill , drill timings .......
Remember potentially “ the largest undrilled oil structure in Australia “ of the scale here is what we want ....
All of the above will cost us not one cent... all costs covered.

NZ...very good, still producing, still selling, like the input on the $20 NPV reserves valuation...this is a key indicator , we can raise finance on this without an equity raise ! I believe goodwill advocated that PUka field reserves could be somewhere around the 1- 1.2 million barrels ..so if we hold 30% of that, do the math of potential valution on an NPV of $20 per barrel that is a $6- 8 million of potential asset there alone we could use for corporate fund raising .....

Corporate....well most know what I want... and I believe it will hugely benefit the company and all shareholders ...
First verbiage indicating corporate change is coming and the mention of UK .... acute interest in our INTERNATIONAL portfolio .. all giving indications the storey here for Melbana lays not just in the ASX To me..
A dual listing on AIM must be be now firmly being considered or hopefully even being Implemented IMO....takes around 6-8 months apparently and if already listed on ASX is not as onourous as ASX governance and reporting guidelines are more stringent than AIM.
88E is massively followed on AIM and as a poster noted have a MC 9 times greater than ours with zero production anywhere and assets in a very tight fracking environment in Alaska.... nothing like the diversity or high impact we have...IMO

That is a very solid operational update and hopefully will be a lead of things to come, some very key clues dropped in there. When you read between the lines.
Clearly the company must divest itself outside of the ASX in my opinion with this international portfolio. I firmly believe a dual listing is what is required

Disclosure : I have added a further 500 k over the last 2 weeks and sit as a top 20 shareholder.