I completely agree with your perspectives on Harrier for this...

I completely agree with your perspectives on Harrier for this winter. It clearly was not being seriously contemplated otherwise it would be already lined up in terms of permits etc. Remember that Charlie #1 was planned and permitted over a year before likely drilling to keep options open in the unlikely event of an early farm-out there.

The Umiat acquisition is a puzzling one. Especially when considering the information you have provided regarding the roads/pipeline development costs. I suspect that costs would be lower if the connection was via Willow (or Harpoon), and even lower if permanent road requirements were minimised. But still, the question remains as to whether Umiat could ever be commercially exploited without higher PoO and also additional reserves in adjacent and enroute reservoirs (ie Peregrine).

So Peregrine is important for a number of reasons: as a possible 'first win' for the company's exploration efforts; as a bolster to the economics for any possible developer, in the success scenario; and as a means of getting one more 'season' for fund raising and share trading.

That said, the independent assessment of Peregrines prospective resources needs to be put into perspective. The numbers provided are based on Monte Carlo simulations which collectively represent a probability distribution of outcomes...in a geological success scenario. The positive/optimist spin is that the high end estimate is for 1,463 mmstb's of oil, with a mean resource estimate of 645 mmstb. The negative/pessimist spin is that the low end estimate is for only 41 mmstb's and that the entire range of outcomes from 41-1,643 mmstb's only represent the success case outcomes....which are collectively 37% of simulated outcomes. If I interpret correctly, this means that 63% of outcomes showed a fail case (effectively zero mmstb's).

As has been discussed in earlier months, the 'mean' number is just a mathematical average, while the 'best' number is the outcome that represents the highest probability amongst all the simulated outcomes (ie the 'mode'). The large difference between the two suggests that it is a right skewed distribution in which the model is showing that success case outcomes are more likely to be in the lower range of numbers. So the focus on 'mean' rather than 'best' may be misleading. Which may have an impact on sentiment and expectations mismatch to reality in a success scenario outcome.

Irrespective, the outcome at the end of the drill bit will be the only number of any merit, soon enough.

Frankly, I just want an unambiguous and undisputed drilling success for once with this company. Whether that (mooted/hoped for) success is of significance to advance the company agenda is another story.

All IMO and GLTA.