Ann: Response to ASX Query, page-12

As others have noted, the gas in place figures are not particularly important.  What matters is what is recoverable.  This said, we should all note that in 2014 a geologist with Cuadrilla indicated that the gas in place figure of 200 tcf needed to be revised upward to 330 tcf.

What's most interesting is that in the intervening years, recovery factors have increased significantly in the US.  Some are now quoting 30-50% recovery factors versus the 5-10% that we were quoting when we originally started looking at the Bowland.  So, even if you were to cut our GIP in half, we should recover more gas than was originally thought (and I'm not suggesting we should cut it in half).  

Yes, recoveries will be somewhat constrained in the UK because of surface restrictions, but because of longer laterals even these concerns are less important.  Nick Grealy posted a link to a document a couple weeks ago that said a single pad was going to be capable of draining 100 sq km, which is unbelievable.  

Any way you cut it, we are talking about a very large resource - much larger than what I originally thought.