Agree with most points. I'm confused with the "porosity" number....

Agree with most points. I'm confused with the "porosity" number. The 6% porosity is conventional - ie attributable to pores. But there is talk of "fracture" porosity, (referred to as bimodal) ie porosity attributable to fractures. Im not sure there's an estimate for this parameter.

Furthermore, idk whether the net 40m approx of gas only covers coentional porosity (I suspect it does) in which case, there is a fracture porosity that needs to be computed for the entire gas saturated thickness...of 200 odd metres...thusfar . It is for this reason I suspect they are running logs, and this is the best time to do it, as formation damage would be at a minimum.

im not sure many truly understand this potential for huge upside. It's a bit like having natural fraccs.