c/b shale

i think this has been raised here previously.
But it is worth thinking about again.

I know it is just speculation.

But here is ICN:
- good (in fact extremely good), highly prospective shale acreage in ATP855
- equal highest j/v partner at 40% in ATP855
- 33% interest in upper portions of neighbouring PEL218
- contiguous permits of 218 and 855.
- access thru J/V in ATP855 to tech data.
- proven flows in PEL218
- statements by Beach that both permits are "basin centred" gas/oil plays of both conv and unconventional
- ICN having an unfulfilled GSA
- ICN having no money to develop ATP855
- ICN free-carried for drilling one well.

So then I look at DLS preso, and again contemplate permits.
Here is BG/QGC farming into DLS permits ATP940.
It will spend up to $130m to prove up shale in DLS permits.
So it wants the gas
It has experience
It has the money
It will have the LNG plant
It will construct Train 3
it wants more customers (eg ICN GSA)

So WHY wouldn't BG/QGC look at some arrangement to co-develop all three permits?
Beach has already acknowledged that it would want to develop PEL218 and ATP855 jointly - so why not add DLS block?

Everybody would win.

Unfortunately we only have 40% - but we could go down to 15% with a big cash injection from BG farmin - and get free carried for a hell of a lot longer.
Also, in these types of deals, the likes of BG could take equity in ICN to secure their interests, and the GSA.