crucial fact, page-83

Hi Everest, thanks for referring to the MAD IPO prospectus - I am reasonably familiar with it, but thanks for pointing out the basis of your statements in relation to why you believe the reserves will be downgraded.

Note that the IPO reserves were:

1P of 7.8mmbo and 2P of 17.8mmbo based on 858 net acres (primarily Blue Ridge Dome acres) used for the reserves calculations at the time, via a combination of the 4 accepted methods.

Thanks to Nihilism for summarising the acreages that the June 2012 Reserves upgrade were based on, or actually more specifically what acres were excluded from the calculations, which are:

1P of 102.3mmbo and 2P of 192mmbo based on approx 3,500 net acres of Boling, approx 2,000 net acres of Blue Ridge, and approx 2,700 net acres of Nash.

So now if I get what you say correctly, which was:

"None of the dry wells I am referring to have been factored into the reserves calculations because the reserves calculations I am referring to were made before the dry wells were drilled. That is a fact rather than speculation."

So you are in fact referring to the smaller IPO reserves calculations that should be downgraded, not the June 2012 upgraded reserves? Well on the above basis (i.e. of your own words), if you believe the 2010 IPO reserves should be downgraded because of the dry holes that were subsequently drilled, then you would accept that if the June 2012 reserves upgrade has been calculated after many of those dry holes, then that reserves upgrade would have factored those dry holes into its calculations - being based on the net acreages held at the time. Is my logic there correct - it is based on what you have stated?

As to the GS deal - where did I say it was irrelevant? I was questioning your logic for stating that the GS deal was a valid argument to downgrade the reserves. Now if you were saying that the reserves linked to those net acres sold to GS should now belong to GS, I can understand that, because they would in fact no longer belong to MAD. But where you seemed to be coming from is that the GS deal raises some suspicion about the validity of the reserves calculations, and therefore the reserves will be downgraded at some point - for both GS's share and MAD's share. I dont buy that at all.

Cheers, Sharks.