OMG Aqua, A few hours away from the PC and I see you are getting...

OMG Aqua, A few hours away from the PC and I see you are getting out of control again!

Fact of the matter is that I already looked at potential net pay translation assumptions on my spreadsheets and examples of this have been sitting around for months for those that care to look. I did start out by asking myself the question as to whether SNE could feasibly contain 1 billion barrels recoverable and came to the conclusion using similar processes of conversion of oil in place to recoverable reserves that you are using that yes it possibly could, but only at the expense what seemed to me to be some fairly extravagant and unwarranted assumptions. I have always labelled my translations as highly speculative at the best and not being an expert, been happy to play them down.

Whatever, the main problem seems to me in making assumptions of average net pay extrapolated over the whole field based on one or two wells selected to return optimum net pay in the first place. As I say, I'm no expert, but it's obviously nonsense to try and extrapolate pay from optimum locations (especially SNE 2, where Cairn won't tell us about net pay anyway - maybe that's why, for fear it will be misinterpreted) over the whole field, when we know that the best sands are thought likely to be dropping out of the oil zone to the east and so far the net thin sand pay identified at SNE 2 in any event appears relatively thin.

Quite apart from the fact that not only does one need to average the pay out over the whole productive area to get a rough idea, but for even that to be valid I would imagine the pay sands would also have to be shown to have high degrees of continuity and connectivity, and allowances would have to be made for that too, particularly where the thinner wispy sands are concerned I would have thought.

So in summary, cool it! Lets not get too carried away - wait and see what Cairn say.

pj