FAR's Xmas Present, page-12

Great post Aqua, I think the Xmas time-line is looking pretty much right with a double catalyst in results
from SNE, also an updated guide to oil volumes and reservoir porosity and integrity of FAN1.

The Cajun is still over FAN1 ; Far have stated that ; " We have identified potential net bearing oil reservoirs
in ADDITION to those included in the preliminary analysis" So, hopefully in the next few weeks we will at
least get an update as to perhaps INCREASED net pay zones {from the 29m currently reported} and also
some basic idea/estimate as to porosity.

I note with the recent Carnarvon ann that it took another 17 days to record the estimated porosity of the
Phoenix South discovery as between 6-8%. They had VERY light oil of 46-48 API which would no doubt
aid recovery/flow-back. It will take another 3 months they state to arrive at a definitive porosity level as well
as a more accurate figure of volumes of oil in place.

Maybe Ya or JP could shed some more light on the following ;

1.So, the Cajun remains over FAN1 no doubt performing further wire-line log tests, core sampling and perhaps
drill stem tests. Could we also be drilling a side-track well to establish those additional net oil bearing reservoirs
that FAR have alluded to? I note that in Tullows' OWI 1 well off-shore Ghana they initially discovered 69 net pay
from a 200m gross oil interval. They then discovered a further 16m net pay in a side-track well 0.6km from OWI 1.
How long to drill a "side-track"? Is that what we are also doing over FAN1?

2. The 500m Gross Oil interval reported is very substantial viz a viz some of the other recent discoveries I
have noted. Sunbird {L10A PCL} 9.2m net pay from 14m gross oil interval. Tullow {OWI1 off-shore Ghana}
69m net pay from 200m gross oil interval. Carnarvon 66m net oil pay from 340m gross interval. Tullows
conversion of net/gross is 35%, Carnarvon is 20%. Ours is 5%.

Our 5% obviously is very low, what is the reason for this? Too early yet? 100m net for us would equate to
20%.

3. I also note ; CVN ; 66m net pay = 300m booip { P90} OIP estimated to the 10th percentile.
TULLOW ; 69m net pay = 70m boip {P90}

We have 29m net pay for 250m boip {P90}. I may be way off the mark here but is our "highish"
figure of 250m {P90} at under half the net pay v Tullow & CVN relative to the :thickness" of our
reservoir. ie. the WIDTH of the channel of this 29m column?

3. I also understand that CVN's next well {ROC} in the same block is in shallower water and targeting
younger sediments. They are expecting a marked increase in porosity. Could we expect the same with
SNE, which is similar in that it is shallower?

Some enlightenment here from more technically orientated posters would be very much appreciated .

Looking to buy further on any weakness.

GLTAH