here's some very interesting info, page-97

wow, if there ever was a good example of someone playing the man and not the ball, it would be that post.. if guess if you type enough words you can fool some readers

"If you like facts,then the correct answer is refer to the post from scholz 14/01/10 20:32,which is the official response and the most up to date figures available to date.This report took all asetts and liabilities into consideration at that time and came to the conclusion that liabilities exceed asetts by $60,065,714 as at 31/12/09."

Official response? As has been pointed out a number of times, that is not a valuation. If you are putting it out there as a valuation, are you calling myself and KK rampers as we are arguing that the project has value if sold today, you seem to be arguing that its worth nothing

"Those who want to talk about current and non-current asetts,please take note that they are currently considered non-current as opposed to current as curently the wells are not producing enough to become current asetts."

Even if the wells are flowing at 20mmcf, they will not be classified as current assets. Please justify, with references to accounting standards, how MAE can recognise the wells as current assets based solely on a change in flow rates.