""For CTP to remain the operator would mean shareholders would...

""For CTP to remain the operator would mean shareholders would be constantly sticking there hands into there pockets. ""

Gougoodthing,

WRONG!!

In any form of JV, whether you are operator or not, any Joint Venturer has to dig deep and come up with it's percentage of the cost according to the percentage ownership.

Operatorship does not always go to the higher percentage owner. IMO it goes to whoever and what was agreed upon during the JV agreement. Anzon, from memory, only owned at one stage 30% of the oil tenement, and it was still the operator. That ended when they were successfully taken over. (Without going back and looking at my old records, it was ROC).

In the case of farm-ins though, IMO there is difference. Because the farminee is allowed to drill into someone else's tenements. In exchange/return the farminee has to bear the costs of the drillings and in return they will receive a percentage of that tenement according to what was agreed upon at the time. Typical example of that, is currently between BPT and ICN.
Most importantly though, BPT will still be the operator although they only own 40% of what is found.
DYOR.

Hope this will help.

Cheers.
Buddy