I had to logout to read what the cockroach has to say because...

I had to logout to read what the cockroach has to say because I’ve got it on ignore. To counter some of these delusional comments:

1. ”Every company announces permeability, saturation and pressure data” is not what I posted. I stated that permeability is always referenced alongside net pay for a discovery and if this isn’t done by stating the result in mD then they would use a qualitative description of the reservoir quality (ie. tight, poor, fair, good or excellent) which in turn is a reflection of the permeability encountered. It then goes on to list a number of discoveries which it claims did not make reference to reservoir quality in their discovery announcements - Beach Energy (Tarantula Deep 1 gas discovery 2023), MIN Resources Lockyer 1 Deep gas discovery 2021) and STX (Erregulla discovery 2022). All of these companies clearly announced the reservoir quality as “high quality Kingia Sandstone reservoir”, “excellent reservoir quality encountered in the Kingia sandstone” and “the discovery is made up of two net pay zones - 16m with high quality flow units as well as a lower permeability gasifier section”, respectively. This is exactly my point! Scott has not revealed this critical market sensitive information in line with what all other exploration companies report on declaration of a discovery.

2. Then there’s a bit of non-sensical jibberish from cockroach about the resource size at Mukuyu being 3 times larger than the Perth basin and net pay will be increased by multiples in the next 1-3 months. In response - our net pay is significantly lower than pre-drill estimates. This means there is a valid risk of a downgrade to prospective recoverable resources. It cannot be in-line or exceed pre-drill expectations at this point in time based on the data we have. There’s no new data that we will receive “in the next 1-3 months” that can be used to increase the net pay. At best we might get some data from routine core analysis or SCAL to refine cut-off limits and possibly increase the net pay thickness but this will take at least 6 months for lab results and will most likely need to be supported by a flow test from these zones that are sitting outside the current net pay intervals to verify mobility (also 5-6 months away). The lab test results for gas samples which we can expect in Feb/Mar will provide clarity on hydrocarbon composition and CGR only and won’t feed into upgrading net pay.

3. The cockroach has also claimed that 20 TCF is still accurate despite the Dande, Forest and Pebbly Arkose encountering only residual hc’s. Not sure that we even encountered any reservoir in the Forest let alone residual hc’s for starters. But the fact that two of the largest compartments on the field are dry in these zones means that we can’t possibly hit the full 20TCF pre-drill estimate. Even if 3D seismic identifies some potential elsewhere on the structure and drilling encounters some net pay in these zones, the resource size is going to be a very small fraction of what they initially hoped for if the entire structure was hc bearing in these shallower zones.

4. “It’s going to flow commercially”. I have no doubt that we’ll flow to surface. But it’s the magnitude of the flow rate achieved that I’m concerned about, especially if we do indeed have low permeability reservoir. We can’t possibly know what this will flow like with the limited data available. But to ignore the risk of poor reservoir quality leading to disappointing flow rates is being naive. SM could quite easily address this concern with some commentary on reservoir quality right now. But he’s not doing that. So you’ve got to ask yourself why not?

5. The MOU that we just signed isn’t a “3 billion dollar offtake agreement”. It’s a non-binding MOU and still needs to be converted to a binding GSA (gas sales agreement).

6. The last comment is amusing. Just to be clear - I haven’t sold out to re-enter at a cheaper price. The flow test result in Q2 will dictate what I do with my holding. And I removed my avatar because somebody else decided to start using the identical image which I find too confusing having multiple posters with the same image. A lot of times I don’t look for the username, I just look for the image to know who has posted something. But in his defence, this particular poster used to be a pirate so pillaging is in his nature…