more interest in central australia , page-60

Karll,

To add some support to your comments, I will add this part (If I am allowed to) and that will, IMHO, help clarify the issue a little better.

And I quote:

"The full technical team at CTP, including Dalton Hallgreen and external consultancies, backed the idea of more drilling for more oil production and finding out the lowest oil water contact to determine the size of the field. It was the remainder of the Board, not JH, who backed away from this.
The steering mechanism is not an intrinsic part of the drilling rig, it is supplied as an add on, via a short term contract basis by companies such as Schlumberger and Halliburton.
The rig on site, ie. Hunt Rig 3, was perfectly capable of drilling a second, third, fourth, what have you well, but using a full MWD and more sophisticated steering mechanism better better than what was available with the short notice on the first well.

3D CANNOT AND WILL NOT SHOW THE OIL WATER CONTACT, only drilling can do that, and this is needed to demonstrate field size and ultimate drawdown capability. 3D certainly CANNOT PRODUCE OIL FOR CASH FLOW, nor can it mitigate against shareholder dilution like cash flow can."

End of quotation.

There is more to it, and I will only post it if requested.

IMHO, there are also the compunding effects of oil production if we would have had two or three well succesfully pumping oil out, instead of one.

Cheers