risk vs reward, page-15

I'd say gas quality is more imp. for now. Average porosity/permeab. should b in line with the local tectonic settings (4-17% is the range) so that's not a show-stopper IMHO.

Was researching the Torosa field & it has apprx 7-8% CO2.
C1-Heavies ratio was 79:21% for early Scott Reef wells & 95:5% heavies for early Brknck wells.

If WPL(50%)-Chevron(16.67%)-B(16.67%)-Shell(8.33%)-BHP(8.33%) want to develop Torosa for its 14 tcf Dry gas & 370 mmbbls Condensate, then I'd say Conoco would do the same for Poseidon. All they need is a few missing pieces of the puzzle at Poseidon.

As for COP-KAR, the 2 gas samples they have frm WPL's Buffon discovery had 75% C1, 22% heavies, traces of CO2, hence the reason to go 60-40% here.

In their early presentations, KAR's internal hurdle rate for the CGR is 19 bbls/mmcf (using Nth Scott Reef data) to 43 bbls/mmcf (frm Buffon).

Hence absolutely crucial for the JV here to get insitu gas samples to give Poseidon its own identity.

As for Ichthys & Prelude, I guess the timeframe between 2012-2015 will tell us how their FLNG/piped gas to Blaydin Point in Darwin goes.

I wouldn't give up yet on Poseidon, will go straight to the bottom drawer after this well & Kronos-1. Still early days in the Browse, when a lot is at stake, including the extent of the structure, gas content et al.

Mkt does get manipulated all the time by Insto's/BOTS/Fat-cats etc, its the stk mkt not a game of touch footy!!

Sadly not all share-holders have industry background or went to rock school & will take the mkt update at face value, hence the paranoia/tree shaking etc.

Perhaps the Directors at KAR should use BOARD ROOM RADIO then going direct to some news wire or Analysts, not fair to their 9141 odd shareholders (as per their '09 AR so number should b less given the SP drop this week).