I'm something like 93% in Range (was 100% until recently but I...

I'm something like 93% in Range (was 100% until recently but I added some funds from my bank account to buy another AIM share), and still chilled with how things are going (albeit I suspect 100% of my portfolio is still substantially less in numerical terms than 10% of yours, so can see why derisking was sensible).

Definitely feel more comfortable now we have a good amount of cash in the bank. Means we can afford a few bad wells without needing to dilute further or can increase our stake in the lower risk Trinidad production play to offset the higher risk Puntland/Georgia campaigns.

Being all-in probably isn't for everyone, but the way I see it is:

1) Diversifying lowers risk, but also lowers the reward. Statistically speaking the more stocks you have in your portfolio, the closer you will get to stock market average returns of about 10% a year or so.

2) I'm still young, so if it all went bad, there's still plenty of time to recover. If I was 5 years from retirement or something like that, my attitude would be different.

3) Range is a diversified company in itself, with quite a few assets spread across the globe. There's no need for a diversified portfolio if you have a company with diversified assets.

Still plan to take a good bit of cash out pre-Georgia results mind you, no matter how confident I am of a postive outcome. I'd go all-in again upon a successful oil find (with commercial flow rates), even though it would mean paying a higher price, as the risk would have been substantially lowered. Seen just too many crazy drops on dusters on AIM to even contemplate staying all-in for drill results. eismic campaigns and the build up to drillnig is a different story but once the drill bit starts turning you want to have banked some profit, IMO.