Trinidad is far more important to RRS and has the potential to...

Trinidad is far more important to RRS and has the potential to deliver far better shareholder returns than Puntland. 100% ownership vs 20% ownership and the oil worth a lot more as it's in a politically safe area and can be brought to production faster.

It's possible Puntland will one day contribute significantly, but it probably won't be as quick as many here think. Of course, if 10 billion OIP (3 billion recoverable) is proved up, the 600mmbls recoverable net to Range will cause a big increase in the share price.

But that won't be happening anytime soon. Think of the Texas asset. After the first well was drilled, most of the resources were in P3, and thus not much value was attributed to them. The second well moved a bit more into P1, but the big jump came with the 4th well which proved up 80% of the area.

With regard to the first well, it's hard to make an argument as to why success isn't already priced in with RMP when looking at other companies and the valuations placed by the market on their oil. It's a bit more difficult to say that with RRS as RRS has other assets and is undervalued quite a bit based on P1 reserves, so you can't really say what 'value' the market is placing on each of the assets.

RMP is now valued at $2 per barrel for the first well. On success, you might get $3 per barrel, which is a pretty nice 50% increase from here, but surely not worth the risk of the 75% drop that will happen on failure. At $3 a barrel for RRS that would equate to a rise of about 6p- so about 19p a share, which is about where I'd expect RRS to be on a strike. The market hasn't priced in much of Puntland in RRS's share price, whereas it's priced in success hugely in RMP. What else do you call a rise from 11p to 36p based on no actual oil discovery? It's just like RRS's rise from 9p to 24p last year- success was priced in with Georgia.

And look at how that one turned out when Georgia didn't deliver. RMP shareholders should keep that in mind.