Tension mounting in news vacuum, page-63

On reflection, it is all now crystal clear to me as regards any ambiguity relating to "possible upgrades", "contingent
resources being released for each discovery" etc etc.

My main beef previously related to the statement {released FAR Q 30/1/15} that a contingent resource would be released
for each discovery after completing well analysis and further evaluation of the geology. Well analysis per se was not released
in the first quarter as per guidance--it was finally revealed in Cairn's CMD on 15/5/15. Thus the evaluation work program
and plans for future exploration {which as per guidance were not expected to be finalised until late April} were revealed
together with the well "data" on 15/5/15.

Now, in context, the contingent resource for each discovery was more of a "hoped " for outcome I believe rather than
anything set in stone or promised. It should have been emphasised as such, rather than be stated "matter of fact" like.
That statement was made on 30/1/15 {covering the reporting period Oct-Dec 2014}. FAN/BEER discovery at this stage
was only 3 and a bit months old {FAN discovery announced 11/10/14}. They mucked around further for another 3 weeks
or so {obviously at the deeper BEER 29m net pay} before the rig was released to SNE. Samples from the well{s} were held up
for 4-6 weeks in Germany also we were told {not being released until early February 2015 if memory serves}. So, I believe
that the statement relating to a contingent resource being released for each discovery {being made on 30/1/15} was
premature in light of the well analysis not being very well advanced by this stage, particularly for BEER. The reply to
Juju's query {sometime later on 31/3/15} in relation to referring to the last quarterly was either flippant {in light
of perhaps more well analysis having come to hand which would have ruled out a contingent resource for BEER}, or
the situation remained as it had on 30/1/15 and they were still "hopeful" of a 2C resource for BEER. We now know that
a 2C resource for BEER will not be forthcoming after well data etc was released on CMD 15/5/15. Prior to that, in FAR's
March Q {released 30/4/15}, there was no more mention of a contingent resource for each discovery.

So, well data and analysis released 15/5/15--check, forward evaluation work program released 15/5/15 check, plans for
future exploration released 15/5/15 check, contingent resource NOT released for BEER, nor will it be until after appraisal.
Neither in the Jan Q or March Q can I see any guidance as to a possible upgrade of SNE in relation to the 2C of 330mmboo
already stated. OOO however did state from the AGM that ;

Here is a direct quote from the AGM: Cath: "There are a number of thinner sands we believe can contribute significantly to the net pay (and hence the 2C). The work is complex and ongoing. By the time we start drilling we expect to be looking at a much bigger field than the 330 million barrels booked to date, so watch this space."

"To be honest, I recall Cath saying the 2C was expected to be released pre-spud, and I recall July/August being mentioned. However, I just checked my notes and I did not record that, so I wouldn't swear to it in court. It really doesn't matter anyway since Cath has since told Mandurah she doesn't want to release results."

"Watch this space" seems to indicate that a release pertaining to that work on the thin sands {estimated to add 30% to the
SNE volumetrics of current 330mmboo} would be made known prior to appraisal. That time-line of July/August for completion
of the work on the thin sands is correct--that is what I heard as well--with the disclaimer that...."well, you know, we would only
still be guessing.....appraisal must prove up those numbers on paper...don't want to rescind numbers post appraisal etc etc...
"I don't WANT to release them". So, the ONLY thing that can add to an upgrade PRE-Appraisal is the results on those thin sands
and that is NOT going to eventuate, from my understanding. The first 2 appraisal wells will test the P90 150mmboo and the
P50 of 330mmboo--it will take either the 3rd exploration well {wherever that may be drilled} or another 3rd appraisal well
on the edge of the "green boundary/ring} to test for that 670mmboo and hence upgrade the current 2C for SNE of 330mmboo.
OR, it may be that the 1st or 2nd appraisal drills will confirm the "volumetric upgrade" of that thin sands work on paper by
being flow tested and we get an upgrade on that 330mmboo, PRIOR to even testing on the outer edges of SNE for the P10 of
670mmboo.

So, really, the only thing they have NOT delivered on, from previous guidance, is a 2C for BEER and I have explained the
reasons for that above. All the rest has basically been delivered on CMD on 15/5/15. I have seen no guidance to the effect
that an upgrade on SNE's current 2C of 330mmboo would be forthcoming, apart from a statement to the effect of "watch
this space" being uttered at the AGM. I believe we will have to "watch that space" until after appraisal.

Now, look how the information flow has been handled post discoveries and post end of the "tight hole policy". I have already
discussed immaterial v material information--material information of course MUST be released to the market. That seems to
have been satisfied--notification of discoveries, a 2C resource for SNE, forward work program etc. Immaterial would relate to
permeability/porosity figures, pressure regimes, thickness of intervals, age and extent of source rocks etc. This information
is a very well known imo,although I would like to see it out of curiosity, reasons have been detailed as to why it hasn't been
released {not least current negotiations over more acreage}. Fair enough, my curiosity will have to wait. Porosity and saturation
figures for SNE were some of the "immaterial" crumbs that they deemed fit to feed the chooks.

There are certainly games at work regarding this "immaterial" information ;

1. An official 2C release was issued by CNE for their share of SNE before CMD {tucked away in their resource table} whilst
FAR maintained their estimated 2C figure.

2. Permeability was described as very good,even in the thin sands for BEER. No mention of any figures by FAR or JV for
BEER or SNE for that matter.

3. I remember when the debate was raging over whether the Northern Canyon Fans or in fact BEER contained the 29m
net pay and CNE in one of their slides earmarked the 29m net pay as being contained wholly within the BEER structure,
whilst FAR maintained their previous slide of the discovery and their "silence" as to where this 29m pay was actually
located.

4. Thickness of intervals ; It took the RBC broker report, released mid March 2015 to identify a 10-15m section/interval
as the thickest part of that 29m pay within BEER. NO mention of intervals by the JV PRIOR or AFTER this report--in
fact I was met with a blank stare as regards awareness of this information.

It's obvious that a bit of ducks & drakes are being played as regards to information that is "known". However, as it is
"immaterial" and could benefit us in terms of negotiations pertaining to extra acreage, fair enough. I have no doubt that
the 10-15m thick interval contained in that 29m of pay at BEER is highly permeable & porous, probably with the high end
of that 29-41 API contained within it. The remainder of that 29m net pay {14-19m}, we don't know how many intervals
that contains - 3 more @5-7m or 20 of them @ 75cm?? They know. And of course, we don't have an OWC yet for BEER
so we can't put a 2C on that 29m yet. Likewise, for those other "thin sands" in SNE--the ones that we will have to rely on
more as we step out further east in that reservoir. We don't know their thickness {they do}, we are hoping they will add
30% to the current 330mmboo but we have to wait to see how they "work". CN's comment in relation to COP being
able to extract oil from some sands that are only 10cm thick, imo, augers well for all those thinner sands at BEER and
SNE , especially considering what we know as regards to the released por/sf figures for SNE and "talk" of good
permeability even in the thinner sands of BEER at this stage.Watch this Space" indeed---POST APPRAISAL.

As a matter of interest, what do others feel will be in the pipe-line as regards the CR? Will it be an SPP or a Rights Issue?

GLTAH.