Well meaning but meaningless, page-36

What can management do to get the SP to 15-20c prior to a CR or Appraisal? Not much I would have thought unless the
POO gets to 90-$100 before that event{s}. If appraisal were to firm up the 330mmboo and give FAR about 45mmboo net
at say 3P, even then we would be looking at 20cps maximum @$70 Brent. The exploration drill and the hoped for success
on that drill imo will really put a kick in the SP and drive what we all want to see as Holders --irrational exuberance--that
may see us on the other side of the ledger for a change--FAR being over-valued. Unfortunately, we are probably now
undervalued {although I would argue probably fairly priced--you CANT eat potential}. If you take out cash, other assets in
the portfolio etc, our 2C currently is valued at under $5 pboo. Did you imagine that $10NPVpboo would be assigned to us
NOW? You would have to be dreaming if you thought that--maybe a few years ago when the POO was over $100pboo, not
now, in this environment. IF Beer had of been more defined at this stage and a 2C resource was able to be assigned to it
in the order of 300mmboo then we would probably be sitting around the 16-18c mark even @$65 Brent. IF, IF, IF.

Post discovery I was sitting on about about a 300% gain {admittedly my portfolio was much lighter in FAR--smaller
purchases @3-5c years prior}. I bought aggressively in the 10-13c range when POO I think was still in the high 80's.
Although still in the green, it does not approach anywhere near a 3 figure % gain. I don't trade FAR, for those that do/did
around these price differentials {2c-15c}, bloody good on you. Having added substantially post discovery at much higher
prices {and I'm sure that a lot of newcomers to FAR did exactly that} it is disappointing to see the SP languish below those
entry levels--such is life--who is to blame for POO going from +$80 to as low as $45 at one stage?

CN constantly referred to the lamentable SP as has everyone here--ok already--it is what it is, get over it. There is no magic
wand to remedy the cycle we find ourselves in. Therefore, what can realistically happen to get the SP up a bit before the CR?
Forget about an update on well analysis/SNE update imo--that's what I was hoping for and many posters thought it was a lay
down misere. The so called "body language" that accompanied the answer {that I interpreted & for what it's worth} was
negative--no big revelation there--the answer of "highly unlikely" removed any debate of what that body language may have
"meant". So, that leaves 3 events in my mind that could still give a bit of a kick to the SP{not 15-20c} prior to appraisal and
the CR ;

1. Rig rates signed off @$900k pday v $1.3m pday previously.
2. More acreage acquired by FAR alone on very good terms with a substantial % holding {possibly as operator}.
3. Take Over Offer {highly unlikely pre-appraisal}.

This is my opinion only ; We will be raising prior to appraisal. I think the Chairman at the AGM and certainly CN at the
Perth presentation made that pretty clear. We trust that existing retail holders will be included {some attaching options
would be very welcome--at the same strike price as management would be a nice alignment}. Retail holders being "good
for $15-30m" was mentioned and I hope that is followed through on--I would imagine that those holders with a longer
term outlook would indeed be good for at least that amount.

Yes, everything was in black & white prior to the roadshows but I for one came away with a deeper understanding of the
"forest for the trees" mentality. You should try attending one- so called body language and off the cuff comments can be
very enlightening, not delusory or wishful thinking if you take what was said & expressed in context to the bigger picture.
I'm sorry but I am not a holder who stamps their feet on the ground constantly because the SP is not where I think it
should be. I have however done a bit of jumping up and down as regards the "tight hole policy". That too was put to
bed for me after listening to CN privately--if only for that I was pleased to have made the effort and attended.

Prior to attending, this was my take on a CR prior to appraisal--a somewhat blinkered and "out of the loop" view as it
turned out.
IF those rig rates do get signed of @$900k per day then the cost of SNE2/3 at least should come in around the $36m mark
per well @40 days per drill {from memory I think they expect 35 days for drill completion}. So about $5.4m per drill or $11m
for FAR's share of the 2 appraisals. Let's say the exploratory drill costs $50m or $7.5m to FAR. Total cost to FAR for three
wells = $18.5m. Throw in some cost over-runs, testing etc and call it $22m. Mid year we expect to have $33m cash on hand
{all previous discovery wells now paid for}. 9 months remaining until March 2016 {when the A&E results should well &
truly be known}. 9 months of admin, seismic for Rufisque/Sangamore Deep and GB etc may see another $8m expended
{although CN said that seismic now is about 2/3 the cost of what Kenya cost some time back}. That would still leave $33m
-22m-8m = $3m cash on hand come March 2016. My reasoning was that after the 1st 2 appraisals that we would still have
approximately +10m cash on hand. Now there was a lot of talk of "sitting at the table" with the JV after the 1st 3 wells and
being in a position of strength cash wise. This did not equate well with my line of thinking. Why would you need 40-$50m
after A&E and BEFORE the next 3 wells were even agreed upon? Particularly if the 3 said wells fell over and SNE/Shelf
proved a flop? Surely if that was the outcome ,we would I have thought, moved on and rolled the dice at Beer/Fan1. Two
appraisals there would maybe cost $200m in the deeper water or $30m our share. Nit picking a bit but why over-insure
for failure to the tune of $50m when $30m would probably suffice at the lower SP when raising. And of course, IF
the first 2 appraisals at SNE proved a great success, surely we would be able to raise additional funds and more at a
much higher SP...and in a heart beat.
1 thing in particular changed my line of thinking and it was tied into the "tight hole policy" or since that has now elapsed,
not releasing information that may be deemed "immaterial" yet of of interest to me anyway. I did not even consider the
possibility that FAR would be "going it alone" to increase their acreage in line with possible SNE lookalikes--ambitious
I would have thought. But, as I alluded to before, this may be the right to time to strike---before possible great success with
A&E on SNE/Shelf when other competitors may be more willing to stump up the cash and save distressed companies with
similar acreage and get a good piece of the pie for the cost of Seismic. It says 2 things basically.
1. It will not be "cheap". We will in all likelihood be committing to 100% cost of seismic, rather than 15% in the case of Rufisque,
GB etc.
2. Shows the "manpower" on board at FAR currently--the ability to interpret that seismic and map out genuine prospects
{as has been shown already with SNE} and the value of that undisclosed data that we already hold in relation to SNE
and possible look a likes. " I do not WANT to disclose it"...CN. We already know the capability of FAR management to
farm out good prospects to the majors!

I have surmised already that we are probably in discussions with "distressed" companies as we speak. IF we do farm-in we
could be looking at a commitment in the range of $10-20m for a decent stake. So, talk of $50m capital raise at this
stage would make sense in the light of this scenario coming to fruition. $50m -$22m{first 3 wells}-$8m {admin, seismic
GB,Rufisque etc- $15m new acreage, leaves $5m cash on hand. Of course, I would think that the bulk of that $15m for
new acreage{seismic} would not be expended until way after March 2016, which would leave us with a possible $15m
cash on hand come March 2016. Enough of a comfort zone I would have thought to ponder our next move--certainly no
problem if A&E SNE/Shelf is a success, a bit trickier of course if the outcome is a failure or problematic.

In conclusion, if anything, the roadshow and contact with the people that aspire to make us all money WAS worthwhile, if
only for seeing the forest for the trees a bit more clearly. These "people" have some runs on the board already-- a farm down
to 2 great companies in the O&G space {1 being a $100b major} whilst still retaining a decent 15% stake, a CEO who is a
petroleum geoligist rather than a paper shuffler, the team that originally mapped out the prospects for which may very well
become a new basin off-shore Senegal, pro-active {alone} in seeking more of the same acreage at an opportune time etc etc.
No need really for me to blow their trumpet, the results are there as facts.

These people who aspire to make us money came across as approachable and down to Earth. We either sink or swim together.
This is a long term "trees for the forest" play {excluding a T/O going forward should A&E in particular come up trumps}. The
SP is what it is currently, we will in all likelihood be raising pre-appraisal, whether that be lower or higher than 10cps. I am
a cynic by nature but sometimes you have to have a little trust and just let people get on with their job. There is no evidence
to the contrary that this is not the case.

We are on a winner here, albeit at a longer time frame than many may have envisaged. I believe and hope and wish that we are
onto a massive new oil province in the Gulf of Mexico, sorry Senegal. This however is only my opinion based on the evidence
thus far. That is why the SP sits at 10c--its called risk v potential.

GLTAH