Hi ITS,Just thought I'd put my understanding of the situation -...

Hi ITS,

Just thought I'd put my understanding of the situation - which does not entirely agree with your post but we agree on the primary target still looking good - here goes:

The secondary target was a low chance of success target which is a completely different reservoir/source system.

It was a failure, containing no recoverable hydrocarbons (but did have minor gas readings).

The term water wet to a geologist means that the sand grains are in contact with water, with oil or gas not beign in direct contact with the grains (hence the reservoir is water wet not oil wet). IN THIS CASE the reference to water wet is a simpler definition - no mobile/recoverable hydrocarbons.

As the reservoir/source system is different the two targets are independent of each other (success or failure in one does not mean anything for the other).

The Nido limestone is very "oily" in the palawan and is the reservoir for Malampaya, Nido, Matinloc, Yakal and Tindalo.

Nido claim that the quality of their 3D seismic allows them to differentiate different reservoir quality in the Gindara structure and thus to target good quality reservoir.

It is a little unfortunate that Nido's announcement has not been recieved in the context of the previous guidance on the chance of success of the secondary target - at the end of the day the chances in the Nido Limestone are as good or bad as they ever were.

I'm not trying to pick on you - please run my comments above past your friend and see what he has to say.

Cheers,
p1000