Ann: AGM Presentation Slides, page-10

I was taking a longer term view - a non-operating explorer in a success case will lead to being a non-operating producer. Conversely an operator in the exploration space generally becomes a production operator in a success case. The company does not have the size or resources to do that.

Being an operator generally implies taking a majority stake in a project. Generally speaking that would not be in MEL's interest, as it ties up a significant portion of their capital. Being an operator also generally sees up front costs being born by the operator and then reimbursed pro-rata by farminees. MEL is not of a size where this is a repeatable strategy. Perhaps for the Cooper blocks it will be ok to stump up for seismic and the like; but why enter new ventures at an early stage on top of this? Risk/reward. Let others take the risks until there is cashflow.

I am referring to 'operators' in the production sense. Junior companies with majority equity stakes in rubbish exploration projects are dime a dozen. As are junior companies with lean exploration and admin costs. It doesn't take a multi million dollar team to sit on a few assets. However, if you're drilling in the GoM or the like with the clear end goal of production, you want to have years of experience and a strong and competent team behind you. That results in significant overheads. MEL's expertise clearly lies in the Finance side of things and with the Cooper. As such, I'd expect them to focus on financial transactions and the Cooper. That indicates deals with developed parties, such as Beach, Santos, Cooper etc....and why would you want to be the operator when dealing with companies with those resources behind them? The expense premium for the sake of control is disproportionate. Hardly rocket science.

You clearly don't like the direction that the company is heading. What would you prefer? I don't mind the idea of a big deal to gain production; but I see no point in being an operator for the sake of it. Any deals should be all in or cautious. Being a 'non-operator of choice' is clearly the cautious path; as it allows for a spread of projects....'no wildcatting'.