memo and independent valuation, page-5

Ronstieb, $2.50/bbl undrilled target seems to be the common industry metric. Were Braveheart to prove oil at a p50 or p10 level then I imagine it could be valued on a number more like $10/bbl, perhaps higher. If we are lucky to enough to have success we can debate it then!

As my personal view of MOG shows, I'm more focused on Artemis. The RPS report mentions that MEOs significantly higher 2P and 3P number is a function of its having a higher GIIP (from p49):

"the Meo resource estimates and risking for the Artemis prospect are generally more optimistic than those presented by RPS. The main difference in GIIP is caused by the Gross Rock Volume (GRV) estimates. Also for Prospective Resources Meo used a more optimistic Condensate to Gas Ratio (CGR) (bbls/mmscf) of twelve. RPS used a mid-point CGR ratio of seven that was based on the neighbouring Wheatstone Gas field."

They also state that the GCoS differences (32% - up to 40% according to some people who went to MEOs AGM - versus 13%) are to do with the DHI risk reducer but also "a more optimistic view by Meo of both
reservoir presence/quality and seal competence".

On the face of it, comparing Artemis using local Wheatstone as an analogue seems fairly reasonable. I would be very open to the counter argument why MEO could reasonably use a more bullish valuation. I would really love to have some expert analysis by any HC petroleum engineers/geologists regarding this! Shout out to ya?