Ok, i'll try and explain it for you. OBL provide two different...

Ok, i'll try and explain it for you. OBL provide two different figures and two different ways of ascribing the resource to the respective companies. One figure is down to 4000m like Buru measures and the other is down to 5000m like OBL provides measurements for. Both of these measurements are entirely valid. Obviously the deeper you go the more resource you're counting there. If Buru went deeper on some parts of their permits no doubt they could pull a higher figure too so you can't compare a 4000m figure with a 5000m figure. Additionally there is a big economic difference between those figures. It costs more than 25% more to drill an extra kilometer down to 5000m so a resource that is already a bit shaky economically is even harder to make work when it costs 25% more to drill the verticals. So it's even harder again to compare the 5000m figure with the 4000m figure as the 4000m figure is a "better" resource.
Now the second problem is taking the 4000m figure for Buru and then giving them their net prospective figure after the Mitsubishi farm in. OBL haven't even had their drilling farm in yet so you can't compare Buru's post farm out 50% with OBL's hypothetical 75%. After a farm out like Mitsubishi's one which provides for exploration etc OBL will be down to 25% so it's a specious comparison. You might as well pretend Buru still own 100% of all their permits. The fabrication isn't that OBL made anything up, it's posters here ascribing the 5000m resource to a pre farm out equity and comparing that with the 4000m resource ascribed to a post farm out equity.
As I said earlier, you don't need to use this slight of hand. OBL's microcap means even a fair comparison gives OBL more leverage.