conclusion:

we estimate that this deal has limited implications for valuation metrics. the new partners have committed a larger total spend {185m$ against 150m$ by its former partner hess] so the valuation, measured by expenditure commitment, per acre has increased: 43$ acre versus 57$ acre. But the relinquishment of one licence and somewhat lower final equity position {30% compared to in the net acreage outcome of 37.5% in the former hess deal} results in a largely unchanged group valuation per share of 17p albeit underpinned by a recent australian farm out.

have problem with laptop so could not for some reason paste report, sorry.