Then again - perhaps not. Your assumption seems to attribute all of that downward move to their losing the battle in court. I think you will find it’s more likely attributed to the down draft of the overall market for energy names. But with that said, even though I might not agree with you on the thesis that it’s 350mm more, the original number Kosmos assigned to the value - and stated in court documents - would still seem to have merit. With the way I have seen these things play out in the court system in other matters it is obviously in their best interests to exercise the due diligence necessary to substantiate their claim before they offer the data before the courts. To me this signals that their geo-tech professionals had reviewed available information and made some sort of credible technical assessment before assigning that valuation to it.
In short, I would be more comfortable accepting that 500mm estimate on its face than the 850mm notional value you are hinting at.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
