Funny... I remember "a couple" of years back when just having access to any 3-D seemed it was like having a new magic wand that you could wave around a bit and have it tell you where the oil was... certainly relative to having only the rough 2-D that used to be the only exploration guide available in a lot of low budget wildcats.
Now we talk about what used to be considered a virtual picture map of the oil trapped down there... as if trying to read what you see in a hi res photo is actually "reading tea leaves".
"They know"...
Of course, the market adjusts to having the new tools, with new expectations on finding and success rates, etc... and you can't afford misses like they used to... but back then, the idea of using expensive 3-D for exploration... NEVER... was only used to refine the planning for specific reservoir targets after finding the fields. Now, before drilling hole one, we got hi res 3-D coverage over every target... just to allow us to pick out a couple of our favorites for sequencing them.
Leaves me feeling like the "exploration risk differential" vs infield development risk here is about like that you get in the difference between shooting long range at jack rabbits with a bow and arrow... or using a ten guage from close up on a cotton tail... when all you have is the ten gauge and the bunny.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
