Woodside Energy Group Ltd (WDS) 2011 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Well, good morning all and welcome to our 2011 Half Year Results Briefing, of course the first for me as the new CEO of Woodside. Of course, once again we appreciate everybody calling in today and we very much appreciate your continued interest in Woodside, our Company. It really is a great company. Sharing the conference call today with me is Lawrie Tremaine, our CFO, and I know you all know Lawrie.

If I can move to slide 2, I'd just firstly like to draw your attention to our normal disclaimer and also remind you that the dollars that you will see in this presentation are now US dollars as we've moved to the US dollar as the functional currency. We can move to slide 3 - before we get to the financial details, I really want to remind you of Woodside's strategy. I know that's important to many of you and of course is pivotal to the performance of our Company as we move forward. The strategy itself will be familiar to most you.

It's really important we keep this in mind as we talk about our base business activities and I'll continue to come back to that as we go through the presentation today. The message of course is we will continue to focus on long term shareholder value as we deliver outstanding results from our Foundation business, of course pursuing our growth opportunities and of course we have a number of other select opportunities that we're currently evaluating. I do say select and of course we'll be examining each opportunity in a very robust and disciplined manner.

First, a brief comment on the global market environment. I think it's important as we've seen many changes happening around us, particularly over the last couple of weeks. I'll offer comment as to how we see that affects Woodside and Woodside's business. Really, the message from us is we do have a very strong business with very real cash flows and we believe the outlook for commodities over the long term is very robust.

Of course, as we all know, new supply is required to meet the mid and long term energy demands and despite the recent fluctuations in global markets, those demands stay very real. It's very clear to us that there is a long term demand for the products that Woodside supplies. But the real message for us here is that Woodside is very well placed geographically. We have a very deep knowledge and competence in our business and we have very strong long term relationships with our customers and our partners.

As we move on and look at executing on the deliverables that we have in the Company and of course Woodside continues to advance the development of its assets, let me make it quite clear that we need to focus on execution if we realise the full potential value of the three horizons that I've got marked out on this page. Our ability to execute well is evident in the North West Shelf - we'll talk some more about that later - where of course five LNG trains have been installed and are operating with very high reliability and I would say world class reliability.

This strong performance has delivered a record first half revenue for the North West Shelf. But it's not all about operations and operational execution. We run a very strong balance sheet and of course you know earlier this year Woodside issued a $700 million bond which was very well supported in the marketplace and remains very competitive even on today's values. Lawrie will talk more about our capital management plans later on.

These activities underpin and provide momentum for Woodside to pursue our LNG growth options as shown in the slide that we're more than just LNG and we'll talk some more about that later on. Moving to the financial results at operating performance, the headlines here are I believe compelling as we look at the results. It really does show the ongoing strength of the Company's base business and the value that that continues to contribute.

The results speak for themselves. The first half revenues rose 7.2% compared to the previous period or corresponding period, I should say. Of course, the underlying profit increased 3.6% and is very much underpinned by the excellent performance of the North West Shelf and its higher revenues. With the cash flow that we're generating out of these assets and of course the majority of our investments spent, a couple with around $2.9 billion of cash and undrawn facilities, we are very well positioned for growth and executing our growth plans here in the short and medium term.

As I look at operational performance, as I mentioned previously, our Foundation business operation performance really does provide our engine room for growth. Our focus on operational excellence in all aspects of our business continues to deliver outstanding results. While you can see our safety numbers improved in the first half, we really do need to strive for further improvement and we're particularly pleased with the reduction in the high potential incident frequency that we've got here on the chart.

Of course, we talked about reliability of the North West Shelf project. It does continue to reap benefits which is translating to the bottom line for us in a very material way. Our solid first half production keeps us on track to achieve the full year guidance of 62 to 64 MMboe. Of course, with that as background, I'll hand over to Lawrie now to talk through the financial results before I come back and talk in some more detail about the other aspects of our business.

Thanks, Peter. Good morning to everyone. I'm going to review our 2011 half year financial results beginning with production on slide 9. Production for the first half of 2011 was 31.9 million barrels of oil equivalent, down 13%. After adjusting for the one off of the sale of Otway and the unusually high level of cyclone and other weather interruptions, production was 6% lower year on year.

Increased North West Shelf LNG production, which was 7% higher than the first half of 2010, has partially offset the impact of field decline and planned maintenance and project outages. Our full year production outlook remains within the 62 to 64 million barrel of oil equivalent range disclosed previously.

Now to the sales revenue on slide 10 -- sales revenue for the first half was $2.3 billion. This represents a 7% increase over the first half of 2010. Our revenues have grown at a very credible compound annual growth rate of 14% over the period shown in the left hand chart. Not surprisingly, stronger oil prices were the primary reason to this very positive result, more than offsetting the impact of lower volume. Average daily Brent prices were $111.30 per barrel, 42% higher than the first half 2010.

Woodside's oil is typically sold off dated Brent. In 2010 we've benefited from the regional supply and demand forces which have resulted in stronger Brent prices relative to WTI. In addition, we've also achieved significant premiums over dated Brent for our heavy Greater Enfield Area crudes. These premiums are as a consequence of strong Asia-Pacific demand for gas oil.

In the first half, we have achieved average premiums from the Enfield and Stybarrow fields at $6 per barrel over dated Brent. The chart on the right shows the relationship between WTI, Brent and Japan custom cleared prices. Also shown is the three month lagged Japan custom cleared price, which is typically referenced in long term LNG contract pricing.

There are a couple of points to note from this chart. Firstly, the JCC price closely correlates to Brent pricing with a one month lag. How LNG prices will benefit from the stronger Brent price is relative to WTI. Secondly, due to LNG contracts referencing the three month lagged JCC, the strong oil prices experienced in the first half will be reflected in our realised LNG prices well into the second half of this year.

Next, the lifting costs on slide 11 -- in the table at the top of the slide you can see that our total lifting costs in Australian dollars have remained flat when compared to the same period last year. Oil lifting costs increased by AUD6 million to AUD115 million. This increase, along with lower production, mainly due to planned maintenance, cyclone activity and field decline, has resulted in an increase in oil lifting costs to AUD15.86 per barrel.

Gas lifting costs reduced AUD6 million to AUD78 million in the first half. This was a good result and together with incremental production growth has enabled us to sustain and further improve the flat gas lifting cost trend of the past few years. With major shut downs at North West Shelf Train 5 and North Rankin A, we expect higher unit gas lifting costs in the second half.

Moving onto unit margins on slide 12, the height of the columns in this chart represents our average realised price per barrel across all products. The bottom grey section of the columns represents gross margin per barrel. The chart highlights that our unit margins have been increasing largely in line with oil prices. Our unit gross margin for the first half of 2011 was $46 per barrel, compared to $36 per barrel in the first half 2010.

Slide 13. Our first half 2011 underlying profit was a very pleasing result, reflecting good operational performance, which Peter will discuss in more detail and strong oil prices which I've discussed at length already. The underlying profit was $842 million, a 3.6% increase on the $813 million recorded in the first half of 2010. In first half 2010, we had net significant items of $88 million after tax.

These were reported last year, but to recap, they included the gain on sale of Otway and a positive once-off adjustment deferred tax liabilities on adoption of the US dollar functional currency, offset by an impairment of the Neptune asset and the write back of US tax losses. The only significant item in the first half of 2011 is the $14 million impairment of the Coniston asset.

Turning to reported profit on slide 14, you can see from the waterfall, higher selling prices partially offset by lower volumes are the major drivers of the result between the two periods. The variance in other income and expense is predominantly the gain on sale of Otway in 2010. Once again, the adoption of US dollar functional currency in 2010 resulted in once off adjustments to deferred tax liabilities positively impacting income tax and negatively impacting petroleum resource rent tax.

Dividends on slide 15 -- the Directors have declared a fully franked interim dividend of $0.55 per share. This compared to the 2010 interim dividend of $0.50 per share. The dividend reinvestment plan will again be offered and will be fully underwritten for this interim dividend.

The chart on slide 16 shows our current estimate of 2011 capital and exploration expenditure. The Pluto Foundation Project continues to dominate our expenditures, representing over 50% of forecasted 2011 spending. The increase in Other category represents higher spending in 2011 on the Browse Project, particularly front-end engineering and design, and expenditure on the other growth projects across our business. As reported in the second quarter report, our year to date investment expenditure was $1.8 billion.

Now to operating cash flow on slide 17. The operating cash flow result further reinforces just how good our first half result was. $1.4 billion represents a record first half result and a 38% increase on first half 2010. This result is largely due to high revenues and lower income tax and petroleum resource rent tax payments.

Finally, to capital management on slide 18. Net debt has increased by $402 million in the first half of 2011 to almost $4.4 billion. Gearing is at 27% and funds from operations over debt is 50%. The latter is a key metric the credit rating agencies use to measure our leverage. Through the balance of the Pluto development phase, we're targeting a funds from operation to debt of above 35% - sorry, that was 35%.

During the first half, we successfully raised $700 million in the corporate bond market. This transaction is satisfying insofar as the credit spread we paid over US Treasury yields better reflected the inherent quality of our existing cash flows and the imminent growth in cash flows from Pluto. We also accessed a broader debt investor base than in earlier transactions. We finished the first half with cash in undrawn debt facilities of $2.9 billion. This is adequate funding to meet existing commitments well into 2012, given the current oil price and exchange rates. Our balance sheet remains well positioned to fund our continuing growth.

Thanks for listening. I'll now pass you back to Peter to discuss our projects and operational performance.

Okay, thanks, Lawrie. Look, I'm on slide 20. We'll just slow down the pace here a little bit now as we've kind of walked through the results for you, and of course we'll now talk about some of the operational aspects and where we're heading to. I will remind those who were furiously writing notes here of course we will post both this presentation pack and the speaker notes on the ASX platform. So if you miss something, you should be able to catch it there.

I'm on slide 20. I really want to start with this because we often don't spend enough time talking about the strength of Woodside's base business. You've heard me talk about it in the presentation already, but I really want to talk in terms of priority. I really can assure you that the team here is very focused on maximising value from these really world class assets, and they truly are world class assets. As you can see, the performance of Woodside in the first half, along with our Australian oil assets, shows that.

Our base business grows next year. We've de-risked of course now a lot of the Pluto Foundation Project with respect to the execution component of that. Pluto will begin adding production, as we've said, from late first quarter next year and it will add production and cash flow to those assets - those cash flows are regenerated by the North West Shelf in the Australian oil business unit. So we're poised here for a stepped change in our revenue stream and a very positive one here for Woodside.

Of course our [tier 1] LNG growth options include expansion at Pluto, Browse Project and also Sunrise. We do have large equity stakes in these projects. We're pleased to be in that position; it's a good place for us to be at this point in their development. That of course opens up additional options to us as we move forward in through that development phase. Through a very disciplined approach, and of course very robust processes within Woodside, we will deliver value from the growth options over both the medium to long term.

Of course, the quality of our LNG growth options won't have us ignore other opportunities outside of LNG which can provide further value and enhance our portfolio. Of course Woodside is very deep in a number of core competencies, and the opportunities that we're pursuing include Laverda, Cimatti and of course our goal for Mexico deepwater exploration and development program. Of course, we're also planning to drill an exploration well offshore South Korea this year. There's plenty going on at Woodside and I can tell you it's a really exciting time in the Company's history.

As we look at slide 21, I've talked a lot about the North West Shelf. I think this chart speaks for itself. The performance there and the reliability really is world class by any measure, and you can see how the Woodside team have been able to improve the performance of this asset over a number of years to get to that world class performance. It doesn't just happen; it's hard work and the team's worked very hard and very diligently to get here over a period of time, and our commitment is to maintain these levels.

Of course our priority is to sustain safe and reliable productions and of course, consequent with that, we need to maintain these facilities and keep them in good order to ensure that this reliability stays with us over the long term. In the second half of this year we've had large maintenance programs planned for the North West Shelf, and of course we'll have concurrent shutdowns scheduled for Train 5 and of course the North Rankin A offshore platform.

We move to page slide 22 and maximising the value of the North West Shelf by not only continuing to deliver on performance today but also extend production into the future. We outline here three projects that are really designed to extend that production and maximise the value of the existing infrastructure hub. As we all know, step outs from existing infrastructure is the most capital efficient way that we can develop these resources.

I'll just run quickly through the projects we have on the list. Of course the North West Shelf Oil Redevelopment, you're familiar with that. That will extend production well into the next decade. The critical part on this is the subsea work is now complete. In fact, we hooked the vessel up this week; it's now out on station and we're on track for first oil in early fourth quarter. The North Rankin Redevelopment Project of course will unlock low pressure gas at both the North Rankin and Perseus fields, and of course further down the track we have development of the Greater Western Flank which will also provide additional gas supply. So we have a wonderful suite of opportunities that will continue to deliver a lot of value for the joint venture in the North West Shelf Project.

If I can move to slide 23 though, we are more than the North West Shelf, and of course our Australian oil assets continue to perform exceptionally well. Lawrie mentioned some of this as we went through the oil pricing discussion. We're often seen only as an LNG company, but take a look at the revenue chart and it just reminds us how important oil is in our business. I should point out that the large green slides on the pie chart represents all of our oil assets including North West Shelf oil and our share of Neptune in the USA.

As Lawrie mentioned, we continue to sell cargos at very attractive pricing, benchmarked off Brent with the Greater Enfield area a real standout performer for us. Our strategy here is to maximise value from the existing operations and we're doing that in a very diligent way while we manage the client in these field areas, through the normal activities that you would expect of infield drilling and near field exploration. Of course, that provides the most cost-effective tie-in opportunities for us. I certainly do see a strong continuing role in our business for oil, especially as we have new opportunities like Laverda and Cimatti coming into the portfolio. Of course, beyond this we are continuing to pursue other attractive exploration targets.

I'll talk to slide 24 guys, but we need to talk about Pluto. Of course, let's talk about Pluto because Pluto is very important for us. We did announce a revision of our cost and schedule forecast on 17 June. Of course our first cargo now is estimated for March 2012 and of course commensurate with that, the project costs have risen. While it's important for us to focus on the near term challenges, of course, with LNG projects as we know, it's also very important to take a long term view because there's considerable value generated. Of course, Pluto is and remains an attractive project underpinned by very solid 15 year sale contracts. Of course, we have some uncontracted volumes as well which gives us opportunity to expand.

If I can just reflect on Pluto, I think it's the first time I've had a chance to talk to the Group about this. It really is a world class project. It's adjacent to existing infrastructure, it's in an environment that we understand well and it is poised to provide a step-changed revenue stream for Woodside for many years to come. I must say, I'm very pleased to have it in Woodside's portfolio.

As we move to slide 25, how is the Pluto development going, and I've put some numbers up here to remind us how this journey has gone and what we have remaining in front of us. As you can see from the slide, our 2P reserves have increased over time. This has been positive for us with creating value for Pluto, and of course have increased FID and quite a significant increase.

I've listed the first half milestones on the slide, and of course good progress is being made. Of course, over the ensuing months the focus is really now on commissioning the onshore LNG plan, and first and foremost ensuring that we have a safe and reliable start-up with our first cargos estimated for March, as I said.

If I can move now onto the other growth opportunities we have. Of course, I mentioned Pluto Foundation Project is a world class asset and provides a cost-effective platform for expansion. We're seeing that in the examples I showed on the North West Shelf. So our expectations in similar opportunities will be captured for Pluto, of course.

Of course, we're progressing the business case for those expansion options. We haven't reached a decision point yet on ordering long lead items for expansion trains. Of course, those expansion options we talked about previously include both equity gas and other resource owner gas. On the equity side, we continue to build volumes but we just don't have enough yet. But we do have additional work in our work programs and that's scheduled for us later this year and then into next year. On the other resource owner discussions, they are active. I can say they're maturing and we are pleased with the progress of those particular discussions.

As we move forward and then have a look at the other major growth projects, firstly at Browse. Of course, aside from Pluto, we have Browse, and the FEED studies on Browse commenced at the beginning of this year. As you know, we have a strategy of ensuring we get the lowest possible cost on Browse by having multiple FEED activities occurring. The FEED studies plus environmental and field development approvals are progressing in line with expectations. But I must say, we do recognise the Browse schedule is a challenging one, it always was. We remain very much committed to being ready to take FID in mid 2012.

With regard to Sunrise, we are actively reengaging with government stakeholders on Sunrise. Of course, as we've talked previously, Sunrise is an attractive project. It's a very good project in many, many aspects. All of the joint venture partners are reliant and it provides significant benefits for all of our stakeholders.

On slide 29, as we look at pursuing opportunities in our exploration program, we've talked about our foundation businesses, but of course, we need to open the aperture and of course the most cost-effective way of providing growth or more organic growth in the business is through an ongoing and well balanced exploration program for us.

We continue to be committed to our exploration program and expanding our portfolio to make sure that we bring additional growth opportunities into our growth portfolio. As I mentioned previously, our Leste drilling rigs will be busy again in the second half of the year. Those rig contracts continue through as you can see on the chart into 2012. We'll be continuing to explore for gas in the Carnarvon Basin and also we'll be drilling two exploration wells in the North West Shelf, together with additional wells to support potential development of extensions at Laverda.

Internationally, we've talked about the Gulf of Mexico but we'll also be drilling our first exploration well in South Korea and as I've mentioned the Innsbruck Well in the Gulf of Mexico. The message here for us though, on exploration is, we will only pursue opportunities that make sense. The key here is to look, be selective and value add as we go through these opportunities.

Moving to slide 30, and in summary, it's really all about value. We have a clear strategy and a clear focus on delivering long term shareholder value. As we've seen in the presentation so far, we have a very strong underlying business with real capacity, real cashflows and real capacity for growth.

Despite the recent fluctuation in global markets, we continue to focus on the things we control and execute them as well as we possibly can. We are committed to maintaining a disciplined approach to our investment to maximise, deliver and capture value from our existing business, pursue our LNG growth options and of course select opportunities that we've talked about.

I sincerely thank you for your time today, and then we'll hand it over to you for questions.

The first question comes from the line of Mark Greenwood. Please go ahead with your question.

Good day, first question on Pluto 2 - previous management has spoken very confidently about securing the necessary gas volumes and then reaching FID by the end of 2011. I hear what you're saying, you don't have quite enough yet, but given the materiality of this growth option to Woodside, I was wondering whether you could give us some guidance about exactly how much gas has been discovered, or at the very least, a range.

Mark, thanks for the question. As far as what I can tell you in here is that we're moving through the program of capturing gas resources for an equity train of Pluto. We're close but we're not quite there yet. We want to make sure we really do focus on value when we capture those resources, so we're not simply chasing gas for gas' sake. We want to make sure that each and every decision that we make really truly does add value and is economically justified in its own right.

So that's the focus we have. We are close. We do have a program that we are committed to. As I said, we have the rigs in place and the wells planned. So we'll continue to work through that but we're just not quite there yet.

What does close mean? How much gas do you actually need for Pluto 2?

Well, how much gas is going to depend on the development options that we eventually decide on Pluto 2 because it also depends on where we get that gas from. As you know, some areas are in deeper water and require higher development costs of themselves. So we don't actually have a threshold number that we have in mind. What we're doing is we're working through each of the opportunities and as they get aggregated into that pool, then we're looking for where that trigger may be for us.

Just further on that, with the six remaining exploration wells you talk about in the Carnarvon to be completed by the end of the first quarter 2012, how many of those are exploration wells as opposed to appraisal wells, and also are they all located in the same area, that central hub, or are some of those wells in another hub down the Ragnar or other areas?

No, they're mainly focused on the central hub area themselves. They're exploration wells by definition, of course it's an inner player that we know well and of course there's no new players that we're pursuing; these are players that we know well.

Sorry, just to clarify, are they appraising existing discoveries or are they new targets?

No, they're new targets for us, I'm sorry.

They're all new targets, are they?

Yes, they are.

Okay, thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Sandra McCullagh. Please go ahead with your question.

Good morning, Peter. Two areas I wanted to concentrate on - costs and then on Pluto. What's Woodside's plan for retaining staff post the bonus lock-ins you've got this year and what extra costs do you expect?

That's a good question. Of course, Woodside finds itself in a very competitive position in the marketplace these days, in a number of areas, not just in people but also in other aspects of our business with respect to supplies and so forth. I'll be very frank with you, we really do welcome that competition. I think it makes us sharper as an organisation. It really puts us on edge and really makes us focus on the contributions that people are making to the results of Woodside out there.

You're correct, we do have a retention plan that matures late next year. Of course, as you would expect, we're reviewing our options on that plan as we are our total remuneration package. I can't tell you what cost impact that has at this point in time because we really just haven't got to the point yet where we've made decisions on that. But of course our focus is on continuing to deliver value. So my expectation is that anything that comes out of that sort of a package or program, whatever we replace it with, we'll be really driving productivity and efficiency in the organisation so that we see offsets.

Thanks. On Pluto, your North West Shelf pie graph shows a four year build up to reliability, is this how we should be thinking about Pluto as it comes on stream?

That's another good question. What I would do is I would say, as we look at Pluto and look at the learnings we've got from the other trains - and of course, you may recall Pluto is a look-alike to trains four and five. We took those learnings across to try and minimise the risk that we had in the construction and commissioning activity and then also to ensure that our people had the requisite knowledge and experience in this type of an LNG train. And, you know, LNG trains are not LNG trains; they all have their unique quirks. So we've tried to minimise or reduce that particular risk as we move forward.

What I can tell you that we're doing is we're working very hard to ensure that we have all the precommissioning completed. We're going over and touching every piece of equipment on Pluto to ensure we have a flawless start up. My expectation is we'll get up to reliability numbers like we're seeing on the North West Shelf very quickly and we'll incorporate that in our production guidance that we give later in the year.

How much of the AUD14.9 billion budget now for Pluto is to accommodate customer delays? The second part of that is, in the original AUD12 billion budget, how much contingency was in that budget originally?

If you don't mind, I'll hand that across to Lawrie to answer.

Thanks Lawrie.

Hi Sandra. Obviously, our commercial arrangements with our customers have to be confidential, and for that reason we've chosen to role the number into the AUD14.9 billion so that we can preserve that confidentiality.

And the original AUD12 billion budget? How much contingency is in that budget, Lawrie?

Look, I don't want to talk about a specific contingency amount but what I will say is that through all of our projects we budgeted an appropriate level of contingency for the maturity of the project at that time. So you know, with all of our estimates, the estimates become fine-tuned as the project approaches FID.

So what's your best case scenario of when Pluto could actually come in and start production? March might be the expected case. What's the best case?

I was kind of looking to Lawrie to answer that. That might have been an interesting one for us. As you know, what we're doing is we've got a number of milestones that we need to meet. We've reorganised ourselves on site, both internally and also with our major contractors. I mentioned also, we're touching every piece of equipment to ensure that we do have a flawless start up and we get up to reliable operations quickly.

I would tell you that the schedule is challenging. While we built some contingency into the schedule which I think was appropriate given all the balancing and competing factors that we had, it's still challenging. So you know, where we are today, we're on target to meet the guidance we've provided and I'm really reluctant to provide anything different to that because we've still got some way to go.

Thanks, guys.

Your next question comes from the line of Rebekah Kebede. Please go ahead with your questions. Rebekah, your line is open, please go ahead with your questions.

The next question comes from the line of Gordon Ramsay, please go ahead with your question.

Thank you very much. Just a quick question on [Series 1A]. You've delayed the decision to flow test that well to later this year. Is it still intended to flow test that well?

Yeah, Gordon, [Series] is back onto our well schedule. As you may recall, we moved off the [Series 1] well. During the drilling of that particular well, we had some pretty difficult sea state conditions out there, including eight metre swells. What we found was we were seeing movement at the wellhead that concerned us. We did some technical analysis and determined that we could not get or go into the next phase of the program without understanding the impact that may have on the casing that was supporting the BOPs.

So we chose to move off that well. We actually cut and retrieved that casing. We drilled the 1A. We still saw the movement, though, and determined that we needed to come back after we'd completed our metallurgical studies, and then also calibrated some of our external and internal engineering computations on that.

What I can tell you as we've done that is good news. In fact, we found no fatigue, cracking or concerns with the integrity of the casing. So we took a very conservative approach but we think an appropriate approach, given the fact that we were - the next phase of the program was to enter into an extended well testing phase which would have brought hydrocarbons to the surface.

So I'm pleased with where the organisation got to in the alignment we had here. We will get back onto the well, as I said, later this year. It's in the program for us.

Thank you. Just with respect to Gulf of Mexico's strategy, you sold some shelf assets, mainly gas production and not that material, but is that a signal in terms of further action in the Gulf?

I noticed today you've highlighted a deepwater well that you'll be drilling. So I'm a little bit confused as to the future direction in the Gulf of Mexico.

I would read that as just simply us reviewing our portfolio and looking into the assets in our portfolio that may be worth more to others. The sale of the shallow water shelf provided us an opportunity to monetise that assets, I think at the right time for us and when there were people out there who were looking for those assets.

In the deepwater itself, we're committed to our deepwater program. In fact, our Gulf of Mexico operations provide us a wonderful window into those activities and also allows us to partner with some of the very significant joint venture partners around the world and provided us a window into a major oil hub in the world, which is Houston.

So we see Houston as strategically important for us to maintain our presence there. We see the Gulf of Mexico deepwater as a program that will continue that value for us.

Thank you. Lawrie, just on the PRRT, that appears to be much lower than what the market expected, at $16 million. You mentioned a deferred tax liability adjustment. Can you just explain why that's so different from the first half in 2010, just a little more detail, please?

Yes, sure Gordon. If you remember back in 2010 we had an adjustment. It was a negative adjustment to PRRT associated with taking on US functional currency for the first time.

That amount I think we would have disclosed in our underlying profit calculation. But it was around about $90-odd million, right. So our total PRRT expense for the first half of last year was $115 million, and a lot of that was due to that once-off adjustment. So obviously, in 2011 we don't have that once-off adjustment, and so the resulting number, the resulting expense, is about the same.

Having said that, though, I think one of the reasons why the market perhaps has overestimated our PRRT expense, it's just the impact of augmentation, augmentation being the uplift of our cost. But when we have an uplift we treat that as a permanent tax difference which reduces our tax expense for the period.

Okay. Lastly, just on CapEx, it's gone up 22% from your prior guidance for 2011. A lot of that's Pluto. The Pluto CapEx has gone up $641 million, yet you've announced the project costs had gone up by $900 million. Is it fair to say that $259 million is the cost of meeting your contractual commitments?

Gordon, to be honest, I don't have the previous guidance sitting in front of me, so I'm not going to attempt a reconciliation. But it's true that exchange rate fluctuations had a reasonably significant impact on our full year estimate for CapEx.

Pluto hasn't changed, in terms of the Australian dollar spend, hasn't changed much at all. With the increase in expenditure for the project, they were all mostly shifting expenditure out into 2012.

Okay, thank you very much.

The next question comes from the line of Matt Chambers. You can go ahead with your questions.

Hi Peter. I was just wondering if you can tell us when you're targeting FID on the Pluto expansion? I'm guessing it's not this year anymore?

Well Matt, as we go back and we talk about Pluto expansion, of course, there's a couple of things in there that have unknowns in them. So exploration programs, as you know, it's always difficult to pick winners - let's say a probabilistic (sic) basis - and you go through that in a very measured way. We want to make sure we maintain the right balance in that program of risk versus investment for us, as we move forward.

So there are scenarios that I could put to you that are earlier or later. I'm really not going to be driven by calendar year penned date. What we really need to be driven by is when will we have created enough to really get value of it, and when does it commercially meet our hurdles and make sense for us to pursue.

Now it's not just about equity, as we talked. We also, as I said, are in active discussion with other resource owners. So we've not just got a single bullet, so to speak, on this one. We are looking at other opportunities as well. As I said, discussions there are maturing. We're pleased with the progress.

So you don't really have a target at the moment?

Well, I'm not going to get (inaudible) by date targets because, as I said, the key here is you've got to work through your program. The message though is we have a program and the program's very clear to us. We have the reefs, we're going to drill the wells. When the discovery volumes meet our hurdle rate, then we'll make those decisions.

Okay. I think it was in the last quarterly, you said that outcomes from drilling was only one part of the business cash needed for confidence to order long-lead items. What else do you need there, and how that's going?

Well yeah, the message there was there are many components, as you go through these business cases and pull them together. Of course, one is the outcome from the drilling program. The other one is what equity position you want to hold in it and then, of course, what the final development plan may look like and whether it justifies its own train or whether it comes in in another way.

So really what the message was there, as we're considering these growth opportunities, we're really looking at the full basket of things to bring forward, before we line up and say, yes, this is the one that truly does create the most value for Woodside.

If I could just relate what you're saying on what equity levels you want to take at Pluto with the funding potentially of Pluto expansion and Browse, if you approve those in the next nine months. What are you looking at there, as far as what equity that you could keep in either project? Because I imagine that's going to be, what, about $30 billion based on current equity?

Yes, as I mentioned during the presentation, we're actually very pleased to have the equity positions we do currently hold in those projects at this point in time. Of course, if we can go back and remember Woodside has a great foundation business that has us very well cashed up. As we said, Pluto will start contributing to that in a very material way early next year. So we are cashed up, we have a good balance sheet and, as Lawrie's talked about, our debt profile is a good one as well.

Having said that, we do recognise the challenges of these major projects as we line them up. Of course, we're going to use all of the options available to us to see what's the right path for us and what's the right mix of debt for us, and what's the right mix of equity as we carry that through, and what other value options we may get out of equity. We're not simply trying to manage cash in that point of view. We are an oil and gas company, and we recognise there's other value opportunities that need to come into that equation as we look at how we match that development profile up.

But fundamental to that, though, even in the base business, our balance sheet is going to get very strong next year and we do have a very strong revenue stream coming on. We're really pleased that that provides us lots of options and it allows us to do the right things at the right time.

Then when one last, if I could, Peter. Just on Cimatti, it seems you've delayed potential production of that by a year or two from the previous full year report. I'm just wondering why that is and whether you're still planning a tieback through Enfield and what sort of size development you're looking at.

Yes, we are continuing with the Cimatti development and our plan is it will come back through Enfield. But we're putting it into a broader portfolio of opportunities there. So Cimatti is just one part of it. We talked about Laverda and some other activities there as well.

Do you know what sort of size you're looking at?

On Cimatti?

Yes.

I'll have to go back and get what previous guidance we provided on Cimatti. I'm not sure that we have. I'm sorry, I don't have them at my fingertips. But it's a good size resource for us.

Okay, thanks Peter.

The next question comes from the line of Jason Mabee. Please go ahead.

Yeah, hi guys, just a few questions. Firstly Peter, you mentioned Pluto, a world class project, but obviously the execution has been disappointing. I just wondered what your take is on some of the issues that have plagued it and how you get confidence that Woodside has the ability to execute technically on, say, a mega project like Browse going forward.

Well, I think there are interesting questions for the industry. I would go back and challenge you, or challenge the perception. We set ourselves a very tight target on Pluto, and we made that commitment very clear when we first went to FID, that some of the execution, timing and so forth were really going to put us into best-in-class type areas.

So the execution we've seen on Pluto is certainly not out of range, and I would suggest to you with everything going on, both within the oil and gas industry and also the resources industry in Australia, the execution has actually been very good.

Having said that, we didn't meet our expectations and, of course, that was a challenge to us. It's one that we're feeding back into our organisation and our learnings, and making sure that as we look at execution, not only of expansion opportunities but also of Browse, that all of those learnings are weaved back in.

That's across the Board and we think we've developed in our FEED process for Browse, a recognition of the risks that we saw play out at Pluto, and we're trying to ameliorate those risks as we go through.

Can I just follow on from, I think it was Mark's question earlier about the Carnarvon drilling program now being mostly exploration wells. My understanding was actually it was mostly appraisal wells. So I just wondered if that's sort of changed, or what does that suggest? Does that suggest that even with good results on the appraisals that it wouldn't have been enough to get you to do an equity train, therefore you need to find some new wells?

Yeah, I think we may be moving around with definition of exploration and appraisal in the Carnarvon. As I mentioned, we're drilling (inaudible) in the Carnarvon. So we're not really stepping out into what I would call real greenfield exploration type programs.

As we look at it, we do have a mix in there. There are two appraisal wells in the mix. So it's not just exploration alone.

Does a Pluto expansion have to follow straight on the heels of the commissioning of Pluto Foundation in order for the economics to stack up, or do you have the capacity to delay it a bit further, man down the site and then man it back up later when you decide?

If you're referring to the economics of the Pluto Foundation Project, the Pluto Foundation Project we evaluate on its own. We don't need expansion opportunities to come to pass on Pluto for Pluto to be accretive on the bottom line for us. So if I can kind of isolate it and say look, the Pluto Foundation Project itself is a positive contributor to Woodside.

As with respect to expansions, of course expansions will - as I said, they'll occur when we've met all of the investment criteria that we've established. We don't see any issues at all with timing and that and so forth. The reality is, the connections between those would be difficult to maintain even where we stay today.

Okay. Sorry, last question, I got the impression from your predecessor that Woodside was working closely with Shell, trying to do something about the I guess remaining stake they own. Are you able to comment at all on - are you still taking a proactive stance there in trying to place that (inaudible) buyer or what sort of role Woodside's actually taking?

Well, if I can handle that in two parts. I'll handle the first part and then I'll hand it over to Lawrie. But firstly, on the relationship with Shell, the relationship with Shell is an excellent one and it's a very collegiate one. It's one where we both recognise the strengths that Woodside brings and also the strengths that Shell brings to that relationship.

So I would tell you as I sit here today I find that relationship a very complementary one to Woodside and it's one that has been a positive one for us on a net basis over the years. So we're very much looking forward to maintaining a strong joint venture relationship with Shell. I'll let Lawrie talk about some of the shareholding components that you're asking.

Hi, Jason. I think as we've said earlier, we have engaged with Shell on their 24% ownership. But we've always qualified that and said we have to all note that these are Shell's shares and Shell alone will make decisions about how they regard their shareholding in Woodside going forward. So I can tell you that there's nothing new that I can or should report at this time.

Okay, thanks, guys.

Your next question comes from the line of John Hirjee from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead with your questions

Yes, thank you. Good morning, everyone. My question is on Browse. Peter, as you mentioned, it's the first time we've had a forum with you. So I just wanted to get an understanding of, in the context of this project being such a significant project for Woodside, expenditure and certainly execution wise, what you think or you're thinking about the current rates of return that you would want from a project like that, given the amount of capital you will need to commit.

Yeah, John, well the rates of return, we have a set criteria for the rates of return that we expect within Woodside and Browse will be no different to that. It'll get tested against a range of economic criteria. But we do have minimum return or hurdle rates that we set for ourselves. Of course, the challenge to the Browse team is to execute in a way that we meet those hurdle rates. So there's nothing special for us about Browse.

We're not moving those sort of rates and we really do need to be disciplined so that over a long period we're able to evaluate all of your projects looking through the same window or lens. If you start moving criteria and so forth at certain points in time, it really doesn't hold you in good stead. There's lots of other moving parts on a project like Browse, as you know, that we need to manage and so we keep those economic criteria stable over time and what we do then is run a set of very robust scenarios against that to test the robustness of the economic outcomes.

So given you're waiting on how much it'll cost you given the tenders are out there, if you find that that economic rate of hurdle is not achieved, what are your likely options? Would you look at other concepts? For example, bring it back to the North West Shelf?

I'd go back firstly and just talk about the Browse resource itself. Of course, there's remaining opportunity for us to hopefully increase the size of that resource. You may be aware we're running some surveys already - seismic surveys - to bring better clarity to the development, particularly with Torosa. The point I would make is it's an excellent resource, it's in a part of the world that we know well and that we can execute.

With respect to the process that we're currently in, as we all know well, FEED is a very well defined process. It's kind of like we've got our ticket for the train, we've jumped in the carriage and we will get to the next station. Then there will be a natural decision point for us as we get those costs in. Now we'll get an early read on that - that's the way we've designed the process for us - so as we go through the next few months, we're going to get early indications of where those costs are heading.

But of course, as you would expect, we also are very diligently looking at opportunities where we can pull costs out of the existing development concepts. So we're not just simply about saying okay, I buy the ticket and I go to the next station then I make a decision. No, we're monitoring this very actively and we actually have a process where we're looking at all of those investment decisions right now and really testing and challenging each one of them incrementally to ensure that they do pay their way.

So I wouldn't suggest at all that we're looking at - we're moving away from that path at this point in time. What I'd tell you though is obviously we're monitoring that very closely, as you would expect for a project of this size and its importance to Woodside.

Okay, one final question, then, Peter. In the context of the ability to handle the Pluto expansion, Browse and possibly and even Sunrise, do you think you have the human capital within Woodside to be able to execute on all those three projects all over a very similar timeframe?

You know, wouldn't that be just a [great] problem to have? Seriously, we're putting a lot of thought into that. Look, these are real challenges. We've talked about the balance sheet challenges and how we'll handle that. We believe we have some good strategies in place to do that and we're maturing those strategies. Similarly, on the people front and the capabilities, as I mentioned earlier in the call, Woodside does have a very deep bench of technical capabilities.

We are very deep in LNG. On a worldwide basis, we're a - by any measure - world class operator, both in size and in performance. So we have a deep bench to draw upon. We're actively hiring a lot of people now already and the organisation has been growing. Having said that, we know we're going to be challenged, but I think the best thing is we do recognise that's a challenge and so we can put plans in place to deal with it. But we're out there and we're realistic.

We're out there in the marketplace with everybody else, but as I'll go back to, we have a wonderful core and that core has got a lot of learning already embedded in our processes and systems. So I'm confident we'll get there and whatever challenge we put to the organisation, we're going to meet it.

Thank you very much, Peter.

Your next question comes from the line of Angela Macdonald-Smith from The Australian. Please go ahead.

Yes, I'm from The Australian Financial Review. Look, Peter, I just wanted to ask about the strategy slide. I think you talked about selective new opportunities that Woodside would look at. Just wanted to clarify whether you're talking about opportunities within your portfolio already or whether you'd look at something external there given all you've got going on with the growth projects.

Yeah, Angela, as we look at the Company and then the timeline of opportunities that you need to have to continue to feed a company the size of Woodside. As we all know, by any measure now on a world scale we're a large independent and that requires us to continue to feed that opportunity (inaudible) for ourselves so that we can maintain the selectivity that we need in a portfolio to make sure we choose to do the right things at the right time.

Our strategies are always to really keep focused on that base business, to make (inaudible) keep pumping out the returns that it has. But just as importantly, the messages are there that Woodside is not necessarily a linear company. As I mentioned, we have a very deep experience base and very deep competence. We know Australia, we operate here well. That should provide other opportunities.

Woodside wants to position itself as a partner of choice. I believe we have an offering that's an exceptional one and very high (inaudible). That's the space that we'll be operating in. So what we're simply saying there is we need to continue to feed our opportunity funnel and as we move forward we need to develop the capability and competencies to capture those opportunities.

Right, could I just ask one more about Sunrise and just how that is going and whether there's any progress at all in trying to get some approval on the floating plan from the East Timorese Government?

Well the movement there - and I may have mentioned is I'll be meeting with the Timor-Leste Government in the not too distant future. I'm hoping through the establishment of early relationships we can get a dialogue going again between Woodside and the Timor-Leste Government to really understand where we have differences.

I must say though, we've always got to go back and say what do we agree on between the joint venture partners, the Timor-Leste Government and the Australian Government. Of course, that is that Sunrise is really a good development. It's one that we all want to develop and it's one where we all see that there's value to it and the fiscal structures are in place and the joint venture structures are in place to allow that to happen. Where we have a stalemate at the moment is of course around what each of those stakeholders believe is the right development option for them.

We have some obligations under the treaties and the licenses that we operate under to bring forward what we believe the joint venture is going to add (inaudible) value based on the criteria that's been established, and we will continue to follow that. What I need to do as the new CEO of Woodside is to establish a relationship with the Timor-Leste Government, a relationship where we can have a good, open and frank dialogue, and that's what I'm committed to. As I said, we already have plans in place for me to visit Timor-Leste in the not too distant future.

Okay, thanks.

Your next question comes from the line of Stuart Baker from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Morning, gentlemen. Peter, just a question on the LNG markets and marketing progress. I note in the report to shareholders there that you believe the LNG market growth out to 2025 will be something in the 4% to 5% range. I think the last report to shareholders had the figure nearer 6%, so I'm wondering whether there's a view by the Company that the outlook for demand for LNG has tempered a little or maybe it's just a little more conservative.

But nevertheless, if I take that figure and then look to the last six projects sanctioned, it just appears that the market is well met through to about 2017 or 2018-ish and therefore I just put it to the Company what expectations it has about what the market opportunity is for a Pluto expansion and a Browse in terms of time.

Yeah, look, I go back to the basic premise that the right projects will get into the market and there will be a buyer for the right projects when they come along. Of course, the gas from Pluto expansions is gas that's attractive to a wide group of buyers and they're buyers who are very familiar to us. So as we look at some of those expansion plans, of course gas is not gas. Some of it's different, has different values, and of course we're a conventional LNG player in every respect of the word. Our technology is well known, our capability is well known.

So we expect that'll give us a leg up as we are talking to the buyers. I don't have any concerns at all about that and it's certainly not a discussion that we've had within Woodside. Now, having said that, as we look forward and we start to talk about what's happening in the broader marketplace, of course we don't see any change in that demand profile and particularly as we see continued growth through China, of course, a lot of our LNG is going into Japan. But they're very, very solid buyers and have been very credit worthy, as you know, over a long period of time. In Japan, Japanese buyers continue to have a large interest in Woodside's products offering.

I believe there was a (inaudible) probably prior to March of this year, that there may have been some sloppiness in the marketplace post 2017. You know, our discussions with buyers around the area would suggest that that sloppiness or uncertainty has tightened up and I think there is a lot more certainty in the market as we move forward.

I would even suggest to you the potential upside in this market as we see the full flowthrough of the Fukushima issues and how sovereign governments deal with that over time. I don't believe we've seen all of that yet. We're also seeing other pulls in the system. You're seeing a proliferation of regasification terminals now around the world, both in South America, South East Asia, Europe and of course the US to a lesser extent. Of course, those terminals now are moving us into a more fungible market, and you're seeing LNG trade move around the world quite significantly. So you know, rather than being constrained, I would say the market's moving to a more fungible type market.

As we see economies around the world change, they're sucking up the production and that's then coming along with our shipping as well. So all the elements, both the nature of the contract, the terms of the contracts, the shipping themselves, and the relationships with buyers, are all pushing us towards more fungible and more flexible markets over the mid to long term. I think that's good for Australia, I think that's good for the LNG product that we're putting out.

Thanks Peter, and just the one follow-on question which relates to some comments you made before about perhaps looking at select opportunities. I guess an observation I would put to you is that the Company's asset base is very concentrated into a couple of big projects with big equities. And while (inaudible) growth if they work, the risks in an uncertain world are that if there's delays or they don't work then you're exposed. I just wonder whether the Company's postulating a broadening of the asset base, whether there are certain geographies or jurisdictions that the Company would like to be in and whether there's a view that the product market mix needs to shift, and in particular whether or not the Company is looking at unconventional gas opportunities that seem to be sweeping the world.

I would say we've had a good look at ourselves and we understand what we do well, we understand what our core competencies are and how deep we are in those. We are in a fortunate position that in the conventional LNG market in the world, we have a competency that takes many, many years to generate and develop. We were one of the first LNG companies out there and we've been operating for a long period of time, both operating and building trains. So you know, I would put that that we really understand what we do well. We also operate (inaudible) which are complex pieces of kit. We drill most of the deepwater wells in Australia - in fact, the deepest deepwater well in Australia.

So we have other competencies in our tool kit that we really don't talk about a lot, and will continue to talk about those. So as we look forward and we say well, how do we balance the portfolio and what risk do we have in execution and so forth, what I can tell you is we're very mindful of that and it's something that we're actively looking at to make sure that we manage our way through to continue to deliver the shareholder value and growth in value that we're committed to delivering.

Thanks very much. That's it from me.

Guys, it's after 11 and I know a number of you have been on the phone for a while. I believe there's 10 questioners still on the line. I suggest we take three more questions if people don't mind. I understand we have three on the line, if we don't mind.

The next question comes from the line of David Heard of Merrill Lynch. Please go ahead with your questions.

Thank you. Peter, one of the growth areas you haven't really talked about is bilby populations at James Price Point. My understanding is the work that you've had to do in preparation for the environmental assessment has already been submitted. Can you comment on what this might mean in relation to perhaps the process for environmental assessment and also, in the shorter term, the demands that are being made that activity at the site stops?

Yeah, let me put that back in the context if I can. As I mentioned before - and I'll keep coming back to this - Browse really is a world class resource and it's one that we have certain commitments that we need to deliver on and we're focused on delivering those commitments. Now, it's not just about what we deliver, it's how we deliver it. Fundamental to Woodside and to the core of our operations and our people values, is the fact that good science and appropriate science and consultation with community and others drives our decision processes.

So as we talk about some of the challenges that we've had at James Price Point, I suggest to you that they're challenges that we're well positioned to work through. I think we just need to move forward on that. We have the right organisation, the right people in place. We really do understand it and we are sensitive. More importantly, we are sensitive to it and we're going to take our time to do it right.

In practice, do you feel free to go on with your schedule at Browse at the moment?

Yeah, well we have an execution plan already in place at Browse. As you know, we have geotechnical survey work underway on the site itself. That geotechnical survey work is progressing. We got off to a late start on that due to some weather and other delays but we're catching up very quickly and that geotechnical work is important to our FEED progress.

Do you consider environmental approvals to be a critical part for readiness to take FID by mid 2012?

Well, as you know, there is a strategic assessment review underway and so environmental approvals are one of the approvals that we'll need to have in place. But you know, that's very similar to any other permits and approvals we have in place. We don't expect there to be any undue delay in pursuing through those approval process. Of course it will take a lot of consultation and it takes a lot of work. So I don't want to, in any way, give an impression that we don't have a lot of work to do. We do. But we are staffed up and we are already on the ground up in Broome and here in Perth, working on these.

Thank you very much, Peter.

The next question comes from the line of Kate Emery from The West Australian. Please go ahead.

Hi Peter, I've got a really quick small one from Angela's question on Sunrise. I'm just wondering if you can comment on whether part of establishing or re-establishing that relationship with the Timor-Leste Government would ever involve putting the option of onshore processing back on the table. Is that something you'd consider or is it definitely off the table?

I think it's too early for us to move away or even have discussions around a different development concept for Sunrise. It just starts to cloud discussions and confuse. The real thing here for us is we, as the joint venturer, really do believe that we have the right development concept that's consistent with the requirements we have, which is good oil field practice.

I think before we start going down a path of saying my idea's better than your idea, the first thing to do is, let's establish a relationship, let's establish one where we really can sit in a room together and really thrash out some of these issues. As I said in my earlier answer, I firmly believe there are far more things we agree on than things that we don't agree on. If we can really get back and say, look, guess what, we actually agree on eight or nine out of 10 things, we're just stuck on this last one.

We need a circuit breaker. What I want to do is go in and listen to the Timor-Leste Government. I really want to understand their concerns because there's really no value in me just blindly putting different opportunities around and throwing them around and bringing rocks without really knowing what the issues are. So I want to understand it. That's why I'm going in the country, that's why I'm going to meet with the Prime Minister.

Thanks a lot.

The final question comes from the line of Mark Wiseman from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Hi Peter. Thanks for going over time. Just a quick one. Obviously the skill shortage and LNG boom and construction boom in WA is a running theme for the Government and the industry. Previous management showed a real sense of urgency with the drilling program and capturing third party gas for the Pluto expansion. With Wheatstone targeting FID later this year and Gorgon progressing, how are you factoring that into your thinking and how important are the action of other players over there in the timing of perhaps choosing to go with third party gas over waiting for equity de-risking?

Look, it's a good question and it's one that is very front and centre on our considerations as we move forward. What I would tell you is until one part naturally stands out as being the best option to us, we're going to continue to pursue all options but there definitely is a tug on resources over here. There's a tug on footprints and available contractors and people and so forth. That's just been heightened by the activities on the East Coast notwithstanding the weather issues that Queensland has had but now also the resource activities over there, combined with the resource boom that's happening here in WA.

What I'd tell you, I've just come back to the core for us, Woodside has almost 4000 people and I think we often forget that. We're a substantial company so while these are real challenges we have contractors who've worked with us for a long period of time, we have an excellent history of industrial relations up in the Pilbara, we have an excellent history of working with the community. So we don't under estimate the challenges but the reality is, I think for us to sit and say, we can pick one versus the other at this point in time, is probably getting outside of the realms of our ability to forecast things. But we are preparing ourselves. So I would tell you it's on our radar screen and we're watching that and we're developing strategies to manage through that.

Thanks.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, that is the final question. I would now like to hand back to the CEO for any closing statements. Thank you.

Just finally, before I give a summary, I think I had a question on Cimatti and what is the resource side. It's in the 10 million to 15 million barrel range and of course it's 100% Woodside. Sorry, that's 100% number, I should say.

If I can just go back and talk about the messages from today, of course you can see the results speak for themselves with performance in the first half as being excellent. It's really been built off our foundation business so the strength is that underlying foundation business, I think it's obvious to everyone. I hope we were able to get across during the presentation how hard Woodside is working on our business to maximise the value from it and really preserve it and continue, more importantly, continue that business into the long term. So it's not a business that is in decline.

It's a real business and one that's going to stay for us for a long period of time. Of course, we're on the cusp of bringing Pluto on line. We do have a good plan. We are well organised and we do have the right resources in place to get Pluto Foundation Project up and running. We are fortunate that we have a good suite of opportunities in front of us with new developments. We've talked a lot about expansion of Pluto and the value that brings. We've talked a lot about Browse and Sunrise and then of course, we've also talked about our commitment to our ongoing exploration program and ensuring that that remains robust. I will come back and I will continue to come back to the point that we're an organisation that's focused on value, an organisation that's focused on delivering, and an organisation that's focused on positioning ourselves as a partner of choice.

We have a truly wonderful world class offering and Woodside, I think is poised now to really make a step change in our business as we move into the future. So with that as a final sum up, I'd also like to thank you for the quality and the insight in the questions that you posed to Lawrie and myself. That's a very helpful insight for us as we understand what's important to you and you are very important to us. I want to make sure that we have an open dialogue, a dialogue that's frank and a dialogue that's based on mutual respect. So again, thank you for that today, guys. We look forward to catching up with you in the future.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation today. This does conclude today's conference call. You may now disconnect your line.