I recall watching this session back in April with great interest: NAVIGATING THE ROAD TO SUCCESS: NAMIBIA’S UPSTREAM OIL&GAS INDUSTRY (>>>> POWERED BY EXXONMOBIL <<<< Moderator: NJ Ayuk - Executive Chairman, African Energy Chamber Ebson Uanguta - Interim Managing Director, National Petroleum Corporation of Namibia (NAMCOR) z Richard Barke - Director South Atlantic Exploration, ExxonMobil Upstream Channa Kurukulasuriya – Namibia Country Manager, Chevron International Exploration & Production Adriano Bastos – Head of Galp Upstream, Galp Energia James Parr – Vice President New Ventures, Woodside Energy Dr. Abderrezak Benyoucef - Head of Energy Studies Department at OPEC
Most notably, Richard Barke congratulated Galp, Shell, and Total, and quite strongly and sincerely expressed that Exxon would "love to be a part of it." I'm quite sure he and James Parr had a lot to talk about, as the last thing Parr said right after Barke finished speaking (while looking quite intently toward Barke) was "we are happy to be a part of it." I took note at the time that Parr was speaking as though Woodside was already a part of it. I had no doubt in my mind that Woodside was going to take up the option with Pancontinental, and that it was simply a matter of when, not if. I now think that the reason Woodside is waiting for that Seismic Licence is so that they can share it with ExxonMobil.
I've never thought for one moment that Woodside has any intention of operating PEL 87. Here's why... Woodside has seriously gone "woke" imho (check out their website if you think I'm kidding https://www.woodside.com/), and I'm not sure they want the "bad" press from operating in Namibia, rather, I think they will prefer to farm out the lion's share of their 56% to another operator and sit in the background to collect whatever money may or may not start rolling in at a future date. They no longer strike me as a serious exploration company (see if you can find more than a single paltry paragraph on their interests in Namibia and PEL 87). Like many companies and institutions these days, their transition to "wokeness" probably really just took root fairly recently and perhaps after they were already committed to that ~$35MM 3D seismic survey. So, donning my "wokester" mindset, I'd want that money back as well as retreating into the background, away from any bad press or stigma that might further (and quite wrongfully, imho) be associated with "unsustainability," "neocolonialism," or who knows what. Accordingly, I'd exercise the option asap, find a major interested in the area, like ExxonMobil and offer them 31-46% of the 56% interest for 1) their money back on the seismic, 2) perhaps a commitment to a drilling program of a certain magnitude within a certain timeframe, and 3) a free ride to production and/or a percentage royalty agreement. And because production is now what appears to be the name of their game w.r.t. O&G, they, Like Galp will likely want someone farming in who will commit to getting there sooner rather than later. Be all that as it may, if my read of Woodside is correct or even just close to the mark, that strikes me as the best possible outcome for Pancontinental regarding PEL 87. Note, none of the above is to take anything away from whatever remains of Woodside's exploration staff. I'd bet that they are every bit as jazzed about the Saturn superfan turbidite complex as Pancontinental is.
One recent event might start waking up Woodside's "woke" management: https://www.upstreamonline.com/environment/-unacceptable-woodside-s-giant-australian-gas-project-dealt-major-blow/2-1-1687436 That must have stung! Like Petrobras, I think regulations in their respective countries might motivate Woodside to elevate their priorities regarding their interests in offshore Namibia. I expect an announcement that they are taking up their option with Pancontinental within days of that Seismic Licence being issued.
(20min delay)