Share
14,139 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 705
clock Created with Sketch.
15/06/18
10:08
Share
Originally posted by zacma
↑
Thanks BSP for the heads up. As you say nothing new except a few interesting tit bits.
Let me just recap the PE issue as outlined by CN at the end of her presentation.
-FAR always knew that COP was a seller since their stated aim was to get out of deep water exploration.
-COP received several offers exceeding the final price paid by WPL, which were rejected by COP.
-FAR was happy about this and did not intend to PE
-COP announced sale to WPL at $2.20 a barrel.
-FAR felt it was too cheap and this would destroy the value of SNE, at least in the short term.
-FAR asked COP for all the details of the sale to WPL which they are entitled to under the JVA.
-COP outlined it in a single page which is totally inadequate and not in line with the JVA.
-FAR gave notice of dispute as per JVA within 30 days.
-COP did not respond to this notice and for a further 60 days only to announce that the transaction has been completed since there was no objection by the Senegalese Government.
-The Senegalese Government asked FAR to continue to persevere with an amicable solution but COP was not interested. Hence the delay in lodging the dispute with the ICA.
-The Senegalese Government is unimpressed with COP's behaviour.
-Submissions from COP & FAR re TOR have been received and the Terms of Reference should be announced by the 29th of June, likely early July.
-COP continues to ask for extensions.
-The ICA is onto COP's behaviour and does not like it.
-Resolution likely by end of the year.
That's all CN knows.
I am sure I am not reporting it perfectly, but this was imo the content.
Re financing the run up to first oil: 60% debt, 40 % equity, 0 % share dilution is one of the possibilities being pursuit and looking good.
Re Erin: As we all know that Erin has applied for Chapter 11 protection in the USA. They did however not include the asset in Gambia and the liabilities attached to it. 5 or 6 Court hearings later, it appears that Erin will enter Chapter 7 leading to bankruptcy. The Court is unhappy about not including the Gambia business. FAR knew that Erin had issues since they also defaulted on the payment to the JV under the agreement. Erin also has a Tax liability in the Gambia to the tune of $ 5 mil, which the Authorities like to collect. FAR is entitled to their assets if payment to the JV is not forthcoming. FAR has given notice to Erin to register their rights to the asset. Negotiations are ongoing. (20% for a $ 5 mil payment? Hmm, could be a good deal)
In the aftermath KKW, REDAL and myself met. Needless to say we looked like a bunch of grumpy old men until we honed in on Angelique and got entranced by here engaging personality and charm. Our bodies straightened and the frowns on our foreheads turned into happy smiles. We all looked at least a couple of years younger.
And yes Angelique reads HC, not least to get her daily serve of humour.
A few interesting points were raised.
The Senegalese Government has to formally approve the sale of the asset to WPL, which has not happened to date. The 60 days without objection to the sale do not count since no negotiations between COP and FAR took place.
Petrosen and CNE formally said they will not PE and subsequently, should the clock restart cannot PE now.
At no time gave the Senegalese Government notice to the JV that a ministerial arrete has been issued. The Senegalese Government does not say to this day that they have done so. Nobody besides WPL has seen anything written with respect to this.
Should any ministerial arrete be issued, it will need to be gazetted, which is publicly known. Has not happened to date, so what ever WPL is saying, in particular our friend STH, the ministerial arrete they claim to have has not been formalised. Maybe STH can comment on this.
Overall the way forward looks like quite a few issues being resolved which could benefit FAR and its SP big time.
Expand
Apparently :
FAR now admit they did not intend to PE. They thought the WPL price was "too cheap" then requested more info (although they already thought the price was too cheap). The statement that they did not intend to PE shows that any notion of a "backer" at the time is nonsense. FAR by their own admission had no intention to PE, just wanted more info when the price was lower than they expected with oil under $30 per barrel. What is the intent of the PE clause in the JOA again?