Nice post
"I, and others, have been presuming that WDS needs the licence in order to share the data with third parties seeking a participating or operating interest in WDS's 56% of PEL87. But does that make any sense? Galp opened a data room where many companies had access to the data they acquired."
A very, very good point.
We seem to have come to a consensus that WDS want are looking to bring someone else in for part of their 56% and will first need to share the data with the prospective partner.
GALP are partners in the exploration license they have shared the data from - WDS are not partners in PEL87 so that may be the difference.
Perhaps WDS only have access to the data through PCL and cannot share it to a 3rd party without either PCL's permission or the seismic license.
A few questions for the AGM is
- what were the original conditions of the agreement?
- Was the seismic license condition added at a later date?
- Why was the seismic license not mentioned originally?
- What other conditions are there.?
- How can the agreement be terminated?.
- Who is being held accountable for no termination clause?
(20min delay)