Exactly STH,
Some fail to see that there were 2 distinct articles from different reporters/media outlets, running different narratives. See one of my earlier posts on this issue. It wasn't to difficult for me to brush the African Intelligence article off as absolute rubbish.. it's story simply didn't correspond with known facts (FAR's financial position).. but Upstream carried a very different narrative... sourced from one of the partners ( I read somewhere that the assertions carried by Upstream was sourced from an "Executive" of CAP Energy (whatever/whoever that may be).
My particular concern with CN's Q&A comment/response is that it appears/suggests that she(or whoever drafted that response) thinks that mere compliance with the "earning of the option"(having spent 1.1mil for 3Dseis) gave them an "open-ended exercise date" to exercise the option, thus totally disregarding a specific term in the option agreement that it had to be exercised on or before 31Oct.
Now.. it may well be that the INTENTION of the parties were that FAR can exercise the option once the 3D seis results are at hand. And at time of contract making the parties took 31 October 2016 as a "safe date" when the results should/will most certainly be available. As it turned out, it was not available at that date (not all of it in any event). If this intention is not clear from the wording of the option agreement, then the obligation rested on FAR to make sure that the 31Oct be extended for a further period, till the results are available. This extension may have been achieved by simple exchange of emails between FAR and TRACE but its not certain if this occurred. It could also be that if such exchange did occur, CAP Energy may not have been informed of such extension but I'd find that extraordinary. Ultimately though, if this was the actual intention of the parties, then that original intention must be applied and adhered to, regardless of the wording of the contract.
Further.., looking at last qrtly, this is stated (NB.. it came out on 31 Oct)
"The survey was completed at the end of 2015 and preliminary processed products have been arriving over the September quarter with final products expected to arrive at the end of 2016. FAR’s deadline to exercise its farm-in option will be the later of 31 October 2016 and execution of the Government Arête approving the completion of the current period work program commitments. The 3D seismic program acquired by FAR allows Trace Atlantic to meet these work program commitments and is pending Government approval which will not be unreasonably withheld.
Referring to the above, the mention of "the later of 31 October ....the Government Arete" strongly suggests to me that FAR may well have negotiated an extension before the 31st (to allow for the 3Dseis results to be received and reviewed before deciding to exercise the option). Just find it surprising that a stakeholder with some 40% stake in DJ would not have been made aware of such event and, seemingly, initiate action to invite "new interested parties" to farmin on the DJ block.
Looking back at the qrtly and subsequent articles that appeared since then, all this vagueness/questions now being raised etc etc could have well and truly been allayed by simply stating clearly, from the outset, that :'The parties to the option agreement have agreed and extended the deadline to exercise...." ...but they did not do/say that!! So it leaves all and sundry mystified about where FAR is sitting on the DJ issue.
No harm in CN coming out now and make a clear statement on the issue... how difficult can it be ?????
Joyful new year's eve, restful new years day and prosperous 2017 to all .
Expand
(20min delay)