Share
clock Created with Sketch.
27/02/15
10:00
Share
Originally posted by Hotazel
↑
"The spokesperson said that the interests of prior partners FAR of Australia and Avana Petroleum of Canada reverted to Ophir Energy after the duo did not fulfil their obligations on the block."
For me the above is more BS than anything else.
I say this because:
From the 3Q qaurterly this was reported re L9.
"Block L9, Kenya (FAR 30%)
The assignment agreement between FAR and Ophir Energy (the Operator of Block L9) expired on 23 July 2014.
Following this date, the Company has been in discussions with Ophir Energy regarding the Company’s entry
into the block and the plans for a future work program in the permit. The Miocene carbonate reef play,
identified in Block L6 extends along the Kenyan coast and into Block L9 and a 3D seismic survey across these
reefs will evaluate this potential and this will most likely be built into any future work program.
During the last quarter the Operator received a one year extension to the current exploration period. FAR
intends to farm out part of its interest for drilling and has already received unsolicited expressions of interest ."
The first part of the above was again repeated in the 4Q quarterly report.
In the Investor presentation of Nov 2014, Kenya assets were addressed but there was not a single mention of L9.
This caused me to post on here and questioned whether we are still involved in L9 because I believed that we're out of it (due to expiration of old agreement). FAR would have had to pay some $11 to get the 30% share in the block. It's also round about this time when the blow-out costs for FAN1 came about.
So, in reality, FAR never held the interest in L9. FAR hoped (so it seems), had in fact attempted to get a farmin partner for part of it's "prospective" 30% stake which would have allowed FAR to hold on to the prospective stake (or whatever was left of it after farming down). With all the security crap in Kenya, this prospect (farmin down) had all fallen flat as had been the case with the farmin discussions on L6.
Spoke to CN at one of the Pressos in April or May last year. Questioned on FAR's prospects to try and get a share of the pie in L8 (from which Apache withdrew). The message that I got is that they were very much in talks with Kenya Govn to get involved in L8. What has since transpired on that front, I don't know. Will have to wait and see. It is interesting though to see that both FAR and PCL "sold" of their interests in certain Aus leases (recently announced).
Strategically, L6 plus a stake in L8 (2 joining leases) is FAR better than L6 and L9. - Minimizes the need for unitization where oil resource is discovered that crosses from L6 into L8. It would be fantastic news if PCL and FAR succeed to pick up L8 entirely.
Cheers
Expand
Originally posted by Hotazel
↑
"The spokesperson said that the interests of prior partners FAR of Australia and Avana Petroleum of Canada reverted to Ophir Energy after the duo did not fulfil their obligations on the block."
For me the above is more BS than anything else.
I say this because:
From the 3Q qaurterly this was reported re L9.
"Block L9, Kenya (FAR 30%)
The assignment agreement between FAR and Ophir Energy (the Operator of Block L9) expired on 23 July 2014.
Following this date, the Company has been in discussions with Ophir Energy regarding the Company’s entry
into the block and the plans for a future work program in the permit. The Miocene carbonate reef play,
identified in Block L6 extends along the Kenyan coast and into Block L9 and a 3D seismic survey across these
reefs will evaluate this potential and this will most likely be built into any future work program.
During the last quarter the Operator received a one year extension to the current exploration period. FAR
intends to farm out part of its interest for drilling and has already received unsolicited expressions of interest ."
The first part of the above was again repeated in the 4Q quarterly report.
In the Investor presentation of Nov 2014, Kenya assets were addressed but there was not a single mention of L9.
This caused me to post on here and questioned whether we are still involved in L9 because I believed that we're out of it (due to expiration of old agreement). FAR would have had to pay some $11 to get the 30% share in the block. It's also round about this time when the blow-out costs for FAN1 came about.
So, in reality, FAR never held the interest in L9. FAR hoped (so it seems), had in fact attempted to get a farmin partner for part of it's "prospective" 30% stake which would have allowed FAR to hold on to the prospective stake (or whatever was left of it after farming down). With all the security crap in Kenya, this prospect (farmin down) had all fallen flat as had been the case with the farmin discussions on L6.
Spoke to CN at one of the Pressos in April or May last year. Questioned on FAR's prospects to try and get a share of the pie in L8 (from which Apache withdrew). The message that I got is that they were very much in talks with Kenya Govn to get involved in L8. What has since transpired on that front, I don't know. Will have to wait and see. It is interesting though to see that both FAR and PCL "sold" of their interests in certain Aus leases (recently announced).
Strategically, L6 plus a stake in L8 (2 joining leases) is FAR better than L6 and L9. - Minimizes the need for unitization where oil resource is discovered that crosses from L6 into L8. It would be fantastic news if PCL and FAR succeed to pick up L8 entirely.
Cheers
Expand
I personally was very happy to see FAR unload its Canning Basin assets. In my view that is exactly where the alliance with PCL should stop. FAR in Senegal have achieved something that almost all spec resource companies can only dream of. The idea of Kenya coming along and adding value is pie in the sky. It should be divested in my opinion. All that these other prospects will do is dilute shareholder returns and prolong management positions. I remain to be convinced that FAR should exist. Only two things management should be concerned with now.
1) Getting as far as it can into the Senegal appraisal/production process with NO further dilution.
2)Being taken over.
As an additional comment i think that no more staff are required to achieve this. No doubt i will be roundly criticized for this post so before you start let me also say i still firmly think with good reason that Senegal will wind up being bigger than any of us currently believe.