10-19-2013, 10:19 AM
A bit of this has been hashed out at various times but I'll chime what I can:
1. Pet is probably the best source for recent and historical info on Wahoo
2. PREs most recent presentation was still showing a Q4 planned drilling. However that is all controlled by PNG as part of the O&G Regulations of 2002. Likely with the PRL still in limbo (likely to the overall deals being discussed) any spudding is on hold. Some are very concerned with this PRL not being approved yet, but it's understandable that PNG wants to wait until partners are all finalized, the operator is final and the development plan is defined. Of course one item the O&G Act states will keep a PRL application from being approved is if there are strong indications that oil is present. I don't think that's why the PRL is not approved yet. Point is there are several reasons the PRL could be held up, but the most logical is the deal negotiations.
3. Not sure of the costs but as you say its likely not free. But again under the regulations IOC must file regular reports with DPE on what is going on at drill sites and with the rigs. Any movement of rigs must be approved as well as any planned drilling. Again, with the ongoing negotiations and the government being kept informed they are likely being kept apprised of the costs as the govt must pay their share when they opt in on any projects. IOC's project costs are the govt costs.
4. I try and track some of these timelines but again we are dealing with PNG. People tend to think IOC could be missing timelines, but IMO PNG is the one who has a history of not getting things done timely. There are many articles and instances of DPE being understaffed and not getting things done timely. Those who think the O&G Act is a hammer for PNG to pound on IOC and something png will use to take away licenses don't understand how this more likely will work. IOC has laid out in its disclosures how it has lived up to requirements, requested and received variations, etc. They have done what they have been asked for the most part. They have invested hundreds of millions and found some very large reservoirs. PNG has not been the easiest country to work in or with. We are where we are right now because the one biggie IOC hasn't done is what we are still waiting for. All of these schedules, timelines, requirements are what are being hammered out now as part of the all-important Gas Agreement. As you have said, then the action we have been waiting for will begin.
5. I don't like "top 10" etc in a case like this. There are more than 10. I would add to yours Landowner issues, extent of monetization possibilities, license renewals (different from extentions)
1. Pet is probably the best source for recent and historical info on Wahoo
2. PREs most recent presentation was still showing a Q4 planned drilling. However that is all controlled by PNG as part of the O&G Regulations of 2002. Likely with the PRL still in limbo (likely to the overall deals being discussed) any spudding is on hold. Some are very concerned with this PRL not being approved yet, but it's understandable that PNG wants to wait until partners are all finalized, the operator is final and the development plan is defined. Of course one item the O&G Act states will keep a PRL application from being approved is if there are strong indications that oil is present. I don't think that's why the PRL is not approved yet. Point is there are several reasons the PRL could be held up, but the most logical is the deal negotiations.
3. Not sure of the costs but as you say its likely not free. But again under the regulations IOC must file regular reports with DPE on what is going on at drill sites and with the rigs. Any movement of rigs must be approved as well as any planned drilling. Again, with the ongoing negotiations and the government being kept informed they are likely being kept apprised of the costs as the govt must pay their share when they opt in on any projects. IOC's project costs are the govt costs.
4. I try and track some of these timelines but again we are dealing with PNG. People tend to think IOC could be missing timelines, but IMO PNG is the one who has a history of not getting things done timely. There are many articles and instances of DPE being understaffed and not getting things done timely. Those who think the O&G Act is a hammer for PNG to pound on IOC and something png will use to take away licenses don't understand how this more likely will work. IOC has laid out in its disclosures how it has lived up to requirements, requested and received variations, etc. They have done what they have been asked for the most part. They have invested hundreds of millions and found some very large reservoirs. PNG has not been the easiest country to work in or with. We are where we are right now because the one biggie IOC hasn't done is what we are still waiting for. All of these schedules, timelines, requirements are what are being hammered out now as part of the all-important Gas Agreement. As you have said, then the action we have been waiting for will begin.
5. I don't like "top 10" etc in a case like this. There are more than 10. I would add to yours Landowner issues, extent of monetization possibilities, license renewals (different from extentions)