StrategyToday 11:23
Iβve been thinking about the sequencing of events at PRD and wonder if the market may be missing the strategic angle here.
PG previously suggested MOU-6 would likely be externally financed, yet PRD then raised funds for long-lead items themselves. At first glance that looked contradictory, but what if it actually indicates negotiations are ongoing rather than abandoned?
Now consider the timing of SC-3 in Trinidad being drilled before MOU-6.
If SC-3 succeeds and proves up commercial value, Trinidad potentially becomes:
a monetisable producing asset,
a source of non-dilutive funding,
or something that could even be partially/fully sold.
That would materially strengthen PRDβs hand in Morocco negotiations.
From a negotiating standpoint, a third party currently assumes PRD needs a Morocco deal because Guercif development is capital intensive. But if Trinidad success gives PRD another funding route, suddenly low-ball Morocco offers become riskier because the counterparty could lose access to Guercif altogether or be forced to offer much better terms.
In that scenario, raising bridge capital now for long-lead items makes more sense:
keep MOU-6 on schedule,
maintain leverage,
avoid appearing desperate,
and buy time while multiple strategic options develop.
The other thing worth noting is that management are no longer talking purely about exploration upside in Morocco. Theyβre increasingly discussing:
exploitation concessions,
pilot CNG development,
phased monetisation,
and partner-funded development.
To me that sounds more like commercial structuring discussions than βwe hope to find gas.β
Not saying this is definitely the strategy, but the sequencing feels deliberate rather than random.