PEL 94 & ECO Atlantic25 Sep 2025 10:14
Some thinking out loud is going on here, so feel free to jump on it...
Looking at the ECO Atlantic RNS regarding license renewal, one thing stands out to me. The renewal seems to coincide with ECO's aim of "optimising operations and exploration focus" across the 4 blocks they control.
"Eco has signed deeds of amendments and secured license extensions across all four of its Petroleum Exploration Licences ("PEL"s) in Namibia. In addition, Eco has farmed out its total 85% Working Interest, pending government approval, in PEL 98 (Block 2213 "Sharon Block") to an arms-length wholly Namibian-owned company, Lamda Energy (Pty) Ltd ("Lamda Energy")".
To gain access to potentially lucrative blocks, there obviously needs to be something in it for Nambia, and that may extend past NAMCOR's automatic involvement in all blocks. Was the PEL 98 farm-out to Lamda, the move that paved the way to the renewal of the other 3 licenses that ECO want to focus on?
During PEL 94 discussions last year, were the goal posts moved by the Namibian authorities wrt to GEO? We seemed close to a deal (according to the Omar hype), then there was so much interest that the timescales were extended. In this time, we went off to do some further analysis that showed an increase in the prospective output from PEL 94 of 23%.
With GEO only involved in one block (unlike ECO), were we "encouraged" to give away more of our block as a condition of renewal? GEO would then be faced with less than 78% of the block we had originally, so re-looked at the geology and squeezed out an extra 23% to 4.31b barrels. If any goalposts were moved, perhaps this re-analysis puts us back on an even keel in terms of value in the block for GEO?
This is only a wild theory, but perhaps this period of silence has been necessary, to meet the conditions of any license renewal whilst retaining value in the block for GEO and its shareholders? Obviously, my ramblings could also be utter nonsense!