Member Info for gruvgunnar

Maybe it's a linguistic issue, but I don't understand your metaphor about the prison card. You have raised the issue of individual responsibility in investments. That's good. Thank you. We have different approaches to the matter. If you want to discuss the matter further in another forum, I'm happy to do so, but perhaps we've exhausted the issue here. I continue to look forward to your views on ECO's continued operations beyond this discussion.

In Swedish we say "You are on a slippery slope" when you leave the question of who really is responsible for the IDF's actions in Gaza.

It is not enough to have voted for the government in Israel on a previous occasion to be seen as the cause of what is happening in Gaza. It is also not enough to be a resident of Israel. It is also not enough to be, like Zelenskyj in Ukraine, of Jewish descent. It is not enough to claim, like me, that those responsible for the orders carried out in Gaza should be held accountable, but that Israeli citizens or companies in general should not be held accountable. Having that opinion does not make me responsible for what is happening in Gaza. - That is the "slippery slope" you have entered if/when you are going to make your judgments.

There are good reasons to accuse the Israeli government of its genocide. The discussion of how great the abuse is compared to the terrorist act of October 7th, need not be conducted here. The war on Gaza is currently being investigated from a legal perspectiv as to whether it is genocide. It is good that it is being done.

Regardless, this does not mean that we need to end business with individual Israeli citizens or companies. They are not responsible for the horrors being committed in Gaza by the IDF.

Another perspective.

Here is the agreement on Orinduik. Article 8.3 clarifies what happens when the contractor makes a discovery and wants to develop it.

https://dpi.gov.gy/petroleum-agreement-between-the-government-of-the-cooperative-republic-of-guyana-and-tullow-guyana-b-v-and-eco-atlantic-guyana-inc/

The application to convert Jethro into a commercial discovery is now of course strengthened when you have a partner who wants to carry out the actual appraisal drilling.

If any of the Block 1 or Orinduik options are exercised, ECO's cash position will be strengthened. The focus will shift from ECO's cash position to the development of the various prospects.

Block 1 has no mandatory expenses for the first 3 years, but has good timing in terms of South Africa's final implementation of its new legislation in oil exploration. I note that ECO has a larger share here net than in Orinduik after the deal. Whether this is an expression of the counterparty's strength and perception that Orinduik will go our way, or whether Gil sees great potential in Block 1, remains to be seen.

Final summary, this deal is better than the 3b/4b-deal even before the majors have entered into the blocks. We will have more than 5% carried to production.

"CEO's are paid to play the hand they are dealt. "

Agree.

But do not underestimate our management. There are different arenas, and different approaches. What we see in this video is of cours just at piece of the picture. We have bought block 1 cheap for a reason. Will that block be transformed in the coming years it is very interesting.

We are all waiting for the verdict concerning shells concessions. Soon we know. I find the African Energys position dynamic: The verdict will make us aware of witch holes needs to be filled in their upcoming applications.

Jethro's heavy oil, an explanatory text.

https://www.ecooilandgas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/20-11-19_ECO_10_20191120_technicals_on_heavy_oil_Hannam.pdf

Parts of what the judgment against Shell applies to are reasonable to fulfill:

The social consequences for local activities along the coast. A lot of international data is available here.

Of course, it is important that the local population, or its representatives, can express their views.

Preparedness in the event of a blowout is important to clarify.

References to an overall climate benefit during the transition period for phasing out fossil fuels are not just a question of supply, but of real demand in the absence of alternatives during the transition period.

In Swedish mining legislation, there is a distinct difference between the requirements for a processing concession and mining production dito. These are two different stages with completely different cost profiles, which is why they are separated. Simply to make exploration economically possible in a first step.

With that, I believe I have touched on the crucial parts of the judgment issued by the judge that is relevant in the Shell case. The ruling is being appealed by two parties: Shell and, also, the government's Department of Petroleum and Mining Affairs.

We are not there yet, butJethro has the potential to be much larger than Hammerhead, which is why the issue is of interest to several actors, including the government of Guyana.

If regulatory success is to be achieved, data from Hammerhead should reasonably create a new factual basis that gives the application weight.

I think that the election in Guyana has created problems with the time window, but that an agreement that conditions regulatory approval has been established. Why?

1. The time factor. Gil mentioned the election as a delaying factor.

2. The application gains greater weight if a large player with the muscle to realize it is a co-applicant as it gives the application greater relevance.

What does it look like for a major to be a co-applicant for commercialization for Jethro, is it a big risk?

In case of rejection, no risk. In case of production, they can probably, like Exxon in the neighboring block, take all the costs in the first years from the sale of oil.

Remember Tullow had a consulting group to study the issue in 2022. ECO buys out Tullow in 2023, when Total and Qatar leave, ECO starts a new investigation, now with data from the emerging Hammerhead.

PS I am still interested to know if the picture on slide 11 of Hammerhead is data from Exxon after Total left our concession. DS

För de av er som inte talar svenska: "Understand" was a google translate from Swedish that was misleading, better wording in English: "I interpret it as..."

https://oilnow.gy/featured/heavy-oil-find-at-orinduik-block-could-be-developed-with-floating-production-facility-eco/

Think of the different inputs we have here, we, together are the market! :-)

"The issue as an investor is not the potential of the assets but the time to monetise them."

Maybe that there are different perceptions of time in the market. :-) And, what if we, in addition, we in the market, some of us, relate the potential to the time factor. :-)

Exciting on a Sunday afternoon.

I understand that there already may be a completed agreement for Orinduik and that there are regulatory issues that remain regarding approval of Jethro as a commercial find. I guess the Tullow deal is incorporated in the new deal.

As for Hammerhead, we find in the release about the purchase from Tullow a figure of 47 million barrels which is supposed to be a 2C of the 60% share that perhaps referred to Hammerhead?

Exiting times. For some of us.

When was this estimate made, before or after Exxon's seismic survey that we today visually see on slide 11 in the latest presentation?

Like Spudz, I also react to slide 11 in the presentation. Everything is, of course, reduced to a visual question from a bird's eye view without volume assumptions, but ECO's share of Hammerhead probably looks to be a t l e a s t 15%.

https://wp-ecooilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2025/10/ECO_IP-OCT.pdf

Words matter, even in obvious contexts. Exxon is pushing Hammerhead hard toward production, following its final investment decision to proceed with the US$6.8 billion project earlier this month.

When it comes to new projects and earlier-phase permits, given Hammerhead's now-obtained FID, Exxon is now shifting focus to the Longtail gas project.

https://www.guyanastandard.com/2025/10/01/exxonmobil-awards-major-contracts-for-hammerhead-project-in-guyana/

There is a common timing in ECO's and Total's statements about the regulatory process.

My experience tells me that when these statements are made in the middle of the process, they have an impact, but if they are made after a loss, it is just an expression of this. I like the timing of these statements.

I suspect that the agreement on the Namibia concessions is an attempt to speed up that process in light of the above.

I have often wondered why ECO has not clarified the legal conditions that apply in Guyana before a possible extension. One reason could be confidentiality in connection with a deal under negotiation that requires verbal consent from the authorities. To be later determined regulatoryly by the same. The issue is simply sensitive.

In the simple world, everything is simple. That is why we are all very rich. :-)

"Getting the other party to see their own financing....."

Getting the other party to see ECO's own financing...

In a negotiation, you create a type of strength that is an opportunity cost for both parties negotiating. It can be Hammerhead or another path than a single farm-out. Several parties can be involved. Getting the other party to see their own financing as real can be another option. The degree of such financing is about ECO's part after a settlement.

The fact that such an alternative is seen as a possibility by some on these pages means that there may, possibly, be such a perception among the intended negotiating partner. Understandably, a good starting point for ECO's part.

Environmental permits and dates for Total's drilling can provide a financing window for ECO. An announcement about a farm-out / drilling with ECO carried in Guyana before, or after, such an announcement from Total frees the share price to find new levels. - Will a deal on Guyana mean that the person making the deal also chooses to buy a larger stake in ECO given this perspective?

"London-listed junior Eco Atlantic is increasingly optimistic about the exploration potential of an Orange basin block offshore South Africa that it acquired last year.

In June, the company struck a deal with South Africa-based Tosaco Energy to take a 75% operating stake in Block 1, an asset covering almost 20,000 square kilometres, part of which lies adjacent to Shell's non-commercial discoveries in Namibia.

However, perhaps more positively, part of the block is also on geological trend with the more recent discoveries made in Namibia by Galp Energia and Rhino Resources in a shallower water play that, some sources told Upstream, appears to host better reservoirs than those found in the ultra-deepwater by Shell and TotalEnergies."

Https://oilnow.gy/news/we-want-to-see-guyana-succeed-u-s-backs-guyanas-energy-future/

Thunder2040, if you click on my signature there is a presentation held in Oslo where our CEO mentioned that.

(Maybe you have to register at the site first. Test this one. It is the one to the right that contains ECO (also later i Q&A)

Try this one: https://emaileditor.provisoevent.no/web-site/ac1c9777-b267-406e-9412-53ce61dd84bf/pages/webcast)

ECO's partners in 3B/4B have given the company a strong cash position, which will be further strengthened. They have shown with cash that they have confidence that the environmental permit process will be finally approved.

Perhaps the drilling will not take place in October as initially planned. We will see, it could possibly be in Q1 2026.

ECO has final negotiations with three players about Guyana. Perhaps the late announcement here is due to regulatory issues around Hammerhead, we do not know. The rig is contracted and all the drilling permits are there.

Not easy to predict where the price will end up in an official release in one these cases. Or both.

To be or not to be, that may be the question?

Maybe you have to register at the site first. Test this one. It is the one to the right that contains ECO (also later i Q&A)

Try this one: https://emaileditor.provisoevent.no/web-site/ac1c9777-b267-406e-9412-53ce61dd84bf/pages/webcast