Member Info for Leafie

There is obviously politics at play in Sarawak, but everything we have been told points to UPL getting the PSC. If the PSC had been rejected, UPL would have been required to announce it. The single Petros article was an opportunity for a team of shorters to spread fear and panic to their benefit. Unfortunately it doesn't help UPL have never taken much care with their RNS's, but others analyse every phase and comma placement and that they now find themselves unable to tell shareholders what they believe will happen until Petros is aligned with the Government.

Expect the shorters to be here again when the market opens, unless of course they're overbought and decide to ramp.instead.

@shamI89 So there is no doubt. I disagree with everything you say. It has no foundation.

Getting tiresome now.

Why do you care?

.....because the application HAS NOT BEEN REJECTED. UPL are in discussion with Petros AND the Government with the GOVERNMENT DECIDING.

Sorry @shamI89 I don't think paying attention or maybe you do so deliberately.

@shamI89 No application has been rejected. You're making it up.

...getting agitated. They want sellers so they can close their positions at a low price.

Does is have "solid reasons to refuse the application"?

Maybe the Government have told UPL it'll be awarded, but they need to break the news to Petros first.....

Oh yeah, "professional processes". lol.

Bid rounds are for CCS. Jeez.

Blimey, where have you been @Barno61?

We don't know how this change came about, but it's in line with UPL now. Petros made the statement, not the Government,

THIS:

UK independent Upland Resources has been dealt a blow with the Sarawak, Malaysia, state government announcing that the exploration asset for which it has spent months trying to finalise a production sharing contract is to be offered via open bidding.

Upland had been well advanced in its plans to secure a farm-in partner for onshore Block SK 344 and had already identified a rig for exploration drilling, which had been expected in 2025.

WAS CHANGED TO THIS:

UK independent Upland Resources has been dealt a blow with Sarawak state oil and gas company Petros stating that the exploration asset for which it has spent months trying to finalise a production sharing contract is to be offered via open bidding.

Upland had been well advanced in its plans to secure a farm-in partner for Block SK 344 onshore Sarawak, East Malaysia, and had already identified a rig for exploration drilling, which had been expected in 2025.

AND THIS:

Following Petros’ statement that it now planned to offer the block for competitive bidding, the UK independent said it reached out to the state government, which it described as “the final authority for onshore oil and gas assets in Sarawak”.

WAS CHANGED TO THIS:

Following Petros’ statement that it now planned to offer the block for competitive bidding, the UK independent said it had reached out to the state government, which it described as “the final authority for onshore oil and gas assets in Sarawak”.

ADDED:

Corrected in the first paragraph to confirm it was Petros, rather than the Sarawak state government, which had issued the statement that mentioned Block SK 334 was to be offered for competitive bidding.

Not->now

Thanks @Coldspy I've not got a cached version. One moment please.....

@Coldspy Do you know what was changed? If UPL complained it could be a massive clue to know what was removed.

If you like ChatGPT---->

The scenario where Upland Resources (UPL) could be awarded a PSC for the whole block initially, with PETROS later opening specific parts of the block to competitive bidding while UPL retains a revenue share or other benefits, aligns well with several strategic interests and practices in the industry. Here's why this is plausible:

1. Strategic Alignment with PETROS: PETROS aims to maximize the development of Sarawak's hydrocarbon resources. Awarding a PSC to UPL for the entire block initially allows PETROS to leverage UPL's expertise and investment in exploring and developing the block. Later, competitive bidding for specific parts of the block can attract additional investment and technological capabilities from other companies, further enhancing resource development​ (ADVFN)​​ (Financial Times)​.

2. Risk Mitigation and Investment Attraction: By granting UPL an initial PSC, PETROS can mitigate the risk associated with the early stages of exploration and development. Once initial discoveries are made and the potential of the block is better understood, PETROS can open specific parts to competitive bidding. This approach allows PETROS to attract more investment and potentially more advanced technologies for the development of the block while ensuring that UPL, as the initial developer, benefits from their early investment and efforts through a revenue share or other financial arrangements​ (ADVFN)​​ (Financial Times)​.

3. Industry Practices: It is not uncommon in the oil and gas industry for governments or state-owned enterprises to adopt such dual strategies. Initial PSCs may cover large areas with the understanding that successful early exploration and development will lead to more focused, competitive engagement for specific high-potential areas within the block. This ensures a balanced approach to resource development, investment distribution, and risk management​ (ADVFN)​​ (Financial Times)​.

4. Regulatory and Economic Benefits: This approach allows the state to ensure that the development of resources is carried out efficiently and effectively, with an initial operator (UPL) de-risking the project. Subsequent competitive bidding can ensure that the most capable companies develop specific areas, potentially bringing in higher revenues and more robust economic benefits for the state​ (ADVFN)​​ (Financial Times)​.

@lovelife Yep, that's why I refer to dickyboyholmez who wrote:

"It is quite likely that UPL could be awarded a PSC for the whole block initially, with Petros later opening specific parts of the block to competitive bidding while UPL retains a revenue share or other benefits from the overall block. This dual approach aligns with Petros’ strategy for competitive engagement and UPL’s expectation of a significant role in the block’s development."

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/dickyboyholmez/

@shamI89 Well, we each have our views.

One view is the Company aren't going get through the AGM without the apparent conflicting information being resolved, the other is there is no conflicting information ant it'll play out as dickyboyholmez suggests.

I'm with the latter and believe the Company is trapped in a position where it knows it has a high probability of a particular sequence of events, but is unable to disclose it.

Unfortunately there are other actors in play with their own motives to muddy things.