Member Info for Montmuzard

"Htf would GPT know if there was a gentlemans agreements and a first refusal for GLND to but 80M at the prevailing market price post a successful drill? It wouldnt"

Well, it analysed all the publicly available documents, including the farmout agreement. If there is a "gentleman's agreement" made behind closed doors to sell at the current price, it would surely be legally unenforceable and, I would suggest, at risk of shareholder litigation in the event it came to light.

I’ve reviewed the **FOA (Farm-Out Agreement) language around Clause 10.3**, and your quoted statement is **directionally accurate but needs careful interpretation** — because the *legal effect is much weaker than it sounds*.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2037431/000182912626001442/pelicanholdco_424b3.htm?utm_source=chatgpt.com

---

# ✅ What Clause 10.3 actually does say (substance)

Clause 10.3 provides that:

* **After the Second Transfer (i.e., after earning the 70%)**

* The parties will:

> **“commence negotiations in good faith”**

* For:

> March GL (GLND) to acquire the remaining 30%

* And:

> **“on the same terms as the Pelican Transaction (to the extent such transaction completes)”**

---

# ⚠️ Critical legal interpretation (this is the key point)

### 1) It is **NOT a binding purchase right**

This clause:

* ❌ does **not** give GLND a call option

* ❌ does **not** fix a price

* ❌ does **not** compel 80 Mile to sell

Instead, it is:

* ✅ an **agreement to negotiate**, not an agreement to transact

In legal terms, this is **non-binding on outcome**.

---

### 2) “Good faith negotiations” ≠ obligation to agree

Even with “good faith” language:

* 80 Mile can:

* refuse terms it doesn’t like

* argue conditions have changed

* walk away if no agreement is reached

Courts generally **do not enforce a final deal** from this type of clause — only that parties *engage genuinely in discussions*.

---

### 3) “Same terms as the Pelican Transaction” — not as strong as it looks

This phrase is often misunderstood.

It does **not mean**:

* a guaranteed fixed valuation

* a locked-in price per % interest

It likely refers to:

* **structural terms** (e.g., share-based consideration, listing vehicle, etc.)

* possibly **valuation framework**, but only as a *basis for discussion*

And critically:

* it is conditional:

> “**to the extent such transaction completes**”

So if:

* market conditions change

* GLND trades differently post-IPO

* asset value shifts after drilling

👉 the “same terms” concept becomes **highly negotiable in practice**

---

# 🧠 Bottom line

Your statement is:

### ✔️ **Textually accurate**

Yes — Clause 10.3 does explicitly say that the parties will:

* negotiate in good faith

* for GLND to acquire the remaining 30%

* referencing Pelican transaction terms

---

### ❗ **But economically misleading if taken too strongly**

Because in reality it means:

* There is **no guaranteed buyout**

* There is **no fixed price today**

* There is **no enforceable option**

👉 It is best understood as:

> **“an intention to explore a full buyout later” — not a right to execute one**

---

# 🔍 Practical takeaway (what matters for valuation)

* The 30% retained by 80 Mile is **real, long-term optionality**

* GLND does **not control 100% upside**

* Any future consolidation:

* will likely happen **only after dr

Short answer: **No — based on the disclosed IPO/JV terms, there is no stated right for GLND to buy out 80 Mile’s remaining 30% at either a fixed “current price” or a post-drill market price.**

Here’s what the documents actually say:

### 1) Structure of the deal (what GLND *does* get)

* The Nasdaq vehicle (GLND, via Pelican/March GL) **earns up to 70%** of the Jameson project.

* It does this by **funding 100% of the cost of up to two exploration wells**. ([Investegate][1])

* After completing the earn-in:

* GLND: **70% working interest**

* 80 Mile: **30% retained interest** ([Investegate][1])

👉 This is a classic **farm-in / carry structure**, not an acquisition of 100%.

---

### 2) What happens to the 30%?

* 80 Mile **keeps the 30% interest** through its subsidiary.

* During the earn-in phase, it is effectively **free-carried** (GLND pays for drilling). ([Investegate][1])

---

### 3) Is there a buyout option on that 30%?

From all available disclosures:

* **No explicit option is described** for GLND to:

* buy the remaining 30%

* at a fixed (today’s) valuation

* or at a future valuation (e.g., after drilling)

* The agreement described publicly is limited to:

* **earning 70% via funding wells**

* **leaving 80 Mile with 30%**

There is **no mention of:**

* a call option

* a forced buyout clause

* a pre-agreed pricing mechanism (fixed or market-linked)

---

### 4) What about the “$92m valuation” you’ve seen?

* The ~$92m figure is just an **implied valuation of the 30% stake** based on the IPO structure. ([80mile.com][2])

* It is **not stated as a contractual purchase price** or option strike.

---

### Bottom line

* GLND’s right is **to earn 70% by funding drilling**.

* 80 Mile **retains 30% with no disclosed obligation to sell**.

* Any future acquisition of that 30% would likely require:

* a **new negotiated transaction**, and

* presumably at **then-prevailing value**, not a pre-fixed IPO price.

---

[1]: https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/rns/80-mile--80m/greenland-energy-to-commence-trading-after-17-mar/9449936?utm_source=chatgpt.com "Greenland Energy to Commence Trading After 17 Mar"

[2]: https://www.80mile.com/regulatory-news/84133?utm_source=chatgpt.com "80 Mile Receives U$500000 from JV Partner"

Sorry, I was responding to Nate, not GLR.

@GLR1990: I can see why it would make sense for GLND, but I struggle to see why 80m would negotiate it. Their 30% will be worth a stonking amount in the event of a big strike, and for GLND it makes no difference whether they're paying $92m or $500m if that is being priced in for a sell-on to a major. Plus, GLND have already received 70% for (relative) peanuts so I would be astonished if 80m had negotiated their remaining bonanza for not much more when it could be worth an awful lot more.

"He didnt say that at all he clearly says they have an exclusive option to buy 80M 30% stake at the IPO price, which means zero upside unless he is talking absolute rubbish..."

What he actually said was: "We have an exclusive option to buy their 30% out at the current valuation of the IPO which, upon a discovery, would be very positive". Again, it's a poor choice of words, but it's obvious what he meant if you follow the logic. He didn't mean the IPO currently. He meant the prevailing value of GLND at the time of an attempt to buy out the 80m share. Otherwise why mention a discovery? The scale of any discovery is irrelevant if he meant that GLND could buy 80m out for whatever tomorrow's price is.

Also, why would 80m have signed up to anything else? It's still their licence for now: the 70% that GLND control is earned through financing the drill, the trade off from which is that 80m get exposure to the immediate upside from a big strike for their remaining 30%. If GLND want to secure it, they pay market prices.

All the exclusivity means is that 80m have to give GLND first refusal. It's obvious what the endgame is: they strike big, prove the asset, GLND sees its MCap rise to a billion or two, and at that point a major sweeps in with an offer, once GLND have bought up 80m's 30%.

"...and he also said this gives glnd massive upside potential, there wouldnt be any upside if he had to pay face value"

Of course there would. If 80m's 30% share is worth, say, $500m in 18 months' time, it implies that GLND has an MCap of about $1.6bn. GLND then buys them out for that much money and, in return, gets exclusive access to an oilfield with c.13bn barrels of oil in it. It's not like the value of the company rerates to the total in-ground value of the suspected oil (which would be $1.3tn at current prices) and so the gap between $500m and a whatever can be extracted from a 30% share of $1.3tn minus costs, taxes and depreciation (which will be huge in Greenland) is the margin that GLND will profit from (or, rather, what the major that buys out 100% of GLDN/80m will profit from). It's still tens, if not hundreds of billions potentially.

See slide 9 of the corporate presentation: https://www.80mile.com/sites/default/files/2026-01/80M%20Corporate%20Presentation%20v4.pdf

Why would 80m connect their 30% ownership to 3.9bn barrels of oil if they could only realise $90m of that value? Also, I struggle to see why either side would negotiate such a restrictive agreement that determined the price of a buyout now in a context where nobody knows, for sure, what is there. It's too risky for everyone on both the up and the downside. Much better to discover whether there's really 13bn barrels, and, once confirmed, make sure everyone gets paid for it.

He clearly meant prevailing price (then) rather than current price (now). It was a poor choice of words but it’s clear he meant that GNLD have first refusal on 80m's 30% at the current value of the offering at the moment they choose to execute the option.

I mean, why would 80m have negotiated a free carry if they weren’t going to profit from it? Why would they give up the licence on the basis of today’s price long before any oil was drilled? Makes no sense logically. Plus, MMs were always going to try a drop to spook people at 2.30pm today

Can sell a big chunk for 1.66 - this goes higher still today IMO

Share price rising nice and steadily - 1.44 to sell, 1.48 to buy now.

Looking primed for a strong afternoon session. The real spread is 1.37-1.45 at the moment and any buying pressure now takes us beyond 1.50. Only 2m shares available at 1.45 and once they clear it's blue skies.

“ Greenland’s Untested Oil Basin Could Be the Next Big Discovery”

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Greenlands-Untested-Oil-Basin-Could-Be-the-Next-Big-Discovery.html

1.37 to buy even small amounts after a bit of churn first thing. We'll be heading towards 1.50 shortly IMO.

1.25 paid. MMs reporting late trades from earlier to make it look like SP is dropping. Games.

Yet both feet are already over 11p again.

It's also entirely predictable that the derampers turn up at the exact moment the MMs are trying to shake.

Still strong buying - 64 in sight

You what? The most recent buy has just gone through at 61.2p. The bid-ask is presently 58-62.

Massive volume again straight out the gate - bid over 12p already

Looking at L2, there's very little on the book this morning between the mid-11s and just shy of 14p.

Funding process advancing towards term sheets 👀