Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Yes. It is done in Belize all the time at remote wellsites, where mains electricity doesn't reach.
Update from Belize.
Not many new facts on the board recently so here are some.
Drove past the San Juan #3 well site today.
Treaty were not drilling.
It is a long weekend here in Belize (today is Sovereign's day) and I was been advised that they have given the crew the weekend off. They only have one crew and operate 12 hours a day.
It was encouraging to see that the logging unit has been moved to SJ 3 wellsite and positioned ready to log, so - in my opinion - they may be near TD (2800 ft - I understand).
See photo of wellsite taken at 2:08pm today.
Read it!
Responses to questions. All facts (except where flagged).
--------------------------------------
Thanks for your answers it helps to clear things up for me! Was SJ-1 left open by Treaty? No. The first well SJ 2 was left shut-in with openhole between reaching TD in late January 2012 and logging it in mid-April 2012. In my opinion that was unprofessional - as during that time the well collapsed underground which prevented the logging tool getting down. Treaty rectified this themselves later (drilled out to TD and logged) And how does the SJ-2 private landowner now clean up the mess from the Treaty well collapsing...will that cost much to do and will the landowner be responsible? Nothing to do with the landowner. The collapse was downhole and rectified by Treaty as per my comment above
TD your posts are normally good but this one is off the mark.
I said what I said and you cannot put other words into my mouth.
Please stick to the facts.
------------------------------------------------------
The Judges judgment didn't apply to just offshore. It actually applied to 6 Offshore PSAs The judgment he gave said that the concessions were illegal, null and void was based on the fact that a proper EIA was not done (before awarding the concession) and that the concessions were awarded without using a competitive bidding process also awarded to company's that may not be qualified to do the work or have the resources to deal with a emergency.
And are you saying that Treaty just up and walk away and left the hole in a environmentally unsafe state? No. Read my post again That sounds typical of Treaty. (In your opinion not mine) Again very unprofessional. (In my opinion it is more unprofessional of you to have this opinion of Treaty's Operations in Belize from a remote location. You must not have read the words in my previous post about Treaty doing things to Interntaional Petroleum Industry Standards now on SJ 3)
Ref your questions, I am not a lawyer but I will answer from my understanding.
My responses are highlighted in your text below.
___________________________________________
Belize Oilwatch, do you have to have a license, concession, or an agreement with the Belize government to drill and ship oil from a well in Belize? Yes What happens if Treaty strikes oil and the court hearing upholds the earlier injunction and adds Treaty Energy to it? I guess they would lose their rights to it - as would Princess who own 50% Does the government of Belize own all the mineral rights to land there or does each property owner own whatever they find? Government of Belize Does the Belize government own the land SJ 3 is on or is it privately owned. SJ 1 &2 were on private land, I guess SJ 3 is too.
___________________________________________
And I have a few other things to add here:
- Treaty are drilling ONSHORE in a concession that was described as OFFSHORE and as such declared Null and Void in the legal judgement with an injunction granted against a Minister of the Government of Belize to stop work. [Fact] This might cause some issues for the legal people and a dilemma for the environmentalists. [Opinion] As Charles Dickens said in Oliver Twist "Sometimes the law is an ass"!
- Before the injunction, Treaty were doing a good job drilling SJ 3 here to International Standards. [Opinion based on what I saw with my own eyes]
- It is technically and morally wrong to leave SJ 3 shut-in with open hole while the various legal teams battle it out - as this compromises the integrity and value of the well. [Opinion based on experience and the fact that SJ 2 collapsed when left shut-in with open hole earlier]
I know - but I am a Certified Petroleum Engineer and I am going to keep an open mind and not going to jump to conclusions based on no (or little) data or heresay.
I am going to visit the SJ #3 wellsite again on May 27th at the invitation of Treaty and will be able to see where they have got to by then.
I am also looking forward to end 2012 10-K and 1Q 2013 8-K issue as those reports gives a lot of information about what is going on for the comapny as a whole (actual production and funding).
Whatever we think of Treaty in the past, all we can try and do is help them with our skills and experience in the present, to make a better future.
SJ #2 both had oil shows and zones of interest but SJ #1 results were hampered by lost circulation - according to a source close to Treaty in Belize.
SJ #1 and #2 were not tested pending results of SJ #3, which I understand is now drilling again (according to Belize media).
This is wildcat drilling at its best. Having the balls to drill a well - as there is no other way to find oil in an unexplored region.
Where are Treaty Old Press Releases Available?
In moving to the new website, Treaty seem to have removed a lot of their historical Press Releases. For example their Belize oil strike press release of January 30th 2012 no longer seems to be on their website.
Does anyone know where I can find Treaty PRs from before the new website was implemented on March 27th 2013?
There has been no announcement here that Treaty are drilling again. I live in Belize City 137 miles from the well site so I cannot verify with my own eyes whether they are or not.
I am planning to go diving in Placencia towards the end of the month and I will get the opportunity to drive past the SJ #3 wellsite then.
Latest 10-K in last 4 years was June 13th 2012.
The 10-Q for first quarter 2012 was filed June 26th.
There is still some time to go until we are later than those issue timings.
Although lack of NT 10-Q filing on May 15th is worrying.
It stands for Luczywo.
I have his card from when I met him in Belize on September 14th 2011.
I don't think he has been here since Max Mohamed arrived in Belize at the time of logging SJ#1 well in April 2012.
Belice is the Guatemalan (Spanish) name for Belize and this country doesn't belong to them, so it is very insulting to use that word for Belize - unless your whole post is in Spanish. I suggest you get a new mapmaker.
I haven't seen any shareholder approval requested by Treaty Board or given by Treaty Shareholders for any of the spending.
We all want a better economy for Belize. And Treaty exploring onshore for oil and finding some oil would no doubt do that - I just wish they did a better job of exploration like shooting seismic first and then drilling and logging wells in line with International Petroleum Standards. They started by just pouring your money into useless equipment (and people) shipped from the USA and then into the Belize ground. In SJ#3 at last Treaty were starting to do the drilling right (professionally) but still the Treaty rep on site told me that they had no clue where they were geologically.
And for just your information the current Government of Belize was re-elected in February 2012 with a vastly reduced majority. Link to election result
There were too many cabinet posts for the 2/3 allowed of the elected candidates of the winning party, so the PM had to make his own appointments of Senators for the other posts, including the Oil and Environment potfolios. Link to Cabinet Appointments
Now I start to see the similarity between Treaty in Texas and Belize.
In both places Treaty are spending (or "planning to spend") your (shareholder's) money in drilling wells that Treaty have no clear beneficial interest in.
In Texas, the Brown well was drilled and whatever the outcome, before it was put online, Treaty lost their permit to be an operator in Texas.
In Texas, the Mitchell lease belongs to US Fuels, the operation is being carried out under US Fuels name (as in the LOI Press Release, Treaty acknowledge Treaty "No longer intends to operate its own wells") and the economic benefit to Treaty is not yet agreed. Not something I would enjoy spending my money on.
In Belize (not Belice please people as you really piss off Belizeans and me if you say that), there is no Production Sharing Agreement or concession in place so all the mineral rights belong to the Government of Belize, and we thank you if you decide to use your money to finish your well for our benefit.
I am not normally interested in what Treaty are doing in Texas - but in the case of this post, I'll make an exception!
And what happened to the Brown well?
Hope someone is keeping Eyes on Texas....as I am on Belize.
Personally I am worried about Mitchell #3 as:
- Good wells don't need to swabbed for days to come in and clean-up
- Normally oil companies would agree the terms of any over-riding royalty agreement well in advance of spending the money and getting production
Just to be clear on the Belize position - as so many misleading posts are being put up here. The facts below indicate:
1) Princess do not have an oil concession in Belize (so neither does Treaty)
2) An injunction has been issued by a Belize Supreme Court judge to cease all operations on the 6 PSAs that were declared null and void (so - in my view - it would be an illegal act by Treaty to resume drilling until their onshore oil rights had been legally established in a court of law)
3) Belizeans don't want offshore oil (in my view due to concerns about the environmental impact)
4) Belizeans and the Belize Coalition to Save Our Natural Heritage (which includes both Oceana and COLA) want onshore oil (in my view because they understand that their country's economy would greatly benefit from it)
-----------------------------------------------------
Background Info - The Facts
The below are just facts, with anything marked "in my view" being an opinion.
6 PSAs with Offshore Acreage have been declared Null and Void
On 16th April 2013, Supreme Court Justice Legall ruled for multiple reasons that 6 Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs) issued by previous and current Governments in Belize were null and void. Oceana in Belize, Citizens Organised for Liberty through Action (COLA) and The Belize Coalition to Protect Our Natural Heritage brought the court action against the Minister of Natural Resources and the Environment. The list of PSAs included that held by Princess Petroleum Ltd, which licenced the company to explore on 1.8 million acres offshore (of which 500,000 acreas were relinquished in November 2012) and 200,000 acres onshore. The judge also issued an injunction against the defendant, their servants and agents (in my view including Princess Petroleum and Treaty Energy Belize) that all work should stop on these PSAs.
Oceana Belize, who's VP spoke in the press conference of 8th May, is set up to Protect the Oceans
By their own statement, Oceana is:
MARINE-FOCUSED: Oceana is 100 percent dedicated to fighting on behalf of oceans.
GLOBAL: We have campaign offices in North America, South America, Central America and Europe.
CAMPAIGN-DRIVEN: We channel our resources towards a limited number of strategic, directed campaigns to achieve measurable outcomes that will help return our oceans to former levels of abundance. Some of our campaigns are regional, others are international.
FACT-BASED: We believe in the importance of science in identifying problems and solutions.
Oceana Belize is Supportive of Onshore Oil Exploration and Development
The Oceana Belize VP at the press conference also strayed onto the subject of Treaty's press release of 7th May 2013, stating that they planned to restart onshore drilling in Belize. Her comments about this and about PM Dean Barrow's statements in the press following the judgement were (in my view) driven by the fact that she is an Attorney-at-law as in the PM. I know for a fact that she has in the past publically supported onshore oil exploration and development in Belize.
The Belize Coalition to Protect Our Natural Heritage Supports Onshore Oil Exploration and Development
I quote:
Belize Coalition to Save Our Natural Heritage
An organization dedicated to the planned development of Belize's petroleum industry, outside of economically and environmentally sensitive areas of Belize (offshore and protected areas).
Mission
To serve as a channel for the voice of the people through advocacy, education, research and actions, which promote the best interest of Belize and its people
In February 2012 the Coalition Organised a Peoples Referendum that Showed That 96% of the Belizeans who voted Don't Want Offshore Oil
At a press conference in late Febraury 2012, the Coalition released the result of the People’s Referendum which showed that 29,235 registered voters voluntarily visited the 51 polling stations across the country to cast their vote. Of the 29, 235 voters, 96% or 28,208 voted against exploration and drilling offshore.
Oceana keeps "Eyes and Ears Open" For Energy Company Drilling Operations.
Article from Amandala Belize Newspaper - May 10th 2013.
Link to article
More Belize News From Channel 7.
OCEANA Says GOB Should Stop Treaty Energy
Other Interesting News from Belize this morning. From Channel 5 News.
OCEANA may seek injunction against Treaty Energy for continued drilling
Press conference happened yesterday (Wednesday May 8th).
This is the link to the transcript from Love TV:
Wednesday, May 8 ----------- Oceana Explains Supreme Court Ruling
Treaty / US Fuel Deatils Released this morning.
Press Release from Ihub
Letter of Intent
The latter mentions overriding royalty in favour of US Fuels but has no details of the production thresholds or %.
Not a fact I have yet heard in Belize.
Is what you posted the truth...if so please provide facts to support your statement.
The Government of Belize does plan on appealing the April 16, 2013 decision of Justice Oswell Legall in which he declared six offshore petroleum concessions to be “unlawful, null and void,” - Amandala Newspaper reported in their Sunday May 5th 2013 edition published in Belize City.
Link to Full Article
No word yet from the Minister of Energy, Science & Techology and Public Utilities or Geology and Petroleum Division in Government of Belize on any separate plans for onshore part of Princess concession where Treaty is drilling SJ-3.
Main oil industry news in "Government" newspaper published today is about a delay in Maranco well completion / testing due to water ingress that has to be plugged off and cement isolated before they can continue. Nothing in that paper about Treaty or Princess.
Three other weekly papers come out tomorrow.
I rely on these for updates rather than watching TV news every night.
I have news from Belize that I can't share with you due to the mistrust and abuse I receive from others on this board.
I have had this news since yesterday morning.
I am not sure why Treaty are not sharing it with you. Please chase Treaty PR to get an update.
GoB "only 2 were left at time of judgement".
See link.
Government of Belize to Appeal
We respect the Supreme Court of this nation. I hope you do too.
For your information appeals of Supreme Court decisions in Belize no longer go to the Privy Council in the UK, since 2010 they go to the Caribbean Court of Justice. See link.
Belize Says Goodbye to Privy Council
No. The defendants (Minister of Natural Resources and Environment) has to pay the legal costs of the applicants in the court case (Oceana Belize, COLA and The Belize Coalition to Save Our Natural Heritage).
First Press Report of the Judgement is now in.
See attached link to San Pedro Sun newspaper webpage.
San Pedro Sun April 16th 2013 offshore-oil-contracts-are-null-and-void
The link was provided, at my request, by the Executive Director of one of the Claimants in the court claim.
Princess Petroleum Ltd has one Production Sharing Agreement with the Government of Belize (GoB), containing both onshore and offshore acreage (there are not two separate concessions).
The judgement today is not against Princess, it is against the GoB.
I understand that without a legal agreement work cannot be carried out on any of the 6 named concessions.
As I said previously, I am not an attorney so I am not clear where this leaves the Princess/Treaty onshore exploration activity in Belize on a legal basis, however as a retired oilman and Belize resident I would like to see Treaty continuing with their onshore exploration plans as long as they continue to work to International Petroleum Industry Standards - as required by the Petroleum Act of 2000.
Link to the Judgement. Posted again as requested..
I have tested last time and this time and it works for me from the IHub post. Hope this works for you thos time.
Can't do better than this unless someone helps.
Belize Court Judgement April 16th 2013 Justice Legall
And today was that later date.
Sorry for any confusion on your part - there was no confusion on mine.
The Princess Petroleum PSA under which all activities onshore and offshore are carried our has been declared null and void. Exactly what this means for Princes/Treaty San Juan #3 well drilling is unclear to me.
Details of the judgement are in the attached link (hope I have embedded it properly)
Belize Court Judgement April 16th 2013 Justice Legall
I understand an injunction to cease work was also issued by the court.
Full story will be on the TV news here in Belize tonite and in the written news transcipts tomorrow.
News was too late for today's bi-weekly paper and we have no daily papers in Belize.
Princess Petroleum Agreement Declared Null and Void
I have just been advised by a reliable and well respected Belizean source, that minutes ago Belize Court Justice Llegal declared that six production sharing agreements (offshore oil contracts - including that held by Princess Petroleum) are unlawful, null and void in that they were awarded without competitive bidding, the companies were unqualified, they were in breach of the Fisheries Act, the National Parks System Act and moreover the companies failed to comply with the erroneous contract.
I am not sure where that leaves Treaty's onshore exploration activity on the Princess Concession - ask Treaty PR.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but I think you should be among the first to know.
10-K Annual Report SEC Filing dates for the last 4 years have been:
2012 June 13th
2011 April 15th
2010 April 15th
2009 March 31st
Don't hold your breath, keep breathing until it comes..
On TRRC I have no knowledge or opinion.
I agree penny companies need to celebrate success but I am just concerned to make sure that it is genuine success that is being celebrated - as for penny companies the temptation is even greater (IMO) to overstate success to boost shareprice for speculative reasons.
My other points more clearly stated are:
(1) Even a penny company needs to do the basic things in the oil industry well and not endure too many delays and doing things over which cost money
(2) Lots of people make positive forward looking statements whereas I look at real peformance - financial as reported to SEC and operational as reported in PRs by TECO and in photos by others like yourself
(3) Cash Flow Positive is a much mis-used term and much mis-understood in business (not just in the oil industry).
- Even in a company as small as TECO you cannot isolate a specific area like W Texas and get a realistic view of how well the company is doing on a cashflow basis based only on that one area. As if you just consider one area you will be missing cash drains on Teco like their relatively large overhead expenses and other cash drains like investment in Belize.
- Also TECO accounting is getting very complex (the reason for delayed 10-Q and K reports IMO) with so many funding schemes like royalties, equity sales and rights sales on wells that we think are TECO's which would reduce the actual cashflow impact on TECO even when the barrels are coming
- And strategically, you would probably want a penny start-up company to be cash neutral not cash positive with cash generated from operations being invested in growing the company instead of being distributed. And with Profit (calculated in line with accepted guidelines) giving a better indication of company financial health.