How do you know that the assignment agreement does not officially bind Total to ever perform work on a block to prove that block is "in production" better than a PSC when over half the agreement is redacted?
Do you even have a working definition of "in production" to qualify either the PSC or the assignment agreement as meeting the criteria for "in production"?
What makes no sense is that STP didn't wait until Sept to pick up the block without the fuss of an international caveat emptor if there were no extension. Hence, it's logical that there is an extension. Whether ERHC got it with the assignment agreement, a stealth PSC, or some other means, logic dictates they got it.
Krombacher
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
