It’s always interesting to compare the high bids with the “runner-up” bids on the same tracts. Usually the gap is large and, as indicated in the table below, that is the case with the Sale 261 “top 10.” This tells us that bidding is independent, that tract evaluation is far from an exact science, that information and expert opinions differ, and that companies have different business and bidding strategies.
Particularly interesting in this sale were the tracts that both Hess and Chevron, its future parent, sought to acquire. Chevron and Hess bid against each other on two of the “top 10” tracts, and Hess outbid Chevron by wide margins. Will this affect post-merger relationships? 😉
In a future post, we’ll look at the 14 rejected Sale 259 high bids and the bidding on these tracts in Sale 261.
| block | high bid (million $) | company | 2nd highest bid (million $) | company |
| MC 389 | 25.5 | Anadarko | 1.9 | LLOG |
| GC 188 | 21.0 | Hess | 4.8 | Chevron |
| GC 151 | 18.0 | Hess | 3.0 | Anadarko |
| GC 723 | 17.2 | Anadarko (55%) Chevron (45%) | 2.0 | Equinor |
| GC 116 | 14.0 | Hess | 7.5 | Anadarko |
| GC 722 | 12.0 | Equinor | 1.4 | Chevron (55%) Anadarko (45%) |
| GC 72 | 7.5 | Hess | single bidder | |
| GC 232 | 7.0 | Hess | 1.1 | Chevron |
| GB 701 | 6.7 | Shell | single bidder | |
| KC 210 | 5.3 | Shell | single bidder |
Bud's Offshore Energy (BOE) 