Describe Qualitatively How the Financing of the Field System Differs from the Financing of the Export System

The 3.7 billion USD was planned to be developed in two parts: the Field System – 1,5 billion USD used to extract oil in Chad and a Export System – 2,2 billion USD – to trasport the oil to the coast. The sponsors agreed to buy all of the output at market prices in proportion to their ownership shares. Corporate financing would be used to finance the Field System and project finance was decided for the Export System.

This structure facilitated equity participation by the host governments and issuance of limited-recourse debt by the pipeline companies (the sponsors would guarantee debt repayment only until completion of the project). An unincorporated joint venture known as the Upstream Consortium would own and finance the Field System. The proposed structure included 2,3 billion USD of equity of which 2,2 billion USD would come from the private sponsors.

The IBRD (member of WB) would lend 77 milion USD and EIB would lend 42 million USD to the host countries in order to finance their equity stakes. The 1,4 billion USD of the project debt would come from three sources: IFC, two credit agencies (Coface and US Exim)and the capital markets (in bonds). IFC would grant 2 loans – one of 100 million USD for its own account and second one of 300 million USD for syndication to other institutions. The two ECA’s would arrange a bank financing of 600 million USD. COTCO and TOTCO would issue 400 million USD in bonds with leverage ratios of 62% and 64% respectively. Production would end by 2032 and the project would end.

The returns were driven by the oil price and volume assumtions. Even based on the assumtion of reduced price than average (due to acidic, corrosive nature of the Doba Basin oil), the price was well above the project costs of 5,2 USD per barrel. The revenues distribution to Chad, Cameroon and private sponsors would come in form of royalities, taxes and dividends. Chad’s returns are basically dependent from project revenues, while Cameroon’s returns are function of a pipeline volume.

FIELD SYSTEMEXPORT SYSTEMPROJECT VALUE1,5 billion USD2,2 billion USDCOMPONENTS300 wells in the three fieldswith reserve of 917x 106 barrels

Treatment facility

Operations centre670 miles long pipeline crossing two countries (Chad and Cameroon) Monitoring systemA stationaryTYPE OF FINANCINGCorporate financingProject financing with private public partnership OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE100% owned by private sponsors (Exxon/Mobile, Petronas and Chevron) No debt, founding completely from equity

Shared ownership:A) Tchad pipeline – 89% private sponsors, 11% Government of Chad B) Cameroon pipeline – 85% private sponsors, 5% Government of Chad, 10% Government of Cameroon Founded through combination of debt and equity. Equity comes from Private sponsors, debt comes from involvement of Word Bank and its entities RETURN RATES/

PAYBACKHigh return rates, pay-back already in 2009Longer payback –(lower return rates)