http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-10/south-africa-s-vague-oil-law-changes-seen-deterring-investment.html

This is why someone should ask Philip O'Quigley what his opinion is towards South African exploration laws. No company in their right mind will invest millions if there are powers in place that could shut down operations. Say some environmental activist pours oil down a well, collects a sample, turns it in, and the powers that be immediately shutdown exploration. That type of situation can't happen in the US because the source of the pollution must be, without a doubt, connected to the activity. South African laws don't, at least not in their current form, speak that language. It seems to me that the South African government wants companies to put a lot of risk on the line, and money, for nothing more than a confirmation of resources. Then, back to debate the real laws they want in place. As we all know, seismic comes first to identify targets, and if you remember the Hess figures, it does not come cheap. Vague laws equal risk to a company. If the legislative environment becomes too uncertain, the big oil companies won't commit to anything long term. I would rather get O'Quigley opinon on the matter than watch Chevron hesitate on signing any deal with Falcon.