Sable Offshore Corp. has bought itself a little more time.

Coming off a week of controversies and setbacks to its goal of restarting oil production along the Gaviota Coast, Sable has rebounded as the company raised $250 million to extend its loan with ExxonMobil.

The company announced in a filing on Monday that it secured $250 million in funding, which it will use for “general corporate purposes.” The revenue was raised by selling off 45,454,546 shares of its common stock to private investors.

The company will receive the $250 million before agent fees and other expenses. 

Company leaders informed investors that they needed to raise that amount by the end of the year to extend their loan with ExxonMobil. Most of the money for Sable’s acquisition of the Santa Ynez Unit came from an ExxonMobil loan.

The company took over the assets in 2024, including offshore platforms, a Gaviota Coast processing facility, and transportation pipelines through Santa Barbara County. The pipelines include the former Plains All American Line 901, which ruptured in 2015 and caused the Refugio oil spill. ExxonMobil purchased the pipeline from Plains All American, and then transferred it to Sable.

Sable hopes to restart production and resume processing, transporting and selling oil. The company submitted a restart plan to the Office of the State Fire Marshal in September, and the office is reviewing it.

Sable told investors that if it did not raise the funds by the end of 2025, the unit would revert back to ExxonMobil.

Even though Sable had hoped to restart production by the end of 2024, it has run into legal challenges and resistance from regulatory agencies and environmental activists. 

Sable still needs final restart approval from the OSFM, and the office has said there is no timeline for when it may be approved. The company also needs to transfer permits from Santa Barbara County for the pipelines. 

The company also has clashed with the California Coastal Commission over alleged unpermitted pipeline construction in the coastal zone. Sable tried to justify the work by saying that permits it held from the 1980s allowed the company to do repair and maintenance, but a Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge found that the construction went beyond the scope of the permits. 

Insider Trading Allegations

The new funding this week comes soon after the company faced allegations of insider trading. An article by business news outlet Hunterbrook Media claimed that it had received a leaked recording of Sable CEO Jim Flores telling select investors that the company would have to raise millions of dollars in equity by the end of 2025.

The recordings were allegedly shared in a group chat between select investors, including pro golfer Phil Mickelson. He later responded to the article on X, saying that Hunterbrook was “manipulating the market through wrongful and slanderous insinuation.”

Some of the leaked information was seemingly confirmed when company executives announced in an investor call that Sable would need to raise the $225 million by the end of the year, according to a report from the Houston Chronicle.

Sable also announced on Nov. 3 that a committee would be conducting an independent review of the leaks.

Company share values reportedly dropped by nearly 40% after the investor call, but have rebounded since then.

County Vote Rejects Permit Transfer

Days after the allegations were made public, Sable faced another defeat when the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 to deny a permit transfer for the company.

Some local permits for the Santa Ynez Unit are still assigned to ExxonMobil, the previous owner.

The Nov. 4 vote was the second time the supervisors discussed the transfer. The board deadlocked at a 2-2 vote in February after Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann recused herself.

Sable sued the county to challenge the lack of action from that vote. A Superior Court judge decided against the transfer but instructed the Board of Supervisors to discuss the issue again until a decision was made. 

Even though the transfer of the permits is usually a simple clerical process, local environmental groups appealed the transfer by claiming that Sable did not have the experience to maintain the Santa Ynez Unit or the funds to clean up any potential spills.

Critics also cited the unpermitted work on the pipeline.

Sable was issued cease-and-desist letters by the California Coastal Commission over the work in late 2024, but continued to conduct construction in the coastal zone. The commission later fined Sable $18 million over the construction and for ignoring its enforcement notices.

During this month’s meeting of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Steve Lavagnino voted against the permit transfer and criticized Sable for its recent actions.

Lavagnino originally voted in favor of the transfer but said that much had changed since February — specifically, Sable’s unpermitted construction and the allegations of insider trading.

Lavagnino continued by accusing Sable of trying to bulldoze the permitting process.

“Right or wrong, oil is held to an even higher standard here,” Lavagnino said. “But without spilling a single drop of oil, Sable has managed to push back the reputation of the industry 20 years.”