+- ShareholdersUnite Forums (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: Companies (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: InterOil Forum (http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) (/showthread.php?tid=4445)
Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Petrovale - 08-19-2013
Journalists who publish unconfirmed reports citing unnamed "industry sources"
tend to compromise the profession by disseminating gossip...This is not to say
that the gossip is untrue, but that the journalist likes to speak before his turn...
Petrovale
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Mainstream reporting is ‘dead’: OPINION |
 |
|
Blair Price Monday, 19 August 2013 OUR ‘exclusive’ story on InterOil on Friday was widely misreported by other media, which helped caused its shares to slide by 12% before common sense kicked in. It closed down 3.2% in what was the stock’s highest-volume trading day for this calendar year, as buyers realised an overreaction had taken place. The report in question from PNGIndustryNews.net was specifically based on news from an industry source that the exclusive negotiations period over a possible PNG transaction between ExxonMobil and InterOil had expired. The significance of this news was that such a development would allow InterOil to also host negotiations with other parties interested in its Elk-Antelope discoveries in PNG. It did not mean that negotiations between Exxon and InterOil over this gas field were over. However, this was the message that was frighteningly run with by various mainstream media around the world, purportedly even including CNBC in the United States, with these outlets not realising that the source’s comments of “it’s dead” were only in relation to the exclusive negotiations period. Some of the media reports even inaccurately referred to asPNGIndustryNews.net as a blog, and reading some of them online is enough to make one wonder if the reporters involved even bothered reading the original story on the site, or just blindly followed doomful posts made on message boards or comments made by stockbroker types. While the ineptness of mainstream media to accurately report on anything in the petroleum world was not too surprising, it was especially disappointing to see that Upstream, which should know better, falsely claimed thatPNGIndustryNews.net reported that “talks between the two sides had collapsed”. Moving on to the topic of the exclusive negotiations period between InterOil and ExxonMobil, it is important to consider how it has been publicly communicated. The original announcement on May 24 on the start of the exclusive negotiations failed to mention how long they went for. This is not even common in the PNG space. This can be seen in the announcements made by PNG minerals explorer Foyson Resources last year which provided end dates for the exclusive negotiation periods held with TVI Pacific which later ended in a deal taking place. Fortunately, PNG Prime Minister Peter O’Neill informed parliament that Exxon’s exclusive period of negotiations with InterOil was for 60 days. Two months rolled by with no update on this topic. My inquiries to InterOil received no response, so I was forced to seek information from other sources. I received some intel, which I did not report on at the time, that they were possibly extended to August 1. While InterOil’s conference call earlier last week left the impression that the exclusive negotiations period was continuing, one of my contacts got back to me on Friday that this was no longer the case. I did not get any confirmation from an InterOil spokesman that the exclusive negotiations period was still in place and no comment on the matter from ExxonMobil, so I ran with what was known in my report on Friday. InterOil is yet to get back to me today to correct me on this, although by now everyone should know that negotiations are still taking place between InterOil and ExxonMobil. There could be more news to emerge on this front this week so stay tuned. In relation to some of the claims made on message boards, I did not know that Friday was an option expiry day for InterOil but aim to keep abreast of these key dates going forward when it comes to the timing of my reports. I’m also not being investigated by the “SEC”, or on the take, or being bribed, by anybody and it’s worth noting that this website is designed to keep PNG industry folk up to date with what’s going on – investors are not a key readership market. Furthermore I have never owned any InterOil shares, and like many other people I would like to see the quality Elk-Antelope field commercialised for the benefit of PNG and its industries. In my view, the proposal to use 4.6 trillion cubic feet of this field’s gas to help expand the ExxonMobil-led PNG LNG project is logical when considering monetisation timeframes and the possible benefits to PNG’s economy. |
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Tree - 08-19-2013
I think it's fair to say Blair read's SHU.
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Palm - 08-19-2013
Hohoho. Not only reads it but gets educated by it. How after all this time does he not know about OE dates, especially with IOC's history of being whacked so many times on that day or at least during that week? 3rd Friday of every month is the red letter day.
Good of him to retrace a little and explain. He knows for sure that many read PNGIndustry News. Maybe he'd like to join us here!
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - ArtM72 - 08-19-2013
Blair Price's points were all well taken I thought. He certainly seems to value his reputation. In my mind he also has the right to identify and maintain the anonymity of sources that he believes to provide good information and/or valuable insight.
As to his criticism of some of the rest of the media, I'd agree with that as well. In far to many organizations the reported news isn't the result of a search for the truth of what happened. Rather, it is a cost center competing for the entertainment dollar, viewing the hard work of story confirmation as an unnecessary burden on the corporation's bottom line.
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Palm - 08-19-2013
One fairly amazing thing about his reporting. He states in this article that IOC "eluded" in its CC on Tuesday that talks were still exclusive. Eluded? Hession flat out CONFIRMED in response to a question about it that IN FACT they were still exclusive. That's was Tuesday and he should have reported that as being a fact. Why a couple of days later did he even suddenly have a question that they WEREN'T still in exclusive talks? He states that it is not normal for something like exclusive talks to not have some sort of deadline and then says Oneill stated there was a 60 day deadline. Wrong again. He only said that (in speaking to Parliament) that "we" ( in context- Parliament) should here more in 30-60 days. How is that a 60-day deadline.
If he doesn't was his publication viewed as a blog, then it shouldn't act like one. It would take him little time to read a CC transcript when companies like IOC, OSH etc report. Asking for clarification shortly before you run a story is not always all you do in seeking facts. It appears running with a story trumps running an accurate story. That's how you "earn" blog status.
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Tree - 08-19-2013
'ArtM72' pid='27449' datel Wrote:Blair Price's points were all well taken I thought. He certainly seems to value his reputation. In my mind he also has the right to identify and maintain the anonymity of sources that he believes to provide good information and/or valuable insight. As to his criticism of some of the rest of the media, I'd agree with that as well. In far to many organizations the reported news isn't the result of a search for the truth of what happened. Rather, it is a cost center competing for the entertainment dollar, viewing the hard work of story confirmation as an unnecessary burden on the corporation's bottom line.
Yes Price's points can be well taken but he was derelict in his reporting - again. He tries today to weasel out of responsibility. Price's explanation of Friday's events fall short of intended self exoneration. He solely was responsible for the chain reaction his article set in motion. Schwab's alerts and this Reuters article carried much market weight and their existence are compliments of Price's ambiguous, at best, report. Perhaps we get a Reuters correction - update today.
Talks fail between Exxon, InterOil for stake in Papua New Guinea fields - report
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Libtardius Maximus - 08-19-2013
There should be some SEC investigation in this matter and Price should reveal his source.
But neither will happen.
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - jft310 - 08-19-2013
Price speakie with forked tongue after some type pay check . Only explanation for his irresponsible article
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Palm - 08-19-2013
Sad thing is most publications have gone this route; few stories are really checked out anymore to lend credibility. Examples are during storm on east coast last year. People fabricated stories with pictures showing sharks swimming in buildings on Wall Street and other crazy stuff. Major news orgs picked up the stories and ran with them because they don't want to be viewed as having dated news. So instead they get caught with pants down from time to time and their credibility takes a hit. So instant "news" is what rules the airwaves today instead of credibility and they all sink closer to National Enquirer status. I've stopped getting our local paper anymore because the next generation of the paper ownership has taken over and they have taken it to "gossip" status and running crap stories.
Maybe Price can shoot for being THE only credible PNG news source. Would be nice and he really is one of the better ones. EMTV was doing that for a while, but they are slowly evolving to the dark side and have even been slapped by O'Neill for shoddy reporting.
Journalism has spun downward with the advent of the internet.
Sigh..........................
RE: Only PNG reporting is "alive" (Blair Price) - Getitrt2 - 08-19-2013
'Tree' pid='27451' datel Wrote:
'ArtM72' pid='27449' datel Wrote:Blair Price's points were all well taken I thought. He certainly seems to value his reputation. In my mind he also has the right to identify and maintain the anonymity of sources that he believes to provide good information and/or valuable insight. As to his criticism of some of the rest of the media, I'd agree with that as well. In far to many organizations the reported news isn't the result of a search for the truth of what happened. Rather, it is a cost center competing for the entertainment dollar, viewing the hard work of story confirmation as an unnecessary burden on the corporation's bottom line.
Yes Price's points can be well taken but he was derelict in his reporting - again. He tries today to weasel out of responsibility. Price's explanation of Friday's events fall short of intended self exoneration. He solely was responsible for the chain reaction his article set in motion. Schwab's alerts and this Reuters article carried much market weight and their existence are compliments of Price's ambiguous, at best, report. Perhaps we get a Reuters correction - update today.
Talks fail between Exxon, InterOil for stake in Papua New Guinea fields - report
Fri Aug 16, 2013 11:25am EDTAug 16 (Reuters) - Shares of InterOil Corp fell 6 percent after a news website said the company's negotiations with Exxon Mobil Corp to develop liquefied natural gas fields in Papua New Guinea ended without a deal.Exxon, the world's largest publicly traded oil company, failed to close a deal to buy into InterOil's license in Elk and Antelope fields, PNG Industry News reported on Friday, citing sources. ()InterOil was in talks to sell a stake in its license to ExxonMobil Papua New Guinea Ltd, potentially expanding Exxon's $19 billion Papua New Guinea liquefied natural gas (PNG LNG) project.Exxon spokesman Patrick McGinn told Reuters the company does not comment on commercial discussions. InterOil could not be reached for comment.Queensland, Australia-based InterOil received the license in November 2010, which covers nine blocks surrounding the Elk and Antelope fields. The company has petroleum licenses covering about 3.9 million acres in the country.The talks also included funding of InterOil and its partner Pacific LNG to drill additional delineation wells in the fields.
Actually, Reuters issued a corrected update Friday.