'jft310' pid='21248' datel Wrote:Phil thought IOC was worth $1,000 taday and others did not agree with him.

So if Phil thought IOC worht $1,000/sh why was he steamrolled other than the opportunity to make a fast bucK?  If you have a "visionary" in place with a long successful track record who thinks your shares are worth $1,000 why get rid of him?  That's the kind of guy you want running your company.

I'll stay with my first reaction.  I think it's Shell and Phil wouldn't stand for being a part of that given the history.  He probably had to be convinced to keep his seat on the board notwithstanding his personal stake..

'ArtM72' pid='21253' datel Wrote:

'jft310' pid='21248' datel Wrote:Phil thought IOC was worth $1,000 taday and others did not agree with him.

So if Phil thought IOC worht $1,000/sh why was he steamrolled other than the opportunity to make a fast bucK?  If you have a "visionary" in place with a long successful track record who thinks your shares are worth $1,000 why get rid of him?  That's the kind of guy you want running your company.

I'll stay with my first reaction.  I think it's Shell and Phil wouldn't stand for being a part of that given the history.  He probably had to be convinced to keep his seat on the board notwithstanding his personal stake..

Art, every rsidential real estate agent will tell you of a tendency of a homeowner to value his property more than the market does.  In this case, a CEO who is holding on to unrealistic expectations with respect to the market....for whatever reason....is likely hindering company growth.

As an aside, years ago there was a Harvard Business School case on Head Ski.  The founder Howard Head was not the right person to move his company into its next stage of development.  After a lot of angst (which is why the case was written for classroom purposes), Head stepped aside from day-to-day management to head up R&D to develop new skis.  Now I have no idea if this fits IOC and PM, but the issue is not unknown and founders are not indispensable.  fwiw

'ltinvest' pid='21250' datel Wrote:Guys, as I now understand it.......Phil did not "retire". Phil was in a major disagreement with the board as was insisting on one deal and the board is favoring a different deal. The BOD decided to make the CEO change. Maybe this is like news coverage of the Boston Marathon bombing and you get some good and some incorrect information in real time.......but I thought it worthy of a post. The BOD respectfully allowed him to "retire" but this about a more comprehensive deal the BOD wants to complete.

I am with Itinvest here. We know the PNG govt wants this all working quickly and Phil I am sure knew he could the extra pieces sold off for more money in the future. Phil may have just wanted a sell down of PRL 15 and others especially the PNG govt wanted partnership at Triceratops and at 236/8. Or selling more than Phils plan. More partners more drilling.

This fits with WA rumored comments at IPAA 8 rigs drilling fully funded drilling program.

'Getitrt2' pid='21261' datel Wrote:Full Raymond James comment: CEO’s Departure Is a Logical Step That Should Help Accelerate Partnership ♦ InterOil has announced that CEO Phil Mulacek is leaving his position effective April 30 (while retaining a board seat). Mulacek had already given up his chairmanship in July 2012, a move that was well received by the market at the time. Based on our conversations with the company and ongoing dialogue with investors, our sense is that several major shareholders have been pushing for a CEO change over the past several years, so this latest news marks a logical step along the way. ♦ While Mulacek’s entrepreneurial drive succeeded in building a $4 billion energy company, he has been a sharply polarizing figure. We are of the view that at least some investors (and, presumably, prospective partners) have come to perceive him as an obstacle to a successful LNG partnership deal. According to local publication PNG Industry News (http://www.pngindustrynews.net/storyview.asp?storyid=798461971§ionsource=s0), CFO Collin Visaggio has specifically confirmed that Mulacek’s departure is part of the process to get the company ready for the partnership deal. This does not mean that his departure was a precondition for a deal, but we look at the news as a positive development, a catalyst for an accelerated timeline towards a partnership announcement. ♦ In the meantime, an executive search is underway to fill the CEO’s position, and we would not be surprised to see someone with major energy company experience. We would also not be surprised if the new CEO comes from the Asia-Pacific region, i.e., someone with first-hand experience in Papua New Guinea or nearby countries.

Good we are getting something from Raymond James.  In typical IOC press release fashion, we get a muddle.  The algo's are already at work. Wait for the heavy volume to subside and drag it down.  Really bush league how this company communicates. Can we get rid of Wayne Andrews.  Of course all the big players I am sure are appraised of what is going on. We get to do what we do best,wait.

'ellerslick' pid='21262' datel Wrote:

'Getitrt2' pid='21261' datel Wrote:Full Raymond James comment: CEO’s Departure Is a Logical Step That Should Help Accelerate Partnership ♦ InterOil has announced that CEO Phil Mulacek is leaving his position effective April 30 (while retaining a board seat). Mulacek had already given up his chairmanship in July 2012, a move that was well received by the market at the time. Based on our conversations with the company and ongoing dialogue with investors, our sense is that several major shareholders have been pushing for a CEO change over the past several years, so this latest news marks a logical step along the way. ♦ While Mulacek’s entrepreneurial drive succeeded in building a $4 billion energy company, he has been a sharply polarizing figure. We are of the view that at least some investors (and, presumably, prospective partners) have come to perceive him as an obstacle to a successful LNG partnership deal. According to local publication PNG Industry News (http://www.pngindustrynews.net/storyview.asp?storyid=798461971§ionsource=s0), CFO Collin Visaggio has specifically confirmed that Mulacek’s departure is part of the process to get the company ready for the partnership deal. This does not mean that his departure was a precondition for a deal, but we look at the news as a positive development, a catalyst for an accelerated timeline towards a partnership announcement. ♦ In the meantime, an executive search is underway to fill the CEO’s position, and we would not be surprised to see someone with major energy company experience. We would also not be surprised if the new CEO comes from the Asia-Pacific region, i.e., someone with first-hand experience in Papua New Guinea or nearby countries.

Good we are getting something from Raymond James.  In typical IOC press release fashion, we get a muddle.  The algo's are already at work. Wait for the heavy volume to subside and drag it down.  Really bush league how this company communicates. Can we get rid of Wayne Andrews.  Of course all the big players I am sure are appraised of what is going on. We get to do what we do best,wait.

I'll speak up for Wayne Andrews.   He has done an excellent job for InterOil and has always communicated as much information as possible to the market.   He has NOT been involved directly in the selldown - so, I expect that this turn of events may be a surprise to him as well.  IMHO, it is the BOD where the power play/struggle has played out - Wayne will not have played a role in the current brouhaha.

John:

You are absolutely right about Wayne.  Wayne is one of the biggest reasons the institutional shareholder base is so strong in thier position.  Wayne is highly respected and trusted by the institutional community.  I'm not sure how many realize his importance in keeping the base intact.  I thought of creatinga  poll based on the last time someone spoke to Wayne.  He will "go dark" just prior to the deal announcement as he is brought into the inner circle on the deal.

As it relates to Phil, I am shocked by the news today or at least the timing.  I am a big fan of his and what he's accomplished but it has become clear for some time that the company needed to get to the next level.  They could not do that without the government and the $$ from a deal.  Whether he was an impediment in the late stages here or just not acceptable to the bidders, it is unfortunate.  Phil was viewed skeptically by many institutional investors.  While beimg smart investors though, most have never created or run companies.  I will follow Phil with interest in his future endeavors.

I think it was Art who posted that perhaps Shell is the winner and Phil won't go along on that ride, at least as the CEO.  This makes the most sense to me as Phil is retiring on his own terms and I would imagine timed this so he is the CEO the day the deal is announced (prior to April 30th).  This saves Phil from being replaced by the evil empire once the deal is done.

The other option that Phil had to retire to complete the deal is also possible but why not wait?  Perhaps Phil ruffled feathers in the past at the winning bidder and they just wanted him out of the way.  In any event, the BoD has to do whats in the best interest of all shareholders and if that means Phil had to step aside or wanted to then so be it.  If there were anything materially negative behind the scenes it would have had to been disclosed so the fact that this was all that was announced is supportive of the deal being almost done.  I think as others have pointed out, the tea leaves in the PR hinted to that.

What will tomorrow bring?