Unless you or I have read the CAs themselves we can "demand" this or that all we want and it won't change what Byker or others can say based on what the attorneys allow them to say. What you or I "think" is immaterial. I know this; IOC management wanted to disclose more in the original PR, but were advised they could not. I can beller all I want about that and it won't chnage what they will say. Obviously Byker was granted permission to put some color on what is being negotiated but with strict limitations on details. Again, he MUST abide by legal direction from both sides; IOC and Exxon. Exxon must have agreed that some material inaccuracies were being spewed about in the press and blessed Byker making the statements he did. Byker and others inside will NOT risk a great deal by saying things people on a message board feel should be disclosed. That's why you as a shareholder (presumably) have the right to use or flush, buy and sell, etc. We will get what we will get until all is finalized. Like it or not.

*****

I think that is right.  However I'm still a little puzzled by the concept of "we have a deal which is sufficiently solid that we are willing to let the World know that we are excluding all of the other bidders"...and yet we still need to negotiate some things further.  If important things still need to be negotiated, then anything could still happen.  It seems odd to voluntarily eliminate the bargaining power that would potentially exist with the presence of the other bidders (unless they all withdrew).  In other words, until/unless IOC has a final/signed deal, what incentive did they have to make the negotiations "exclusive"?  Why say it...and why even concede it to XOM?  Why not just keep negotiating (even if IOC knows it is mostly or completely with XOM)...with all options still open?   

One possible explanation could be that they have a deal ready to be signed and that the parties have agreed it will be signed as is...unless a buyout number can be reached.  I could see those negotiations continuing with IOC saying "yes, we have a deal based on your bid, unless you can up your buyout number to "Y".  Take 60 days to consider it and get back to us."  So IOC knows they have one deal or the other and also feels confident they can exclude everybody else (and announce it)...and yet accurately state they still need to negotiate a little more.  

CAC- Good am to you! What you say makes a lot of "horse sense" to me.However,after six decades of livin' with me (I'm not much of a cook), my bride says I may have to learn to cook ......if  I keep adding to our stash. I don't know which will come first ...the "deal" or the "divorce" !! Please guys,ask the powers that be to put a rush order in on these negotiations ! Thanks.

'sageo' pid='23844' datel Wrote:

CAC- Good am to you! What you say makes a lot of "horse sense" to me.However,after six decades of livin' with me (I'm not much of a cook), my bride says I may have to learn to cook ......if  I keep adding to our stash. I don't know which will come first ...the "deal" or the "divorce" !! Please guys,ask the powers that be to put a rush order in on these negotiations ! Thanks.

The concept is quite standard: A term sheet is written after the basic deal is agreed upon. Once this is done, the contract is written up and has to be signed. I guess we are in the written up part of the process. I have seen plenty of term sheets turn into toilet paper. The market is wants more concrete evidence to believe that the project is sufficiently being de-risked with XOM participation. That is my opinion as to explain the trading lately. Furthermore, if there was any offer or number on the table as a buyout from XOM then that is material and would have to be announced. The deal is what was announced and we wait for the dotted lines to be signed. That is all. XOM has there own deals with OSH etc regarding the expansion of trains. This was likely spelled out before they even began construction as XOM is the operator and has that decision making capability. This is not the hold up IMO. Basically, we wait, again. Could be tomorrow could be 50 days and could be no deal with XOM at this time. All are in the cards. I believe we will hear in another month or so. But as with many things I have been wrong before.

'Palm' pid='23841' datel Wrote:Well said Lt; only so much can and will be said at this point. Material event of exclusive negotiations had to be disclosed per legals. We all want everything disclosed and had hoped for a full disclosure final deal. We got the first step instead and it was a big step. But not final deal. And even then we will likely only get what is legally required to be disclosed. We see this happen all the time when deals are struck. Companies like Exxon know that certain deal info will tip their business model to competition, so they disclose what's legally necessary to properly inform shareholders, the markets and regulators. I bet some people will still howl a bit when work must be done to figure out a /mcf price, but we are already seeing info about pipelines, development costs, etc being funded by Exxon which evidently will be part of a deal. But I bet we don't get something that says, "Exxon is paying $x.xx per mcf for the deal and that is calculated at present value using x% as the discount rate." That's business and that's part of investing.

I have got to believe that at least RJ will break down the deal in a dollars per mcf  figure.  That is what they have been talking about for 2 years...company valued at x/mcf now, we believe the company will get y/mcf and if it is more, we will mark to market.  I would hope the company would also be ready to give us a present day valuation in a $/mcf.  Help a brotha out