+- 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: Does this mean 3 trains ? (/showthread.php?tid=11050)
Does this mean 3 trains ? - ioc.aussie - 07-25-2016
“The bid by ExxonMobil clearly underscores the merits of our offer for InterOil and highlights both the quality of our LNG assets in PNG and the potential value that would be created by cooperation between PNG’s two world class LNG projects.
“Total SA and Oil Search have already signalled their desire to cooperate with the PNG LNG Project, to maximise synergy values for all stakeholders. Should ExxonMobil be successful in its proposed bid for InterOil, its entry into Papua LNG would significantly enhance the likelihood of material project cooperation,” Botten said.
RE: Does this mean 3 trains ? - jft310 - 07-25-2016
The words two projects and project cooperation weigh heavy in favor for Papua LNG. The third train gas might come from P'Nynag,
RE: Does this mean 3 trains ? - Relker - 07-25-2016
'jft310' pid='74749' datel Wrote:The words two projects and project cooperation weigh heavy in favor for Papua LNG. The third train gas might come from P'Nanag,
The parties involved in the P'Nyang field should decide in 2017 whether or not they will proceed with the project. The most important parties involved are OSH and XOM. The first indications for the development cost are not very promissing. Therefore they are looking for an alternative. Apparently they stumbled over IOC who is so grateful to hand over its shares at a bargain price. Where else do you think Botten could find his huge synergy gain?
RE: Does this mean 3 trains ? - jft310 - 07-25-2016
Relker I certainly hope you are right as in that would require at least 10 T's of gas at E/A. To be determined.
RE: Does this mean 3 trains ? - ArtM72 - 07-26-2016
'jft310' pid='74755' datel Wrote:Relker I certainly hope you are right as in that would require at least 10 T's of gas at E/A. To be determined.
Not 10 Ts of gas at E/A. 10 Ts of gas in E/A, Triceratops, Bobcat, Raptor and anywhere else on IOC's acreage. I can't believe this board appears to maintain such a myopic view of IOC's resources.
If there is a binary decision to be made by IOC shareholders it isn't Total or Exxon. That binary decision is to sell or not to sell. To date all I see showing from the 'sell' side camp is red flags.