![]() |
|
|
We made the Post - Printable Version +- 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: We made the Post (/showthread.php?tid=4465) |
|
We made the Post - Gator - 08-20-2013 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/interoil_fiasco_scorches_paulson_NjJOhxPX5PyxbzrFARmfHI The NY Post
RE: We made the Post - Tree - 08-20-2013 Flat out LIE.
RE: We made the Post - freddiekingman - 08-20-2013 I would have liked an other title...but hey...we're close Gator.... Tanx RE: We made the Post - Gator - 08-20-2013 Fact: The exclusive period had ended without a deal. Fact: The stock is down 19% from a year ago. Fact: The stock is down 26% this month. Maybe a deal will still be work out, but InterOil shareholders have been waiting for a sell down of E/A for 4 years. RE: We made the Post - Stavros - 08-20-2013 There are no lies in the article It is proper use of the English language. FACTS: 1. IOC and XOM were holding Exclusive Negotiations 2. The exclusive talks had ended without a deal 3. Non-exclusive talks continue RE: We made the Post - Tree - 08-21-2013
'Stavros' pid='27638' datel Wrote:There are no lies in the article It is proper use of the English language. FACTS: 1. IOC and XOM were holding Exclusive Negotiations 2. The exclusive talks had ended without a deal 3. Non-exclusive talks continue Sorry you cannot read correctly the quote I highlighted. The quote is a lie. The quote does not state what you state. The quote alone is a repeat of last Friday's Reuter's article which all agree was innacuate. RE: We made the Post - Stavros - 08-21-2013 Let me reiterate what I said Tree; I was trying to be helpful but you got sarcastic on me. I read the quote that you highlighted. I repeat it below: "The controversial InterOil Corp. said its months-long exclusive talks with a unit of ExxonMobil Corp. to develop gas fields in Papua New Guinea had ended without a deal." 1. IOC has engaged with XOM in months-long exclusive talks 2. The EXCLUSIVE TALKS ended without a deal The statement is 100% TRUE and absolutely not misleading because the article then immediately takes it further and makes it plain as the 9+ TCF in Elk/ Antelope that the NON-EXCLUSIVE talks between IOC and XOM continue ... which means they are still trying to reach a deal but competition is now back in the playing field which puts pressure on XOM. We all appreciate it when you post information that helps us make our investment decisions. Please continue doing that ... RE: We made the Post - Gator - 08-21-2013 Stavros is correct. The article was correct. Tree you might not like the way the article was written, but it is factual. RE: We made the Post - CAC - 08-21-2013
'Tree' pid='27645' datel Wrote: ************************* Some people just can't stand anybody ever saying anything that isn't glowingly positive about IOC. Where's the lie? I read it to be completely accurate and true. RE: We made the Post - tarulestheday - 08-21-2013 OK, I think we have determined that the article is both painful to read and 100% accurate. In hindsight, was the exclusivity a mistake on IOC's part and could it have been a requirement on XOM's part? I personally think that this event is a major turning point for the company in that major investors consider this a failure and will move to push for the sale of the company. Just as I was beating the drums a few years ago that the major investors were pushing to oust Phil, I now have some evidence that they are pushing for a buyout. |