Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
We complained to the editor of AFR
#1

We sent a copy of the SPA to the editor of the AFR and asked them to slow down and read the SPA document and then print a retraction . This is sloppy journalism and keeps getting repeated.Enough!

Heres their most recent distortion of the SPA document.

The next few months could prove transformative for oil and gas producer Oil Search. If all the stars align, the Port Moresby-based firm will, by the end of March, control a hefty stake in the largest gas deposits ever found in Papua New Guinea and its register will be free of concerns about the conversion of an exchangeable bond owned by Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund.

But concerns about how the company navigates its path through this transition has sent the stock price on a bumpy ride over the past six weeks. Investors and bankers believe the convergence of both events could result in some $1.2 billion worth of stock changing hands in a simultaneous equity raise and block trade. Others however believe the two events will occur at a wide distance from each other. On December 9, Oil Search boss Peter Botten revealed the company is in negotiation for a potential 20 per cent slice of Total’s share of a joint venture with InterOil over its PNG reserves at the Elk and Antelope fields. The announcement sent the share price soaring but since then doubts about how to fund the deal and the looming conversion of the exchangeable bond have kept it on a volatility streak.

A number of hedge funds are betting on a potential block trade of the Abu Dhabi stake, which is held by the state-owned International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC). The notes convert into equity in March at a strike rate of $8.55 although if the company’s share price falls below that level on the conversion date the PNG government must fund the difference. For a long time the consensus view has been that both sovereigns would avert a market trade and agree a deal that would enable PNG to retain its stake in Oil Search but many in the market now anticipate IPIC will sell down some of the holding to the market by the end of February. The conversion of the bond is likely to coincide with an agreement on Oil Search’s participation in the up to $3.6 billion JV between Total and InterOil. Botten’s comments this week on the continuing negotiations appear significant. InterOil is pressing Total to go unconditional on the deal by the end of the first quarter. That would tie the French giant into a large financial exposure in PNG – a costly and unpredictable territory.

Selling a slice to Oil Search not only allows Total to take money off the table, the cash could be used to mop up minority owners in Elk and Antelope, who own 20 per cent of the reserves. That in turn would benefit InterOil as eliminating the minorities is also one of the preconditions to the Total joint venture.

Reply

#2
They sure don't understand the deal or what is going on very well.
Reply

#3
Who is "we"?
Reply

#4

'Getitrt2' pid='36897' datel Wrote:They sure don't understand the deal or what is going on very well.

I guess I must not understand the deal very well either.  As far as I can tell these guys are reporting on negotiations that are tangential to IOC's deal with Total.  There have been discussions for some time here about the subsequent sale of part of Total's (and presumably IOC's) stake in E/A.

How is it that such a sale of that/those pieces to OSH would somehow represents a misunderstanding of the SPA?

Reply

#5
First of all, Art, the "up to" being at only $3.6 billion is just plain wrong and illustrates they don't even know the basics of the deal.

Also, as I understand it, none of IOC's remaining stake after the purchase by Total is up for sale to a potential additional partner, as you mention. Total has indicated they may resell up to 19.3% gross of its 61.3% gross purchase from IOC; I think the article essentially has that straight, except for identifying the sale as E/A rather than PRL 15.

The article also shows a basic misunderstanding of the agreement and the minority interests aspect of it in its description of that, saying Total's getting money from OSH would allow Total to "mop up minority owners" and thereby benefit InterOil. Huh?! InterOil is responsible for buying them out, which then becomes part of its 38.7% gross, using at least in part the proceeds from Total for its 61.3%, regardless of what Total does with any of its 61.3% gross; and that is what Total has agreed to regardless of whether it resells any.

Furthermore, Total may want to spread some of the risk of its likely 47.5% net position as is typical in the industry, or make a front-end profit on it, and/or bring in another partner who would provide certain other benefits; but if the author of the article thinks Total is primarily highly concerned about how "costly" PNG is, he should check out the costs of such projects in Australia where Total has some interests. Also, PNG is not nearly as "unpredictable" as it used to be, when XMO started its project.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)