Posts: 1,112
Threads: 88
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation:
109
Guys, one simple question.....Why when IOC was far from sealing a deal we banded as a team and now that we are close to the finish line are we infighting? Like my position or not I have been optimistic but speculative but c'mon. We seem to be upon the verge of a MAJOR move ahead. All of those bickering are the same ones who helped make us strong to begin with. Keep it together, health and happiness and be strong folks....time will tell, and I look forward to it!!!!!
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
Ebster you of course are right. We need deal and a good deal and then all will be fine.
Posts: 708
Threads: 135
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
77
Back some time ago (before there was SHU and all was darkness and chaos), there was plenty of good-natured banter/talk of visiting Cairns when IOC price went to $100.
Due to the passage of time, I suggest that the target be moved to $150... 'cause I am afraid that we'll hit $100 before this month is gone and all my travel time/vacation is booked this year ?!?!?
OK - make it $200 if you must  G'Day Mate !!!
Posts: 12,025
Threads: 1,809
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
227
'jft310' pid='22343' datel Wrote:
PET with all due respect. You have 50% of the IOC information and things can and do change with IOC. Best example is all the nonsense about expiring licenses and IOC
losing licenses. . Your posting your opinion is fine but its what it is an opinion based on limited data. IOC deliberently hasn't revealed all the data for many reasons.Or why
would the have Confidentiality Agreements??,. Because theres more information they didn't want to make public. Proof read the PRE slides and what do they say about the
IOC structures. They hope for 5-10 T's of additional assets in each structure but you didn't post that info. Why because its been hidden. Today the infomation is starting to
come out from behind the Confidentiality Agreements.
So let's wait and see what else IOC can reveal in the next few weeks. IOC per Henry Aldorf who has data you don't have states IOC has 18T's at E/A. He also believes IOC will
produce 30,000 barrels a day of condensates . And he has data you don't have. Example PRE ! Example the leases ! Yes please keep it real and best to qualify your posts
until we get that hidden data.
1) "Nonsense about losing licences" It happened before and when there is no watertight legal obligation, I don't see why having at least a modicum of concern isn't reasonable.
2) "Hidden data" You don't have the hidden data either. For E/A to contain 18T, it either has to be twice as big, or twice as porous, on average, or a combination of these. Does that seem likely to you?
3) 30000bbls/d condensates. Today we learned that Mitsui could be out (although Binc told us that a year ago already) I think Pet explained what the legal obligations are in terms of deviding these condensates and what amount of gas has to be processed in order to arrive at these numbers. Do you have any better numbers?
Yes, perhaps things change, and who knows, perhaps we get there, but for the time being, you can't just slam people with non-existent numbers or unsourced quotes.
Posts: 185
Threads: 12
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
24
'admin' pid='22354' dateline='<a href="tel:1368502 Wrote:
'jft310' pid='22343' dateline='<a href="tel:1368499 Wrote:
PET with all due respect. You have 50% of the IOC information and things can and do change with IOC. Best example is all the nonsense about expiring licenses and IOC
losing licenses. . Your posting your opinion is fine but its what it is an opinion based on limited data. IOC deliberently hasn't revealed all the data for many reasons.Or why
would the have Confidentiality Agreements??,. Because theres more information they didn't want to make public. Proof read the PRE slides and what do they say about the
IOC structures. They hope for 5-10 T's of additional assets in each structure but you didn't post that info. Why because its been hidden. Today the infomation is starting to
come out from behind the Confidentiality Agreements.
So let's wait and see what else IOC can reveal in the next few weeks. IOC per Henry Aldorf who has data you don't have states IOC has 18T's at E/A. He also believes IOC will
produce 30,000 barrels a day of condensates . And he has data you don't have. Example PRE ! Example the leases ! Yes please keep it real and best to qualify your posts
until we get that hidden data.
1) "Nonsense about losing licences" It happened before and when there is no watertight legal obligation, I don't see why having at least a modicum of concern isn't reasonable.
2) "Hidden data" You don't have the hidden data either. For E/A to contain 18T, it either has to be twice as big, or twice as porous, on average, or a combination of these. Does that seem likely to you?
3) 30000bbls/d condensates. Today we learned that Mitsui could be out (although Binc told us that a year ago already) I think Pet explained what the legal obligations are in terms of deviding these condensates and what amount of gas has to be processed in order to arrive at these numbers. Do you have any better numbers?
Yes, perhaps things change, and who knows, perhaps we get there, but for the time being, you can't just slam people with non-existent numbers or unsourced quotes.
Seconded.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'admin' pid='22354' datel Wrote:
'jft310' pid='22343' datel Wrote:
PET with all due respect. You have 50% of the IOC information and things can and do change with IOC. Best example is all the nonsense about expiring licenses and IOC
losing licenses. . Your posting your opinion is fine but its what it is an opinion based on limited data. IOC deliberently hasn't revealed all the data for many reasons.Or why
would the have Confidentiality Agreements??,. Because theres more information they didn't want to make public. Proof read the PRE slides and what do they say about the
IOC structures. They hope for 5-10 T's of additional assets in each structure but you didn't post that info. Why because its been hidden. Today the infomation is starting to
come out from behind the Confidentiality Agreements.
So let's wait and see what else IOC can reveal in the next few weeks. IOC per Henry Aldorf who has data you don't have states IOC has 18T's at E/A. He also believes IOC will
produce 30,000 barrels a day of condensates . And he has data you don't have. Example PRE ! Example the leases ! Yes please keep it real and best to qualify your posts
until we get that hidden data.
1) "Nonsense about losing licences" It happened before and when there is no watertight legal obligation, I don't see why having at least a modicum of concern isn't reasonable.
2) "Hidden data" You don't have the hidden data either. For E/A to contain 18T, it either has to be twice as big, or twice as porous, on average, or a combination of these. Does that seem likely to you?
3) 30000bbls/d condensates. Today we learned that Mitsui could be out (although Binc told us that a year ago already) I think Pet explained what the legal obligations are in terms of deviding these condensates and what amount of gas has to be processed in order to arrive at these numbers. Do you have any better numbers?
Yes, perhaps things change, and who knows, perhaps we get there, but for the time being, you can't just slam people with non-existent numbers or unsourced quotes.
Posts: 84
Threads: 2
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
5
'Ass0ciatedPress' pid='22357' dateline='<a href="tel:1368504 Wrote:
'admin' pid='22354' dateline='<a href="tel:1368502 Wrote:
'jft310' pid='22343' dateline='<a href="tel:1368499 Wrote:
PET with all due respect. You have 50% of the IOC information and things can and do change with IOC. Best example is all the nonsense about expiring licenses and IOC
losing licenses. . Your posting your opinion is fine but its what it is an opinion based on limited data. IOC deliberently hasn't revealed all the data for many reasons.Or why
would the have Confidentiality Agreements??,. Because theres more information they didn't want to make public. Proof read the PRE slides and what do they say about the
IOC structures. They hope for 5-10 T's of additional assets in each structure but you didn't post that info. Why because its been hidden. Today the infomation is starting to
come out from behind the Confidentiality Agreements.
So let's wait and see what else IOC can reveal in the next few weeks. IOC per Henry Aldorf who has data you don't have states IOC has 18T's at E/A. He also believes IOC will
produce 30,000 barrels a day of condensates . And he has data you don't have. Example PRE ! Example the leases ! Yes please keep it real and best to qualify your posts
until we get that hidden data.
1) "Nonsense about losing licences" It happened before and when there is no watertight legal obligation, I don't see why having at least a modicum of concern isn't reasonable.
2) "Hidden data" You don't have the hidden data either. For E/A to contain 18T, it either has to be twice as big, or twice as porous, on average, or a combination of these. Does that seem likely to you?
3) 30000bbls/d condensates. Today we learned that Mitsui could be out (although Binc told us that a year ago already) I think Pet explained what the legal obligations are in terms of deviding these condensates and what amount of gas has to be processed in order to arrive at these numbers. Do you have any better numbers?
Yes, perhaps things change, and who knows, perhaps we get there, but for the time being, you can't just slam people with non-existent numbers or unsourced quotes.
Seconded.
Well and succinctly put. Thirded.
Posts: 148
Threads: 13
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
48
'Petro2458' pid='22329' dateline='<a href="tel:1368490 Wrote:CF..too low? Why do you think $1.50 for the mid case EUR is too low?
It depends on whether we are talking about a cash basis or production basis. Cash basis I calculate between $1.20 and $1.50 per CFM. On a production basis I think over $3.00. That is using a 15% IRR.
CF
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
1)The point of licenses discussion is instead of giving bullets to the shorts call the company. They have two full time employees Meg and Wayne to answer questions. Either you trust mgt or you don't its that simple. Not calling IOC mgt for clarification is waste of everyones time. IOC has 2 employees to clarify just these type issues.
2)Pet I personally appreciate your interpretation of the IOC data they provide us.
There are 3 things I ask you to understand:
a-IOC has a data room not a data page or a data book but a data room in Singapore. Therefore one must conclude there is much in the room IOC doesn't want public. In order to see those extra seismics, core logs etc one must sign a Confidentiality Agreement. The information must be quite bullish for it to be screened from public view. There are some that put together that data in the room that r take time to talk about part of it.
Henry Aldorf is one of those persons and his statements about the IOC assets are quite different than what the IOC slides reveal. I simply ask that you listen to what Aldorf has to say at the LNG Conferences on a recorded interview posted on these boards. Further I ask you to read the Phil M interview with Reuters from 2009 where Phil talked about the IOC liquids and their ownership. Phil didn't lie for that interview.
b-The IOC drilling partners have a different set of slides than the ones posted on the IOC pages. They reveal some of the data that is in the data room. Just check with a drilling partner and see what Henry Aldorf thinks about the size of IOC assets at E/A and the projected future production of the liquids. There is much that you just don't know . You know what IOC wants public shareholders to know. But with a data room and seperate and different data than revealed in the IOC slides for the Drilling Partners there is a whole world just hidden from view.
c-You are an Engineer and a darn good one. I am not second guessing your work in the engineering world. What I am doing is trying to tell you how Wall Street works. You have never worked on Wall Street and do not know how information is disclosed on Wall Street within SEC guidelines . The SEC allows two levels of information about company data. Its what Wall Street sells to their clients. Its called research which is different information than what is discussed on Press release and what's discussed on CC's. It legally called color and its specifically allowed by the SEC. Because some of us on the IOC Board work on Wall Street and get the color story doesn't mean all investors get that information. Some of that information can easily be seen in Wall Street written reports by the Wall Street firms and other information is passed verbally. And its not illegal, nor is it inside information nor is it a violation of any SEC rule.
3) Pet has one explanation for the liquids . He ignores the 2009 Phil Mulacek interview with Reuters where Phil discusses the liquids and their value to Interoil. An obvious answer may be he missed the interview. That doesn't mean it never took place and isn't true. It means PET didn't read the article .
|
