Civelli and IOC

[Palm]

You're delusional if you think this forum can or should be used to hold management "responsible". Management answers to the BOD and Management talks to large investor groups on a regular basis. They're called Investment Roadshows. If you think those who post here represent a large % of total shareholders, you're more than delusional.

This is a message board. Have you ever heard the advice about giving much weight to what's posted on message boards? Our small voices are for our own benefit. We may figure a few things out, but face it we see a light and it could be the light at the end of a very long tunnel, or that freight train coming the other way. We get a few breadcrumbs and think we have a seat at the royal table. Don't kid yourself.

[sfiaes]

I get it Palm, SHU is just an opiate for the masses. It's like the Truman Show and all of us like Jim Carey, thinking it's real.

Can I add pathetic to delusional?

Speak the truth, it will set you free.

[Palm]

I get it Sfiaes, you think this board is something it isn't. It's a place to try and figure some things out; but in this day of shareholder activism on steroids you a some others think this is a place to somehow hold management "responsible". Your words. This is an informal message board, not an organized court of law. You may want to look up the definition of a message board.

If you think this is or should be a place that holds management "responsible", how's that going so far? May want to take your own advice and realize the truth. This is a message board in every sense. Don't fool yourself by thinking it's anything but that.

[sfiaes]

I'm a shareholder. I ask questions.

Hession has the answers.

Let me put it this way: Is it reasonable for us as sharholders to request Hession address the IPI issue publicly by Friday?

I am firmly in the camp that it is.

[Thylacine-2]

Sfiaes, Here's an idea for you. Why don't you call IOC investor relations and request that Hession address the IPI issue publicly by Friday. Then if he does you can claim credit for it.

[sfiaes]

"Then if he does you can claim credit for it."

Sounds like you would like Hession to address the issue publicly by Friday also,but are just too disingenuous to answer the question head on.

[Thylacine-2]

No, sfiaes, I don't share your views on the IPI matter at all.

My view is that Hession and his crew are able to run the business without our input.

And that venting our anxieties, if we have any, on SHU is in direct opposition to the purposes of the board. The main purpose of the board, as I understand it, is to work together in a group learning endeavor, exchanging information and reasoning together about IOC. It performs that role admirably.

There used to be a "no whining" rule on the board. I'd like to see the moderators bring that apparently moribund rule back to life.

[ebster123]

Thy, it us not necessarily whining to speak about opposition to company sections (or lack there of). Interoil and MH, like all other corporations, reports to the BOD but has a responsibility to its shareholders...all shareholders. I understand that.the bigs get preferential treatment and information. This is fact with mist companies, but it dies not make it right. Each share a big owns us in equal value to what a small investor owns. The problem is that manipulation on Wall Street is as I see it similar to Washington and is accepted by the masses. In part because people say "I can't change anything" or " that is just the way it is". Several have said over the years members of management read SHU. If so, they should see people want the, accountable. I have lost money because of their BS over the years. The bigs, they loan out to shorts, make a Rate of Return and when all is done will win both ways. Not all can do this. This is not whining it is just fact. The fact that people say adverse opinions are either whining or a shorts response if you do not agree with management is not good.

[Palm]

No, sfiaes, I don't share your views on the IPI matter at all. My view is that Hession and his crew are able to run the business without our input. And that venting our anxieties, if we have any, on SHU is in direct opposition to the purposes of the board. The main purpose of the board, as I understand it, is to work together in a group learning endeavor, exchanging information and reasoning together about IOC. It performs that role admirably. There used to be a "no whining" rule on the board. I'd like to see the moderators bring that apparently moribund rule back to life.

Exactly Thylacine. Hession's job is to run the company. He answers to the BOD, not day to day questioning by any shareholders who think THEY somehow have him on a string. Many of us work for companies who have shareholders and a BOD. We answer to our BOD as far as operating the company and give a report periodically to shareholders. The BOD approves the budget and plans presented by management but even they pretty much stay out of day to day operations. We at times tell a board member that they are meddling if they start crossing lines if we feel they are trying to dictate too much. At our monthly Board meetings we report to them what is going on and if there are any issues, we deal with them then. That's how it has to work. Shareholders have their say at the annual meeting when they vote on certain matters, including the BOD elections.

Shareholders should have little or no direct access to the CEO. In fact some who used to have access to PM (because he at times ran IOC like a small business) have basically zero access to Hession. Large institutions have some access. But anyone here? Good luck. That's they way it should be.

[jft310]

The purpose of the post was to show that CC was not all powerful. That Hession had some leverage and to point out that the minority

wanted this settled. Both sides want a deal and they both need each other. Who thinks the minority interest wants to come up with $30

million and/or pay for the LNG plant?????

Therefore their will be a deal. Exactly when we cant say with any certainty. But there will be a deal.

Many seem to misunderstand how badly Total wants this done. Who put that condition of the minority buyout in the deal

in the first place???Who says it was Total?? Could IOC close with Total without a closed minority deal well yes it sure looks that way.

If that happens then drilling is right ahead and then those cash calls. Thus we get a deal .