Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Benzinga article
#1
InterOil's (NYSE: IOC) latest talks with the government of Papua New Guinea have begun to break down and it is looking more and more likely that the deal will fall through altogether. Minister for Petroleum and Energy William Duma has set a 180-day trigger for termination of their 2009 project agreement, in which InterOil is set to deliver between 7.6 million-10.2 million metric tons of liquid nat gas per year from its Elk and Antelope gas reserves.
In 2009, the government and InterOil reached this agreement, and the company promised to use state-of-the-art technology and internationally recognized operators with experience in similar-sized assets. However, progress has been very slow, with the company only proposing a phased development of the reserves and no yet naming an operator.

ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) has been constructing a $15.7 billion physical and liquid natural gas plant, as part of Papua New Guinea's foundation project. Duma said that the government has worked with InterOil to ensure that the Elk/Antelope assets are monetized in a manner consistent with these high standards. "InterOil has for too long insisted on a development structure, which is designed to only meet its objectives of controlling the asset and the pace of developing it. This has led to a proposal calling for a piecemeal, incremental and fractured development implementation operated by InterOil and its affiliates, rather than by large-scale international operators with experience and capital."

Minister Duma further called for InterOil to sell it at a minimum 50.5% stake in the Elk/Antelope reserves to a major company with experience operating a plant of this size. He added that the upstream activities, which InterOil wants to control under its plans, must be operated by the international company, not by InterOil or its affiliates.
The company's affiliate in the region, Liquid Niugini, recently wrote a letter to the Department of Petroleum and Energy , which claims that the government's notice of intent to terminate the project agreement is invalid. The company claims that, for the state to terminate the agreement, the state must prove that the company has failed to take certain steps, whereas it is currently just upset with intentions to take future actions.

Earlier this week, InterOil claimed to be in talks with Chevron (NYSE: CVX) to fulfill this operator role, although Chevron has yet to make a formal statement on the matter. Duma and the government has consistently hinted that they would like Shell (NYSE: RDS.A) (NYSE: RDS.B) to be the international operator. Investors should watch the general elections this month for further clarity on how the government will act.
Reply

#2
While Benzinga's is a pretty good (if old) rehash of recent project history I believe their one error was that InterOil claimed to be in talks with Chevron. It was the PNG Treasurer that claimed Chevron was in talks with Interoil, a distinction I'm sure lost upon Yahoo detractors.

As Pet and Gator observe in an adjacent thread the top 10 shareholders own 70.1% of the stock. Given all the serious issues raised by Benzinga, these are shareholders who certainly ought to know better (than us). Doesn't buffet still hold a big hunk of Wells?

I have to find that link again to RC's thesis on corporate responsibility. Mewonders if he plans for PNG to be his newest and best ever test tube.
Reply

#3
Petrovale,

How do these "authors" (of fiction) come up with their conclusions?

1) "talks have begun to break down" -- prove it
2) "InterOil claimed to be in talks with Chevron" -- Interoil did no such thing, right?
3) "Duma and the government has consistently hinted that they would like Shell to be the international operator" -- no, just Duma and his stooge

What nonsense.

VS
Reply

#4
Funk over on Yazoo just made a great point on this article. It was written by a kid who has not yet graduated college yet:
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/matthew-kant...33/451/b63

Probably a sharp kid, but a kid nonetheless. Grab a few articles off of the internet and throw in a few opinions, and that's research. Pretty bad.
Reply

#5
Today, Benzinga quotes its Monday article, which was published in The National. Of course, Benzinga does not provide investment advice...
Reply

#6
What's davidhmtk trying to tell us today ???

"More than 50 companies took bid packages and therefore had to sign standstill agreements not to buy IOC stock. The standstills expire on the announcement of a deal. Real fireworks would happen then."
Reply

#7
That was a comment made at the AGM as far as the original number of bidders and that anyone signing and bidding is prohibited from buying stock on the open markets.
Reply

#8
Palmtok, please tell Benzinga: "50 parties..."
Reply

#9
My dog won't even listen to me Petro! Hohoho
Reply

#10
Actually I think the comment was 15 bidders but given how it was said, it could have easily been misunderstood as 50. At least 15 was what I heard.

Doesn't really matter much at this point.

H&H,
efi
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: