Bidder Selection Period

[Tree]

Bid packages laying out the bid process, expectations on both (all) parties, stated time-frames and minimum requirements for a viable bid (financing, LNG scheme, acceptable FEED, acceptable cost estimates, cost-overrun guarantees, exploration schedule, OT marketing, financing, construction time and start as to deliver by end date, contingencies placed on PNG and or IOC, like maybe a canning of alleged incompetent and maybe even counter productive folk in IOC and PNG Gov't. Point is this bid package would likely be as thick as a Grand Rapids phone bood where you will find Spinnaker Lounge #. What we know of the 'final binding bid deadline' of Feb. 28th was described in a few paragraph press release. Some optimistic folk, take that to mean, on March 1 simple bids requiring no countering offers and DD after the opening could, would and should be easily readable and an obvious winner would have been self evident by Mid-March. That isn't how this works. Many bidders are negotiating for stakes in many facets of a greater project than we know. The longer this process takes, the more accretive the bids are, the more pps pop upon announcement and the tighter the spike squeeze. Let's just be glad that O'Neill overacted and apparently is cleaning virtuousness and experience from Petromin. He's acting like an alpha male and that is a chip off the old M. Somare block.

I am curious, how do you know how it works?  Now that would have been a great question on the CC.  Tell me about the process as the bids are reviewed.  Instead we get poor questions and poor answers.

Question asked Question answered.  It's simple, works every time.  Key is to give those in position to disclose public info to the best of their ability the benefit of the doubt that they are being square.  This is a fluid time and all bidders, sellers, IBs and partners are operating within pre-defined rights and obliglations.

With no such framework the bid game would be fixed from the get-go and who would spend millions in DD and legal work under that scenario?

Had it explained that winning IB to receive up to 10% of winning contract and other 2 to get 5%.  Don't know if this is true, but if they can extract another $100 mill in the process it is worth all our while.  I'm glad GCI's work for us too.

[ellerslick]

Bid packages laying out the bid process, expectations on both (all) parties, stated time-frames and minimum requirements for a viable bid (financing, LNG scheme, acceptable FEED, acceptable cost estimates, cost-overrun guarantees, exploration schedule, OT marketing, financing, construction time and start as to deliver by end date, contingencies placed on PNG and or IOC, like maybe a canning of alleged incompetent and maybe even counter productive folk in IOC and PNG Gov't. Point is this bid package would likely be as thick as a Grand Rapids phone bood where you will find Spinnaker Lounge #. What we know of the 'final binding bid deadline' of Feb. 28th was described in a few paragraph press release. Some optimistic folk, take that to mean, on March 1 simple bids requiring no countering offers and DD after the opening could, would and should be easily readable and an obvious winner would have been self evident by Mid-March. That isn't how this works. Many bidders are negotiating for stakes in many facets of a greater project than we know. The longer this process takes, the more accretive the bids are, the more pps pop upon announcement and the tighter the spike squeeze. Let's just be glad that O'Neill overacted and apparently is cleaning virtuousness and experience from Petromin. He's acting like an alpha male and that is a chip off the old M. Somare block.

I am curious, how do you know how it works?  Now that would have been a great question on the CC.  Tell me about the process as the bids are reviewed.  Instead we get poor questions and poor answers.

Question asked Question answered.  It's simple, works every time.  Key is to give those in position to disclose public info to the best of their ability the benefit of the doubt that they are being square.  This is a fluid time and all bidders, sellers, IBs and partners are operating within pre-defined rights and obliglations.

With no such framework the bid game would be fixed from the get-go and who would spend millions in DD and legal work under that scenario?

Had it explained that winning IB to receive up to 10% of winning contract and other 2 to get 5%.  Don't know if this is true, but if they can extract another $100 mill in the process it is worth all our while.  I'm glad GCI's work for us too.

I just think it was an opportunity lost to ask of management,  without putting them on the spot, what had gone on in the pre-bidding stage and the process of evaluating bids. Without asking about timelines and un-answerable questions I think we could have been more informed. But that is water under the bridge now.

[Palm]

But that's the way CCs go. A few choice analysts ask some softball questions and that's all you get. But that's why SHU is so important. We dig, we ask, we compare, we analyze and we spit it out. Makes for a great site. If we had all the answers from a CC life would be boring.

[Getitrt2]

Bid packages laying out the bid process, expectations on both (all) parties, stated time-frames and minimum requirements for a viable bid (financing, LNG scheme, acceptable FEED, acceptable cost estimates, cost-overrun guarantees, exploration schedule, OT marketing, financing, construction time and start as to deliver by end date, contingencies placed on PNG and or IOC, like maybe a canning of alleged incompetent and maybe even counter productive folk in IOC and PNG Gov't. Point is this bid package would likely be as thick as a Grand Rapids phone bood where you will find Spinnaker Lounge #. What we know of the 'final binding bid deadline' of Feb. 28th was described in a few paragraph press release. Some optimistic folk, take that to mean, on March 1 simple bids requiring no countering offers and DD after the opening could, would and should be easily readable and an obvious winner would have been self evident by Mid-March. That isn't how this works. Many bidders are negotiating for stakes in many facets of a greater project than we know. The longer this process takes, the more accretive the bids are, the more pps pop upon announcement and the tighter the spike squeeze. Let's just be glad that O'Neill overacted and apparently is cleaning virtuousness and experience from Petromin. He's acting like an alpha male and that is a chip off the old M. Somare block.

I am curious, how do you know how it works?  Now that would have been a great question on the CC.  Tell me about the process as the bids are reviewed.  Instead we get poor questions and poor answers.

Question asked Question answered.  It's simple, works every time.  Key is to give those in position to disclose public info to the best of their ability the benefit of the doubt that they are being square.  This is a fluid time and all bidders, sellers, IBs and partners are operating within pre-defined rights and obliglations.

With no such framework the bid game would be fixed from the get-go and who would spend millions in DD and legal work under that scenario?

Had it explained that winning IB to receive up to 10% of winning contract and other 2 to get 5%.  Don't know if this is true, but if they can extract another $100 mill in the process it is worth all our while.  I'm glad GCI's work for us too.

20% of the total "contract"?  Are you serious?  I hope not!  Wonder if that would be of cash up front, total total over time or what? Did you mean 15% total?

[TxPm]

There is no way that's the case. Most of these deals are done around 5-7%. I have seen Recap deals where a company sold a large stake to a bigger firm get done in the 2-3% range. If that percent is correct we better be getting several billion upfront

[ebster123]

Bid packages laying out the bid process, expectations on both (all) parties, stated time-frames and minimum requirements for a viable bid (financing, LNG scheme, acceptable FEED, acceptable cost estimates, cost-overrun guarantees, exploration schedule, OT marketing, financing, construction time and start as to deliver by end date, contingencies placed on PNG and or IOC, like maybe a canning of alleged incompetent and maybe even counter productive folk in IOC and PNG Gov't. Point is this bid package would likely be as thick as a Grand Rapids phone bood where you will find Spinnaker Lounge #. What we know of the 'final binding bid deadline' of Feb. 28th was described in a few paragraph press release. Some optimistic folk, take that to mean, on March 1 simple bids requiring no countering offers and DD after the opening could, would and should be easily readable and an obvious winner would have been self evident by Mid-March. That isn't how this works. Many bidders are negotiating for stakes in many facets of a greater project than we know. The longer this process takes, the more accretive the bids are, the more pps pop upon announcement and the tighter the spike squeeze. Let's just be glad that O'Neill overacted and apparently is cleaning virtuousness and experience from Petromin. He's acting like an alpha male and that is a chip off the old M. Somare block.

I am curious, how do you know how it works?  Now that would have been a great question on the CC.  Tell me about the process as the bids are reviewed.  Instead we get poor questions and poor answers.

Question asked Question answered.  It's simple, works every time.  Key is to give those in position to disclose public info to the best of their ability the benefit of the doubt that they are being square.  This is a fluid time and all bidders, sellers, IBs and partners are operating within pre-defined rights and obliglations.

With no such framework the bid game would be fixed from the get-go and who would spend millions in DD and legal work under that scenario?

Had it explained that winning IB to receive up to 10% of winning contract and other 2 to get 5%.  Don't know if this is true, but if they can extract another $100 mill in the process it is worth all our while.  I'm glad GCI's work for us too.

20% of the total "contract"?  Are you serious?  I hope not!  Wonder if that would be of cash up front, total total over time or what? Did you mean 15% total?

there is no way that is the number.  The normal range is about 3% +/-.  In addition, the losing IB is not going to walk away with a boatload of cash.  Business does not work that way, there must be an incentive to make it work.  Time will tell....

[HhoseBoy]

Best advice is to understand reality and to have realistic expectations while IOC /IBs navigate the bidder selection period.

So you feel mislead by Phil and IOC regarding bidder selection timeframe?  So you are angry at being lied to in the CC??  So you blame Phil and IOC for saying things they didn't and for making you hear/read things they didn't say???

Shorts want shareholders to believe IOC stated they would announce a bid winner in early March.  That is a bunch of bullocks and has been a bunch of bullocks.  That was clear in the CC, a day before bid period closure, and Phil was asked 2 unanswerable questions by Pavel.  Phil didn't answer either one except for saying the questions were unanswerable.

The bid selection process timeframe is obviously and honestly laid out by McDougall and Phil.    As is what the market should expect in the way of selection process updates.

The good news is IOC received 'several bids'.

Philstar.com defines the term 'several bidders' as:    "a number of bidders between 5 and 7"

If you beg to differ, make a case, post some quotes.  Don't just whine to justify your frustration and fool yourself into thinking that is somehow relevant.  

Somebody help me figure out where I went wrong reading this quote from an IOC press release from 24 Jan

"The InterOil Board of Directors intends to meet the Company’s advisors during the first week of March 2013 for the purpose of evaluating bids received and selecting our partner(s) for the development of the Gulf LNG Project utilising gas from the Elk and Antelope fields in Papua New Guinea."

Ok, fine it didn't get done, but as a LONG time investor (or even new) shouldn't we at least get an update from IOC?

Hose

[Tree]

Somebody help me figure out where I went wrong reading this quote from an IOC press release from 24 Jan

"The InterOil Board of Directors intends to meet the Company’s advisors during the first week of March 2013 for the purpose of evaluating bids received and selecting our partner(s) for the development of the Gulf LNG Project utilising gas from the Elk and Antelope fields in Papua New Guinea."

Ok, fine it didn't get done, but as a LONG time investor (or even new) shouldn't we at least get an update from IOC?

Hose

[/quote]

Hose,

Refer to original post of this thread.

IOC may have seleted a preferred partner, no one knows yet.  IOC did not say they would announce to the market as they select a partner.  Selection and announcement could easily be a couple of months if there are contingencies and depending if all paperwork and FEEDs need completion prior to announcement.

[ellerslick]

Best advice is to understand reality and to have realistic expectations while IOC /IBs navigate the bidder selection period.

So you feel mislead by Phil and IOC regarding bidder selection timeframe?  So you are angry at being lied to in the CC??  So you blame Phil and IOC for saying things they didn't and for making you hear/read things they didn't say???

Shorts want shareholders to believe IOC stated they would announce a bid winner in early March.  That is a bunch of bullocks and has been a bunch of bullocks.  That was clear in the CC, a day before bid period closure, and Phil was asked 2 unanswerable questions by Pavel.  Phil didn't answer either one except for saying the questions were unanswerable.

The bid selection process timeframe is obviously and honestly laid out by McDougall and Phil.    As is what the market should expect in the way of selection process updates.

The good news is IOC received 'several bids'.

Philstar.com defines the term 'several bidders' as:    "a number of bidders between 5 and 7"

If you beg to differ, make a case, post some quotes.  Don't just whine to justify your frustration and fool yourself into thinking that is somehow relevant.  

Somebody help me figure out where I went wrong reading this quote from an IOC press release from 24 Jan

"The InterOil Board of Directors intends to meet the Company’s advisors during the first week of March 2013 for the purpose of evaluating bids received and selecting our partner(s) for the development of the Gulf LNG Project utilising gas from the Elk and Antelope fields in Papua New Guinea."

Ok, fine it didn't get done, but as a LONG time investor (or even new) shouldn't we at least get an update from IOC?

Hose

Hose, I believe in the press release on the 1st of March they left out the selecting of partners and just went with evaluating bids in March.  The big question is why, did they go conservative, did the lawyers get to them, who knows? Then there was the conference call and the Phil statement of we know more in 30 to 60 days which has been interpreted to mean anywhere from partner selection to the type and process of LNG development, you take your pick on that one also.

[HhoseBoy]

Somebody help me figure out where I went wrong reading this quote from an IOC press release from 24 Jan

"The InterOil Board of Directors intends to meet the Company’s advisors during the first week of March 2013 for the purpose of evaluating bids received and selecting our partner(s) for the development of the Gulf LNG Project utilising gas from the Elk and Antelope fields in Papua New Guinea."

Ok, fine it didn't get done, but as a LONG time investor (or even new) shouldn't we at least get an update from IOC?

Hose

Hose,

Refer to original post of this thread.

IOC may have seleted a preferred partner, no one knows yet.  IOC did not say they would announce to the market as they select a partner.  Selection and announcement could easily be a couple of months if there are contingencies and depending if all paperwork and FEEDs need completion prior to announcement.

[/quote]

Tree,

     I thought the quote in January was pretty clear (I was wrong) but I do believe the company does OWE us an update. I have been around since less than $2, and I am going to come out just fine, I have been patient for a LONG time, I really thought things would have gotten better after we hired Wayne. They have not, IOC has never been very good at keeping us updated or hitting a dead line, some things will never change., but really am I asking to much?

Best regards,

Hose