Thanks for the observations Stavros. It's fair enough about FEED, let's call #1 'FEED' and 'Mini - FEED' as that term has been coined by management. FEED is a daunting task, expensive too. Bidders should still be required to complete a certain level of FEED to even submit a bid. Since some bids could be FEED ready, it makes best sense to require FEED of all bidders. IBs have been working with them for a year now afterall. We need to remember that bidders are from starting with a blank slate for FEED work with Gulf LNG. IOC's pre-investment in road building, surveying, land and easement securement, geological survey, pier design, CSP design, dredging plan, power plant/support facilities in the Gulf, Port management agreements with Hubline, licenses, gas analysis, 3 off-takers. I would imagine IOC's completed FEED with EWC/Flex/Mitsui could be of help in generation of FEED by a SM.
So, in a short-list of 6 bidders, we could have easily had
1) XOM ( FEED complete)
2) EWC/FLEX (FEED complete with a pre-packaged FID awaiting since Dec. 2011)
3) JKM who has been circling Gulf LNG for 5-6 yrs. (FEED/Mini-FEED complete)
4) CVX - Aussie Projects underway allow enough info for 'Mini-FEED'
5) RDS - Aussie Projects underway allow enough info for 'Mini-FEED'
6) ENI - LNG project experience
Since some bidders are ready and willing it's not a stretch to require others to spend the millions required also in FEED work so all bids are comparable. I can't imagine IOC/PNG choosing a SM and then allowing them a yr. to work on FEED from scratch when viable options are ready to go. That won't happen.