04-10-2013, 04:53 AM
Here is a serious response I posted to Gefvert before reading Tree's version, which is probably better. LOL!
Gefvert , I think this is one of the most ridiculously dishonest deliberately distorted articles I have ever read. You mention “Bozo the Clown”; the biggest clown involved in this situation is you. This article would likely have little if any effect on the stock except for the shorting of the stock by your cohorts in conjunction with it. It really doesn’t even deserve any response, but I despise people of your character violating securities laws by attempting to mislead investors for personal gain, assuming it is not just a case of gross incompetence.
For starters, you perhaps should clarify what the “new evidence” you cite is.
I would disagree to begin with with your initial assertion, and say that most shareholders are not wondering why it is taking more than a month since final bids to announce a deal, since the Company is not just “choosing a winning bid”, as you ignorantly claim, but, in conjunction with three world-class investment banks around the world, selecting multiple partners in the most important decisions in the Company’s history and negotiating binding international agreements involving many complex issues, requiring Board-of-Director-level approval by all parties, and coordinating some of it with the PNG and other governments. Of course, I am sure you have little understanding of all that. They will not be announcing a “winning bid” without that; it is not one without it. The Raymond James CFA with energy expertise, unlike you, thinks the decision on the “winning bid” has probably already been made and they are completing the rest of the process. I agree and think we are getting very close to an announcement.
You ignorantly or dishonestly question the receipt of bids, arrogantly asserting that “for all we know Bozo the Clown was one”. You falsely state that the PNG authorities “demanded that it partner with” specifically a “supermajor”. What the government actually called for was an “internationally recognized LNG operator”, and the Company has said that all the final bids meet that criteria, as reported by Raymond James. You falsely state that “InterOil’s management has never specifically said that the company has received a bid from a supermajor.” However, I have heard/read such statements, and just on April 5, 2013, Raymond James, a highly respected outside party, reported in writing, “the company has previously disclosed receiving at least four preliminary bids: two from major oil companies, one from a national oil company, and one from a utility (known to be Kogas). You question the term “preliminary bids”; that simply means those received prior to the “final” bids received Feb. 28. Furthermore, in the Feb. 28 conference call the CEO stated that the PNG NEC conditional project approval “created enhanced interest by several new parties”, and that “IOCs” (supermajors), NOCs, and utilities have all moved forward” into the final bidding stage and “we look forward to this partner selection”. You put all that together, not to mention more available, and it is very clear without “suspicion” to most people, except perhaps for uninformed or misinformed clowns like you.
The interview with the CEO in the PNG Industry News article you reference, and try to make into something it is not, was about Elk 3 and quoted him about that. The statement in the article about two supermajors being “involved with bids” was a background statement by the reporter not even attributed to Mulacek much less quoted, and there is no reason to believe it was subject to subsequent rewrite by the CEO. Your ridiculous semantics game with the word “involved” meaning in your twisted mind “evidence” of a secret conspiracy with “no official bids from supermajors” is illogical, unjustified, and clownish, indeed.
Your interpretation of standard canned disclosures by Raymond James about all companies they write about and your accusations of bias and incompetence against them are totally unjustified and inappropriate, and even more ridiculous (and clownish) coming from you.
Your final suggested question has been answered by the Company and deserving of no further explanation prior to disclosure of results. Your final conclusions are also not deserving of any further response, being clearly those of a dishonest or incompetent clown. The problem with your playing Bozo the Clown is that, with the trash you publish, you are pathetic and not funny.
If this is the best the shorts have to offer now, they are in big trouble indeed!
Gefvert , I think this is one of the most ridiculously dishonest deliberately distorted articles I have ever read. You mention “Bozo the Clown”; the biggest clown involved in this situation is you. This article would likely have little if any effect on the stock except for the shorting of the stock by your cohorts in conjunction with it. It really doesn’t even deserve any response, but I despise people of your character violating securities laws by attempting to mislead investors for personal gain, assuming it is not just a case of gross incompetence.
For starters, you perhaps should clarify what the “new evidence” you cite is.
I would disagree to begin with with your initial assertion, and say that most shareholders are not wondering why it is taking more than a month since final bids to announce a deal, since the Company is not just “choosing a winning bid”, as you ignorantly claim, but, in conjunction with three world-class investment banks around the world, selecting multiple partners in the most important decisions in the Company’s history and negotiating binding international agreements involving many complex issues, requiring Board-of-Director-level approval by all parties, and coordinating some of it with the PNG and other governments. Of course, I am sure you have little understanding of all that. They will not be announcing a “winning bid” without that; it is not one without it. The Raymond James CFA with energy expertise, unlike you, thinks the decision on the “winning bid” has probably already been made and they are completing the rest of the process. I agree and think we are getting very close to an announcement.
You ignorantly or dishonestly question the receipt of bids, arrogantly asserting that “for all we know Bozo the Clown was one”. You falsely state that the PNG authorities “demanded that it partner with” specifically a “supermajor”. What the government actually called for was an “internationally recognized LNG operator”, and the Company has said that all the final bids meet that criteria, as reported by Raymond James. You falsely state that “InterOil’s management has never specifically said that the company has received a bid from a supermajor.” However, I have heard/read such statements, and just on April 5, 2013, Raymond James, a highly respected outside party, reported in writing, “the company has previously disclosed receiving at least four preliminary bids: two from major oil companies, one from a national oil company, and one from a utility (known to be Kogas). You question the term “preliminary bids”; that simply means those received prior to the “final” bids received Feb. 28. Furthermore, in the Feb. 28 conference call the CEO stated that the PNG NEC conditional project approval “created enhanced interest by several new parties”, and that “IOCs” (supermajors), NOCs, and utilities have all moved forward” into the final bidding stage and “we look forward to this partner selection”. You put all that together, not to mention more available, and it is very clear without “suspicion” to most people, except perhaps for uninformed or misinformed clowns like you.
The interview with the CEO in the PNG Industry News article you reference, and try to make into something it is not, was about Elk 3 and quoted him about that. The statement in the article about two supermajors being “involved with bids” was a background statement by the reporter not even attributed to Mulacek much less quoted, and there is no reason to believe it was subject to subsequent rewrite by the CEO. Your ridiculous semantics game with the word “involved” meaning in your twisted mind “evidence” of a secret conspiracy with “no official bids from supermajors” is illogical, unjustified, and clownish, indeed.
Your interpretation of standard canned disclosures by Raymond James about all companies they write about and your accusations of bias and incompetence against them are totally unjustified and inappropriate, and even more ridiculous (and clownish) coming from you.
Your final suggested question has been answered by the Company and deserving of no further explanation prior to disclosure of results. Your final conclusions are also not deserving of any further response, being clearly those of a dishonest or incompetent clown. The problem with your playing Bozo the Clown is that, with the trash you publish, you are pathetic and not funny.
If this is the best the shorts have to offer now, they are in big trouble indeed!