[quote='Tree' pid='20602' dateline='1365729966']
Bertl or anyone else, can you please explain how Petromin's removal can adversely effect the SD process? No one has shown how that's even possible.
However, It's easy to show why that thought is baseless.
Elimination of Petromin has no bearing on the SD process whatsoever. It neither can delay the process or speed it up. SD is a commercial transaction between IOC and chosen bidder(s). Petromin has no say or influence on which bidder IOC chooses. Petromin has the right to opt into the project and will then be obligated to pay sunk costs of their stake and their share of development costs. Petromin would have only managed the State's equity and by no means carries any weight in the SD partner decision.
Unwinding Petromin is a Gov't decision. Petromin will no/cannot t sign any contracts with chosen bidder or IOC until they opt in to Gulf LNG and commit at FID. Petromin appears to be dismantled as it was universally claimed to be poorly managed by industry, was incriminated in a bribe scandall with Shell, took liberty of promoting Shell as preferred operator for Gulf LNG when they had no authority and illegally reneged on JAPEX/Petromin 2010 MOU to assist Petromin in training and development of PNG's hydrocarbon industries. Summer of 2011, Petromin signed a similar MOU with RDS supplanting JAPEX of their association. Last month, JAPEX resigned MOU with JAPEX, booting Shell, a clear indication of O'Neill administration's will. It is likely JKM consortium, and maybe others, helped force this move.
Duma and DPE have not hinted one bit that they are problematic at all since O'Neill's re-election. Drilling commitment extensions and Duma's public support for Petromin's elimination are evidence.
It works best if people back up their conclusions or they are just gratuitous. It works best if people don't count on rumors and fear for their DD.
There is a big difference between legit concerns and falsehoods fueled not by reality but emotion.
And yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion. They are are also obligated to scrutiny and making the case. We all benefit that way.
++++++++
Really? Not even "possible" that a bidder (the same bidder that required the gvt restructuring as a condition of the deal) might want to be 100% sure that their multi-billion dollar partnership with IOC and PNG would be consummated with the legally authorized, completely-revamped, governmental entity that they may have requested be created as part of the deal? It still takes two to tango. Just because you think PNG can do it now doesn't mean a bidder feels comfortable with that. The truth is that we are all speculating here, however, a conclusion that it is "impossible" for a major governmental shakeup to cause a bidder to want to delay the process is also gratuitous and emotional. It is not my opinion that this is definitely the case...but it is far from impossible.