'admin' pid='21600' dateline='<a href="tel:1367072 Wrote:There are a few pending questions from CAC from yesterday for anyone who seriously thinks Phil went voluntarily:
["I actually think Phil's comments raise more questions than they answer. Human nature provides an inherent incentive to be somewhat self-serving. I am dubious about his statements that this was planned a long time ago, and has nothing to do with pressure from an outside source or with disagreement with the Board on future direction. He makes it sound like he's stepping down from the company he loves, right before the deal he's been working on for years is consumated, out of an altruistic concern for how the yet-to-be-identified successor's legacy will be viewed. Hmmm.
If true, why the coincidental timing of the announcement immediately following an important Board meeting? Why the extremely short notice? And most telling, why wouldn't IOC have also given a roses and lolipops explanation for Phil's departure and specifically state it had nothing to do with deal negotiations? What they chose to say was..Mulacek’s retirement was a part of the process to bring in a strategic partner to operate the Elk-Antelope field."]
I'm not sure references to icebergs cut it, in terms of answers, but perhaps that's just me.
And again, write a letter of protest to Pavel, Westlake, etc.
Phil created a $4b company out of thin air in one of the last frontier countries on earth. For that he deserves much praise, but that shouldn't make us blind to the possibility that he's not perfect and could have become an obstacle for progress lately.
you can't find any cheap shot bidder or government quotes either I have to conclude. I guess I will just have to take Phil and Collin and Oneill at face value and the hearsay for what it is. But, that's just me.