Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Raymond James March 14th
#30

'Libtardius Maximus' pid='39316' datel Wrote:

'Getitrt2' pid='39313' datel Wrote:I can't believe this debate over Exxon vs Total with respect to PRL 15 keeps popping up, even in a thread for an RJ report predicting a close with Total. As far as I am concerned, we have an extremely intelligent, experienced, and competent CEO who has thoroughly evaluated the best proposals of Exxon and Total and decisively selected Total's, in conjunction with on-going consultations with the government, and that is good enough for me. Furthermore, however, what I have learned and evaluated in conjunction with that from all sources pro and con seem to back that up. Without some significant change from Total and/or Exxon, I don't see any reason why there is any debate left on PRL 15 at this time. On one point, as I have discussed elsewhere people keep referring to "sooner cash flow from a PNG LNG third train", even though MS puts that at four years. They should be saying "operating cash flow", because much sooner cash flow comes from the fixed and resource payments from Total, which are apparently greater than Exxon was willing to offer. I might add that, as I have also discussed elsewhere, according to the Feb 27 MS report on OSH, Exxon and OSH are currently focused on developing and evaluating Hides, P'nyang, etc. as sources for PNG LNG train 3. If there is any worthwhile debate left, barring circumstance changes as indicated above, I think it arises from other gas from Triceratops, new discoveries (likely, imo), or perhaps certification of much larger amounts than expected in PRL 15; and I think that debate would be on expansion of either or both when of the two LNG facilities, a debate I would love to enjoy. The first two of those sources have also been cited by our CEO as possible sources for PNG LNG.

Getirt,

There has never been a better time to own IOC than right now. No IPI, Duma, PNG government in support, drilling, low cost gas, terms of winning bid known. We have been told for years that there is huge interest in IOC finds and licenses. I for one favor letting the competition play out in full view of shareholders. Remember, Hession stated on his 40% off cc in December that it was competitive to the very end. This may strike you as strange, but this is not over. Not until a deal is signed and money changes hands. If someone else wants EA more than TOT than I support that. Next up for IOC shareholders is a cc which is overdue. I hope there is some good news involving more than what we already know.

I couldn't agree more Lib.

Reply



Messages In This Thread
Raymond James March 14th - by jft310 - 03-16-2014, 03:18 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by hudsojo - 03-16-2014, 12:11 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by admin - 03-16-2014, 03:06 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by jft310 - 03-16-2014, 09:55 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-16-2014, 10:12 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by admin - 03-17-2014, 02:13 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Spartina - 03-17-2014, 03:57 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by cybersssss - 03-17-2014, 04:10 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by kommonsents - 03-17-2014, 04:28 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Putncalls - 03-17-2014, 04:35 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Kaliboo - 03-17-2014, 04:50 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by admin - 03-17-2014, 04:33 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Spartina - 03-17-2014, 07:37 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-17-2014, 09:13 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Putncalls - 03-17-2014, 09:28 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-17-2014, 09:59 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by jft310 - 03-17-2014, 10:00 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Putncalls - 03-17-2014, 10:37 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Putncalls - 03-17-2014, 10:38 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-17-2014, 12:25 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Spartina - 03-17-2014, 08:22 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by TomCrooz - 03-17-2014, 10:48 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by ArtM72 - 03-17-2014, 11:07 PM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by jft310 - 03-18-2014, 02:09 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-18-2014, 03:15 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 03:48 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 02:48 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by CAC - 03-18-2014, 04:07 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 05:36 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by CAC - 03-18-2014, 06:17 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 09:16 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by jdeo1969 - 03-18-2014, 04:14 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 04:59 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 08:09 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Palm - 03-18-2014, 05:09 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Brew Swillis - 03-18-2014, 04:30 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by geologydude - 03-18-2014, 05:00 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 06:11 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 05:51 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Brew Swillis - 03-18-2014, 05:59 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Getitrt2 - 03-18-2014, 08:35 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by jft310 - 03-18-2014, 05:15 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Bobby - 03-18-2014, 05:56 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by Petrovale - 03-18-2014, 05:58 AM
RE: Raymond James March 14th - by sageo - 03-18-2014, 07:05 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)