09-25-2015, 01:48 PM
JFT:
1. PNG LNG Train 3 (one additional copy): I would guess on the order of $6 Billion since there's no investment required for Gas Conditioning Plant, Pipeline, Airport, Storage Tank, Site Preparation, etc, and costs have come down by as much as 20% in the past year of turmoil.
OSH contribution is 29% ... $1.74 Billion in total; 30% CA$H ($525 million) and 70% LOAN ($1.21 Billion)
Of course, the cost is spread over a period of about 4 years with about 30% spent in the highest-cost year 2.
2. Cost of the Papua LNG 2-Train Build of course depends on the capacity of each Train. If we say 3.5 million tons per annum per train (ie same as what has been demonstrated by PNG LNG) then $16 Billion is a reasonable first guess.
OSH contribution is (22.84 x 0.775)% after Govt takes their 22.5% .... $2.83 Billion in total; 30% CA$H ($850 Million) and 70% LOAN ($1.98 Billion)
In this case, the period is more like five years and the maximum might be 25% in Year 3.
3. Payment to Pacific LNG - Unknown $$$. Let's hope it's $600 Million all paid in CA$H in mid-2016
Lots of new borrowing would be required .. but spread over the next 6 years, during which time they would have revenue from PNG LNG but pay Dividends plus Operating Expenditures plus repayment of existing debt.
A key point is that OSH's "Gearing Ratio" at the end of 2014 was about 40% (US$10.7 Billion assets and US$4.4 Billion in total Debt)
In their Annual Report they said:
"We remain focused on rigorous financial management and fiscal discipline, with capital, gearing and liquidity to be conservatively managed. Our aim is to be in a position where we can fully support the required investment in our key potential lng growth projects, while still rewarding shareholders with dividend distributions, in line with the new dividend policy."
WILL THEY BE SHORT OF MONEY?
It seems to me that the answer is YES ... BUT I'm only a Chemical Engineer!
1. PNG LNG Train 3 (one additional copy): I would guess on the order of $6 Billion since there's no investment required for Gas Conditioning Plant, Pipeline, Airport, Storage Tank, Site Preparation, etc, and costs have come down by as much as 20% in the past year of turmoil.
OSH contribution is 29% ... $1.74 Billion in total; 30% CA$H ($525 million) and 70% LOAN ($1.21 Billion)
Of course, the cost is spread over a period of about 4 years with about 30% spent in the highest-cost year 2.
2. Cost of the Papua LNG 2-Train Build of course depends on the capacity of each Train. If we say 3.5 million tons per annum per train (ie same as what has been demonstrated by PNG LNG) then $16 Billion is a reasonable first guess.
OSH contribution is (22.84 x 0.775)% after Govt takes their 22.5% .... $2.83 Billion in total; 30% CA$H ($850 Million) and 70% LOAN ($1.98 Billion)
In this case, the period is more like five years and the maximum might be 25% in Year 3.
3. Payment to Pacific LNG - Unknown $$$. Let's hope it's $600 Million all paid in CA$H in mid-2016
Lots of new borrowing would be required .. but spread over the next 6 years, during which time they would have revenue from PNG LNG but pay Dividends plus Operating Expenditures plus repayment of existing debt.
A key point is that OSH's "Gearing Ratio" at the end of 2014 was about 40% (US$10.7 Billion assets and US$4.4 Billion in total Debt)
In their Annual Report they said:
"We remain focused on rigorous financial management and fiscal discipline, with capital, gearing and liquidity to be conservatively managed. Our aim is to be in a position where we can fully support the required investment in our key potential lng growth projects, while still rewarding shareholders with dividend distributions, in line with the new dividend policy."
WILL THEY BE SHORT OF MONEY?
It seems to me that the answer is YES ... BUT I'm only a Chemical Engineer!
Drivel Maven with Personality