'CAC' pid='71550' datel Wrote:'Li'loilady'
From the replay of an RJ / Pavel conference call with Hession and gang regarding the deal. May 24: Per Hession, there will be 2 Resource Evaluators, chosen out of the following 3:
Ryder Scott, Beicip, and Miller and Lents, Ltd.
It was decided that Gaffney Cline and Nederland Sewall were "tainted" because they're working for OSH right now. The evaluators they're choosing from now are the 3 left on our original SPA list. Nothing suspicious with this, I don't think. I would have preferred folks who are already familiar with our field, however.
Total picks 1 resource evaluator and a "CVR subcommittee" picks the other one. This subcommittee is made up of 2 IOC directors + 2 OSH directors + 1 "independent chairperson." This subcommittee will "oversee" the CVR process from beginning to end.
*******
So...us shareholders have a subcommittee to "oversee" this process for us? Is the ability to "oversee" an actual legal term? Are there specifically defined and articulated legal entitlements and remedies included as part of this "overseeing" right? It sounds somewhat like meaningless window-dressing designed to elicit false security...and.acceptance of the deal. If "overseeing" means what I think it does (i.e. "watching"
, then I guess I can "oversee" it all too.
While wording like this: "No member of the Certification Subcommittee owes any duty of care, or will otherwise be liable, to the CVR Note holders in respect of the performance of their duties as members of the Certification Subcommittee" is included in the agreement, it is quite clear that the certification committee will be specifically NOT working in the shareholders best interest.