"Oil Search continues to argue that the development of the oil and gas assets of the Elk-Antelope acreage would be cheaper if done using some of the infrastructure of Papua New Guinea's existing gas export project, in which ExxonMobil and Oil Search are shareholders."
Again, we see OSH and IOC unable to get beyond the non-sequitur that XOM, OSH and TOT can do what XOM, OSH, TOT and IOC cannot do. They simply can't and won't answer the question why they think IOC would stand in the way of sharing PNG LNG's infrastructure even while Total is the JV operator. In other words neither OSH nor IOC can produce a logical reason for this buyout.
I'll produce two:
1. The Hession contract's extraordinary Change of Control provisions and
2. Saxon Palmer's projection last June of gross prospective and contingent 17 TCFe unrisked P50 resources with an additional 35 leads, all in addition to Elk/Antelope (Slide 20 http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documen...202015.pdf).
Again, we see OSH and IOC unable to get beyond the non-sequitur that XOM, OSH and TOT can do what XOM, OSH, TOT and IOC cannot do. They simply can't and won't answer the question why they think IOC would stand in the way of sharing PNG LNG's infrastructure even while Total is the JV operator. In other words neither OSH nor IOC can produce a logical reason for this buyout.
I'll produce two:
1. The Hession contract's extraordinary Change of Control provisions and
2. Saxon Palmer's projection last June of gross prospective and contingent 17 TCFe unrisked P50 resources with an additional 35 leads, all in addition to Elk/Antelope (Slide 20 http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documen...202015.pdf).