XOM and IOC Agree to extend outside date by 1 week!

[2126]

To my opinion, the only way this can be positively resolved is if a new offer, based on this new valuation, is accepted by Dr Mulacek, and he subsequently withdraws his law suit. Mr Hession can go to Cuba and stay there.

I agree.  What can this short extension achieve?  The deal is dead.  The court has ruled.  It can't be undone.  Perhaps this is what they are doing.  IOC and XOM are renegotiating the deal so that it will have new conditions and a new timeline, but it will be labeled by MH as the same deal but with improvements.  Perhaps doing it under that framework gives them procedural short cuts.  So between now and Dec 21 we'll be hearing of the newly announced deal with an expedited shareholder voting process to be concluded BEFORE A7 IS EVALUATED AND BEFORE THE RECERTIFICATION IS DONE.  PM will have to sue all over again if he doesn't liike this one.

In any case I sense another attempt by MH and XOM to rip us off.  Surely XOM does not want to delay and have to contend with higher oil prices, A7 positive results and higher recertification.  For them this is one of 2 outcomes - snatch victory from the jaws of defeat OR snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Hopefully the shareholders that have voted yes have woken up.

The Appeallate Court did not kill the deal. What they did is overturn the lower courts final approval of the deal and, in addition, rule that the shareholder vote was tainted because of inadequate disclosures by IOC, stemming mainly from the insufficiently independent 'fairness opinion'.

IOC and Exxon can revive the same deal, get a new and independent fairness opinion, have the BOD approve the deal again [I believe that the MH double payment may or may not be still in play], issue a new MIC with a new shareholder vote date, and go forward with a vote and then seek 'final approval' again from the lower court.

There is still a question of conflict of interest with MH's compensation and the BOD, but that may not be enough to have the Yukon court not approve this 'new' deal, particularly if the shareholder vote again comes in above 75%.

Additionally, the new fairness opinion does not necessarily need to be an opinion with detailed facts and figures regarding the NAV of all of IOC assets. It just needs to be independent, not linked to a payment which is based on the success of the deal, and include a bit more analysis of IOC assets than the wholly inadequate Morgan Stanley opinion. This new opinion will, no doubt, still find that this deal is "fair".

Phil may again attempt to block the final approval of this 'newly independently appraised and fair' deal in court, but he will have far less ammunition this go-round, as the IOC and Exxon lawyers now have the Appellate Court decision as a blueprint for how to proceed to Final Approval. I think some SHU members are assuming that Phil has any power at all over this particular deal. He only has his legal attempts to stop a 'final approval' which, as I note, has a far less chance to succeed this time around. He, of course, can take other legal steps against the BOD and CEO regarding their malfeasance and corporate misconduct, but none of those legal manueverings will stop this deal if, again, the shareholder vote is YES by over 67% and there has been an independent 'fairness opinion',

I don't expect any better terms from Exxon and I don't really expect any other outcome than final approval of the deal. This leaves No/Dissent as a much more viable vote this time around, as I do believe that the Yukon courts will expedite a court-ordered appraisal of all of IOC assets to determine 'fair value', using a NAV approach, and not a 'market value' approach. Such an appraisal will also come after A7 results and the Total certification numbers, though will not necessarity include the future value of the 2nd Total certification which is now part of the SPA.