The Attempted Grand Theft of IOC

[admin]

Irrelevant.  His argument is irrelevant.   It lacks context of a very high probability of IOC current reality as I laid out.  His argument is based on assuming 10.2 T and that we are getting screwed and in fact, it may just be that it's the absolute best IOC can do in view of realities we will not admit or know about.  When cert #s come in much lower than 10.2 then Hession is vindicated.  The lower the #, the less life IOC has.  IOC would not be able meet exploration obligations to hold leases.  As time would pass our next and final offers would be much lower.

Just because you claim it is irrelevant doesn't necessarily make it so. IOC's current reality is that we have a deal with TOT, under which they are liable to a whole range of stuff, which they have wiggled out of under the new arrangement, the takeover of IOC by OSH and dividing the spoils with TOT.

WIthout the new arrangement the old arrangement stands.

The whole idea of this seems driven by the realization of both OSH and TOT that they are liable for large sums of contingent pay if the certification comes up high.

Everything we've learned from the last three years of appraisal has increased that possibility.

[jft310]

Phil is high that's true . It's his baby . The 5 largest appraiser are notoriously conservative . Hession told us GLJ is more right than GCA . But NSAI was hired by Aldorf and their pre drill estimate was 15 T's in 2005 . Now we have the data and the wells drilled .
Knowledge Reservoir in 2009 said 15 T's .
Phil has copies of the NSAI report from 2005 and the Knowledge Reservoir report from 2009 both saying 15 T's . Or he has a legal basis for what he states .
I am betting with Phil with the understanding that other appraisers may be more conservative than his completed appraisals .
Grand thief defined with a legal way to show cause !!
Vote no

[sageo]

Excellent post Pet

Ditto,Lib ...his post gives new meaning to the word excellent . With all the combined experience of our ceo and bod (I put them in small letters instead of caps intentionally), you know they can't be ignorant . Therefore,we have to conclude something else; either they are incompetent or their lack of courage underlies a darker side as to what is going on and is hidden from the shareholders .

In addition,RJ has become such a disappointment to me .I realize that they don't know 1/20 th of what Pet knows about our assets,but they still ought to be willing to learn ...(    Yes,putting their arrogance aside would be very difficult for them )  .Thanks for all your help to our bms .

[Tree]

Irrelevant.  His argument is irrelevant.   It lacks context of a very high probability of IOC current reality as I laid out.  His argument is based on assuming 10.2 T and that we are getting screwed and in fact, it may just be that it's the absolute best IOC can do in view of realities we will not admit or know about.  When cert #s come in much lower than 10.2 then Hession is vindicated.  The lower the #, the less life IOC has.  IOC would not be able meet exploration obligations to hold leases.  As time would pass our next and final offers would be much lower.

Just because you claim it is irrelevant doesn't necessarily make it so. IOC's current reality is that we have a deal with TOT, under which they are liable to a whole range of stuff, which they have wiggled out of under the new arrangement, the takeover of IOC by OSH and dividing the spoils with TOT.

WIthout the new arrangement the old arrangement stands.

The whole idea of this seems driven by the realization of both OSH and TOT that they are liable for large sums of contingent pay if the certification comes up high.

Everything we've learned from the last three years of appraisal has increased that possibility.

Your fallacy is assuming TOT/OSH lacked a very clear and accurate view of volumes in E/A in 2013/Jan 14 when they bought in.  They crafted an upside deal with IOC and PacLNG happily agreeing to buy more chap gas if there was proven to be more cheap gas.  Same posters back then, griped about being ripped off at the $/M in the deal and that TOT/OSH based size on ~6.2 T.  You and Pet now telling us TOT/OSH wouldnt want much more 'cheap' gas to ship JP/SK??  That's absurd.  The more gas the better, if it's cheap and can be sold at profit.

I can see it now....Re-cert # is 7.7 TCF and you guys will cry we're ripped off again!  Admit it or not the whole marked fell for Phil's lies of $/MCF deal options he had in his pocket and potentially the size of what he's been claiming.

[jft310]

Tree explain why near the end of the OSH-PACLNG appraisal they are voting to kill that appraisal and mark it tainted !!! There is but one answer the results are not what we wanted !! If they were low then finish and reveal them !!
A court should make them finish that appraisal .

[AU74]

We've had 2 resource deals and neither were anywhere close to the values brainwashed by Phil.

Irrelevant.

What Pet argues is that the present takeover by OilSearch confers big benefits to OilSearch and Total, at our expense. It's got nothing to do with whatever values, brainwashed or not, Phil has come up with in the past

It's simply argues that the present deal is much worse than the one we had:

Once again to see how this works, Total was to start paying according to the above table at 3.5 TCFe. Now they only start paying at 6.5 TCFe and they only pay US$0.77/MCFe instead of the higher rate shown above. They only have to pay 60% instead of 100% and they get a larger piece of Elk/Antelope to boot. Both Total and OSH end up with a larger percentage of Elk/Antelope and Papua LNG. Most of these gains and benefits to Total and OSH are a loss to IOC shareholders. Total also gets 62% of all licenses outside PRL-15, including the discoveries at Triceratops, Raptor and Bob Cat for nothing. Of course OSH also gets their cut of all other licenses outside of PRL-15 including Triceratops, Raptor and Bob Cat for nothing. This is really grand theft by both Total and OSH with the cooperation of our CEO and BOD.

The Attempted Grand Theft of IOC

Irrelevant.  His argument is irrelevant.   It lacks context of a very high probability of IOC current reality as I laid out.  His argument is based on assuming 10.2 T and that we are getting screwed and in fact, it may just be that it's the absolute best IOC can do in view of realities we will not admit or know about.  When cert #s come in much lower than 10.2 then Hession is vindicated.  The lower the #, the less life IOC has.  IOC would not be able meet exploration obligations to hold leases.  As time would pass our next and final offers would be much lower.

If your take is correct, why would OSH hide the facts by canceling the OSH-IPI certification?  It would only cost them $$$.

[admin]

Your fallacy is assuming TOT/OSH lacked a very clear and accurate view of volumes in E/A in 2013/Jan 14 when they bought in.  They crafted an upside deal with IOC and PacLNG happily agreeing to buy more chap gas if there was proven to be more cheap gas.  Same posters back then, griped about being ripped off at the $/M in the deal and that TOT/OSH based size on ~6.2 T.  You and Pet now telling us TOT/OSH wouldnt want much more 'cheap' gas to ship JP/SK??  That's absurd.  The more gas the better, if it's cheap and can be sold at profit. I can see it now....Re-cert # is 7.7 TCF and you guys will cry we're ripped off again!  Admit it or not the whole marked fell for Phil's lies of $/MCF deal options he had in his pocket and potentially the size of what he's been claiming.

I don't know what TOT/OSH had in mind when they bought into PRL15, and I never purported to know.

I'm also not the one who griped about being ripped off by TOT.

I'm not telling you either that TOT/OSH wouldn't want more cheap gas.

Now, after clearing that mist up, what I am telling you is that they prefer not to pay for it according to their old contingent transactions (TOT with IOC and OSH with Civelli).

Your whole point seems to rest on Hession knowing the recert is low and IOC would not have a future under the existing SPA with TOT.

I have cited these words before (several times as it happens), I will cite them again:

The fact of the matter is volumes are trending up and, Evan, [indiscernible] talked about this. The GLJ, their view of the reservoir as we continually drill four, five and six GLJ again and again are being proved to be more correct with respect to the reserves and the nature of the geology that we are dealing with.

This was Hession during our last CC. Is he saying one thing in public and another in private?

So let me reverse the question. Say the takeover by OSH materializes and the recert comes in at 10Tcf. What will you say?

Rather than sticking to words from unreliable people, lets look at the facts.

The facts are that everything done in terms of E/A appraisal work the last three years is likely to have increased the resource numbers. By how much? Well, that remains to be seen..

[jft310]

Admin - And IOC shareholders deserve to know the amount of that increase before the vote or common sense days vote until they do provide basic info . Certainly forms a solid foundation for a law suit with cause and could prevent Hession and the BOD from filling their wheel barrels with our money .

[admin]

Admin - And IOC shareholders deserve to know the amount of that increase before the vote or common sense days vote until they do provide basic info . Certainly forms a solid foundation for a law suit with cause and could prevent Hession and the BOD from filling their wheel barrels with our money .

I know. One of my main gripes with the deal is that we don't know what we're voting on. If the resource cert is high, I would be against the deal. If it is low, I just might change my mind.

But as Pet showed in the original post in this thread, the deal has been structured in a way that cuts both TOT and OSH's contingencies, largely at our expense.

[Tree]

Tree explain why near the end of the OSH-PACLNG appraisal they are voting to kill that appraisal and mark it tainted !!! There is but one answer the results are not what we wanted !! If they were low then finish and reveal them !! A court should make them finish that appraisal .

Already did that in my original reply to this thread.  Sorry, you guys can;t stop, think and breathe and take a chance to consider what is moreso appearing to be the reality.