Bid to banish uncertainty over resource

[TxPm]

Getit, for some reason you feel the need to criticize & question the integrity of my posts & positions in this company. Really however that doesn't bother me bc you and your opinion of me mean absolutely nothing. What is annoying is the arrogance that you display in your opinion. While your posts are valuable you have displayed no insider knowledge of the company that others on this board don't also posses yet your posts are way more arrogant then those of Palm, Hemi, Tree & others & you feel the need to tell ppl they are being "sucked in" and "fallen under the influence". I suggest you leave your personal opinion of others to yourself and focus on the company.

[wapitidropiti]

[Hey Bertl, I'll take that $3.85/MCF all day.    quote='admin' pid='13219' dateline='1353702499'] Have to agree with that, Bertl05 [/quote]

[Libtardius Maximus]

Guys,

I'll add my .02 to this.

Collin's correct about sources. I've always known this but it was nice to hear it stated in such a blunt manner.

While there have been delays and I lay a fair amount of of this blame on management, I place a larger amount on PNG politics and culture. I have to remind myself that the masses have no idea of what prosperity looks like unless you happen to be one of a select few and that includes electricity and power generation. Or a toothbrush for that matter. PM is making this a whole new ballgame not just for IOC but for all of PNG.

I am surprised by one thing that was not noticed here after the last cc. Where was Byker? He was on the August cc. I suggest you fellas do some dd on his background pre-Calvin.

And while we wonder why PNG wants additional 27.5% and shorts bellow IOC had to "give away" half for NEC approval what appears to be lost in the fog of this POV is this. PNG is not the only government getting theirs. It seems to me that Korea, Japan, China, Thailand, Indonesia and a host of others are involved as well, just by proxy.

IOC's resource has extreme value not just to us as shareholders but to an entire region of the world.

Why do you think the bashers and shorts won't go away and claim victory? Stock is down almost 40% from the phoney short induced high. What do they really want? To be right?

This company and this resource is very valuable and we will all find out just how valuable once the first winning bidder is announced or just prior. THAT is when the fur will fly.

I'll leave the price per MCF banter to you fine people. I just want an announcement of a deal.

Happy weekend all and armor up for more slings and arrows.

[sageo]

Hi to all--  OT for a minute. Can anyone tell me for sure that all the new rig and all it's associated parts and supplies  have been landed at the Hou Creek site for Elk3 ? The rainy season in PNG is from December to March , so I'm hoping that we can spud  Elk3 by 12-1-12 !  Sure anxious to see what is down deep !!

[Getitrt2]

sageo, good question. I can't tell you for sure whether it's all there or at the drilling site, but they said not too long ago it was on the way; and I get the impression from management that they are determined to spud E3 by Nov. 30. I can hardly wait to have two drilling simultaneously, and two more gas confirming wells fairly close together. I think they know a lot about what to expect, but I think E3 is more of an unknown than A3. See Petrengr1's comments elsewhere.

[Getitrt2]

TxPm, I am sorry if you think I was targeting you personally or questioning your integrity, because I certainly did not intend to be doing that. I was focused entirely on the content of your post and the support it seemed to be giving an article whose content, integrity, and motives I consider highly questionable and in fact seriously flawed and misleading. I hardly even paid any attention to the writer of the post. I admit I am severely agitated and frustrated with the shorts and their dishonesty and success in distorting the facts and misleading people, and I guess that came through and affected my tone. I do have a lot of confidence in the information and opinions I express or wouldn't do so, and am trying to fight against misinformation from shorts and promote the truth and help shareholders; if you want to call that arrogance so be it and that doesn't bother me much either. I also happen to think anyone who chooses to participate in that battle and publicly post should do adequate research and due diligence first and try to make sure they don't inadvertantly aid and abett(?) the cause of the shorts, which does not mean blind faith in the Company, although I believe the Company is certainly more trustworthy than the shorts and their lackeys. There is, of course, nothing wrong about asking questions about information or issues someone wants feedback on .

I am already very much focused on the Company, and am glad and appreciative if you see value in the posts. I didn't note any comments or questions by you on the content of my post here. If you have any questions or criticisms on that, I would be glad to try to respond in hopefully a more appropriate tone, although I would still ask you check the sources I referenced first.

[sageo]

Getit 2-- Thanks for your reply about Elk 3 . If one of our guys ( with better  internet skills than I have ) could ask Colin or Dave about this question concerning the  E 3 rig progress, it would sure bring us all  to an updated  answer . Nice thought to have 2 rigs drilling at once in such a prolific field ! GLTY .

[Getitrt2]

Getit thats a bit harsh. While its unwise to put much stock in these "unamed" sources, it's also never a good iea to blindly swallow all of what ANY company says, wether it be on a CC or otherwise. The best method is to always have a healthy dose of skeptism. Based on the reality that much of what mgmt has said over the last several years has not panned out yet, one must be careful to think that things said are facts. Many many things are out of IOC's control, therefore best intentions don't always come to fruition. We really have no idea what any of the bidders feel about the size of the resource or what configuration they desire, or how much they are willing to pay upfront and how much they will finance. You can say that this 40% has all been the shorts fault, but I doubt thats true, nor has it all been IOC's fault. The truth lies somewhere in between. I certainly am not being sucked in by anyones crap. The doomsayers are wrong IMO as are the $200 per share $385 SD'ers. Somewhere in the middle is my guess. I happen to appreciate the varied opinions here. Obviously neither TXPM or I are stupid enough to listen to the paid bashers (of which all are on yahoo). But neither is it wise to ignore the risks and complexities of getting a large project going, financed and built in a timely effcient manner very wise.

bert, perhaps you're right about being a "bit harsh", but you haven't really addressed the content, just provided some platitudes hard to disagree with, along with some general criticisms that are not accurate.  I do not "blindly swallow all of what ANY company says", including IOC;  and if you have any relevant examples, I'd like to hear them.  I think that's a "bit harsh".  I definitely do trust the Company much more than I do the shorts, which I assume you would agree with.  I do think you have to distinguish between statements of fact and ones of plans, intentions, or expectations, which the Company itself advises us to do.  I don't recall any examples of their lying about facts, or even their plans, recognizing they can always change, voluntarily or otherwise.  I think we can agree on most of that.  I also am certainly not ignoring the risks and complexities involved, as you seem to be implying;  in fact that is part of what I have been trying to remind people of.

I disagree that we have "no idea" what any of the bidders feel about etc., etc., as you state above.  Their preferred configuration was discussed on the cc, indicating a strong preference for a phased project (but no indication of flat rejection of a larger up front), and primarily for reasons of earlier production and cash flow with better supply/demand market timing, as well as easier financing, not because of serious concerns about the resource, though the phased approach is obviously lower risk.  Do you doubt management's honesty on that?  I also understand from management that all bidders have full financing available, with no issues about that.

Also, I was talking about an article with anonymous sources, which the CFO has warned about, not any "paid bashers" on Yahoo.  Furthermore, I don't believe I have said anything about your being sucked in by anyone's crap, although some people may have been at times, maybe even me.  I appreciate "varied opinions" as well, but preferably informed ones as opposed to uninformed or careless speculation that could do damage to shareholders.