The Attempted Grand Theft of IOC

[trans]

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.

That sounds narcissistic.  Can you consider possible alternatives to your conclusions?

[kommonsents]

I didn't know trees had mirrors......

[admin]

Sorry, you guys can;t stop, think and breathe and take a chance to consider what is moreso appearing to be the reality.

Well, perhaps we're not as clever as you but we did think, stop and breath and took a chance considering everything.

Let's make this binary with respect to the recert:

• Low (7T or lower)
• High (10T or higher)

And now for some stylized facts:

1. Whatever OSH and TOT had in mind back when they entered PRL15, they entered via contingency deals
2. Whatever has happened since in terms of appraisal work, the chances of a high recert has increased, also according to Hession
3. The LNG market isn't near as attractive as it was when TOT and OSH entered PRL15
4. IOC can remain viable with a high recert, but will really struggle with a low recert
5. There is little doubt that the OSH takeover of IOC and the OSH MoU with TOT remove much of the contingency from a high recert (see Pet's original post in this thread).

Binary outcome in the light of these stylized facts

• Low recert: Hession might have gotten us the best deal available in a forced selling of the company
• High recert: Hession has sold us out giving away much of our upside while the company could have remained viable

You see why one of the first things I said was that the big thing missing in valuating the deal is knowledge of the recert, and that this is like "groping in the dark"?

It's REALLY crucial info, IMHO.

[AU74]

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.

Did you really?  Here is what you posted in your original reply to this thread, and I see no reference to the OSH-IPI certification, much less any reasoning on its cancellation:

Simplistic to assert TOT/OSH bought into PRL15 initially based upon GCA and GLJ #s. They based their decision to plunk hundreds of millions down on their own internal evaluations.
Only # that now matters is the average of 2 certifiers. Might you run 7.7 T through your analysis and placed into proper context:
IOC financially on the ropes.
TOT showing they are fine with waiting out IOC on re-certification.
LNG mkt ain't half attractive as it once was.
Likelihood E/A gas headed to PNG LNG via an aligned JV's
Very real possibility Papua LNG gets 'delayed' officially.
4 reported bidders in last round and TOT stated to be the best for shareholders.
We've had 2 resource deals and neither were anywhere close to the values brainwashed by Phil.
In retrospect, a very strong case can be made that previous management, PM, should also be considered the target of litigation.

[jft310]

Phil certainly had his moments his little slips on the calls of things that were not factual . Hession carried the tradition forward with talk of 51 T at the last AGM , talk of GCA being wrong and GLJ right , 6 T's at RB .
GLJ is a very respectable firm that even Exxon has used to the past , call them and ask like we did . David Harris has a great tract record in the biz , Phil has 3 reports to verify his comments , one the NSAI report in 2005 15 T expected , the 2009 report from knowledge Reservoir who saw 15 T's , let's not forget Hession stating the high GLJ number of 12 T was now the mid point per Hession and crew . Phil thinks 12-15 T eventually can be proven out . Three appraiser's agree with him .
One needs to keep in mind Ant S 3-6 T and Mule Deer and Raptor not explored yet but seismics show possible assets , Discounting Phil has issues based on the above . It makes no sense to think the number is low based on OSH and Total and Interoi all saying well results are better than expected . Vote no way on this deal . We deserve finished results from GCA and NSAI before we can possibly vote . Hiding them has great liability for the people voting to hide the results .

[will2bgreat]

Thank you Pet for a great thread/thoughts.

I have always been curious why IOC would sell when they can't put an amount on the gas in E/A.  But here is what we do know:

• IOC has stated previously that there is sufficient gas for a 2 train LNG facility.
• TOT stated there is sufficient gas for a 2 train LNG facility.
• Botten has stated they don't know if there is sufficient gas for one large or 2 small train LNG facility.  But we also know that Botten had is eyes on IOC back in 2014, so he has a reason to suppress the E/A gas estimate.
• However, we do know that OSH is very interested in acquiring IOC.  Why if they do not know how much gas is in E/A.
• Also, GCA can't be used for certification if IOC is sold?  And the recertification for Civelli may be cancelled/delayed until A7.  If Civelli agrees to this, they have taken him a suitcase full of cash.

Right now my bullshit meter is going off.  I am inclined to believe that OSH knows there is more than 7.2Ts in E/A and I am basing my voting decision on IOC having at least 7.2Ts.

As Pet states, IOC has enough to thrive at 10Ts.  In my opinion, IOC can survive at 7Ts, which is why I am voting no.  This, in my opinion, is legal robbery.

By the way, the threat of TOT canceling the contract is fine by me, let them. IOC can do it all over again. However, if the deal is stopped, it's a given the Hession has to go along with the BOD.

[sageo]

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.

That sounds narcissistic.  Can you consider possible alternatives to your conclusions?

Thanks Trans- Appreciate your descriptive word narcissistic . Any way we "cut it" ,it is still grand theft ....and OSH and TOT are keenly aware of it.

[Putncalls]

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

How could OSH cancel the certification?

[AU74]

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

Just by agreement with IPI.  From page 28 of the June OSH update, in FAQ format:

How does this affect the Pac LNG resource certification?
» Given the unanimous vote by the PRL15 joint venture partners to support the drilling of the Antelope 7 well, OSH and the Pac LNG sellers are considering whether to suspend the ongoing certification process (with NSAI and GCA) in relation to the Pac LNG sale and recommence after completion of the well
» This is subject to the approval of OSH and the sellers of the five Pac LNG companies

Class A slimeballs.

[jft310]

Vote no . Get more money for our assets , They need our gas no need to give it away