Pavel: Selection timelines forward

[Getitrt2]

Phil:

That's kind of like answering a question "How long is a string?"  This depends upon unknown contingincies by bidders.  Will know much more in the next 30-60 days.

Here is the transcript:

<Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move forward as you are anticipating,
what do you think is the realistic timeframe to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?
<A>: You know probably we have to get with them and sit down and map it out, but one of the key is, what process are
they going to use, from the stick belt, and we have discussions from 36 months to 60 plus. So, I mean, everyone has
different project, that's to build it. So everybody has different concept, some maybe portfolio issues that maybe that
they are really in need of a strategic supply of near-term fuel. So, as I said, I mean, we -- that process is going to
kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days. So that's what
we would like to – that's all I can say.

The 30-60 day comment was in reply to knowing when construction will begin, NOT 30-60 DAYS TO SELECT THE PARTNER.

Thanks, db.  That's the impression I got about the 30-60 days listening to the call too.  However, guess what, Pavel has an update out now and even he imo misunderstand that!  His comments further the erroneous impression that the 30-60 day timeline is related directly to the partner selection!  I would say that is making things worse.  I have passed that feedback to the Company, and they will supposedly try to address.

[Tree]

Phil:

That's kind of like answering a question "How long is a string?"  This depends upon unknown contingincies by bidders.  Will know much more in the next 30-60 days.

Here is the transcript:

<Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move forward as you are anticipating,
what do you think is the realistic timeframe to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?
<A>: You know probably we have to get with them and sit down and map it out, but one of the key is, what process are
they going to use, from the stick belt, and we have discussions from 36 months to 60 plus. So, I mean, everyone has
different project, that's to build it. So everybody has different concept, some maybe portfolio issues that maybe that
they are really in need of a strategic supply of near-term fuel. So, as I said, I mean, we -- that process is going to
kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days. So that's what
we would like to – that's all I can say.

The 30-60 day comment was in reply to knowing when construction will begin, NOT 30-60 DAYS TO SELECT THE PARTNER.

Thanks, db.  That's the impression I got about the 30-60 days listening to the call too.  However, guess what, Pavel has an update out now and even he imo misunderstand that!  His comments further the erroneous impression that the 30-60 day timeline is related directly to the partner selection!  I would say that is making things worse.  I have passed that feedback to the Company, and they will supposedly try to address.

Pavel has it right.

Back up in the transcript to the beginning of Pavel's questions.  Pavel asks Phil 2 unanswerable questions:

1)  <Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Hi, guys. Phil, a question for you. How long do you   anticipate the board deliberations on selecting a partner? 2)  <Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move   forward as you are anticipating, what do you think is the realistic timeframe   to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?

Phil's Answer to both:

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that   process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to   know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

You can't know construction timeline which depends on scheme chosen without knowing which partner BoD selects.

1)  <Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Hi, guys. Phil, a question for you. How long do you

  anticipate the board deliberations on selecting a partner?

2)  <Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move   forward as you are anticipating, what do you think is the realistic timeframe   to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?

2)  <Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move

  forward as you are anticipating, what do you think is the realistic timeframe

  to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that

  process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to

  know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

[Getitrt2]

Phil:

That's kind of like answering a question "How long is a string?"  This depends upon unknown contingincies by bidders.  Will know much more in the next 30-60 days.

Here is the transcript:

<Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move forward as you are anticipating,
what do you think is the realistic timeframe to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?
<A>: You know probably we have to get with them and sit down and map it out, but one of the key is, what process are
they going to use, from the stick belt, and we have discussions from 36 months to 60 plus. So, I mean, everyone has
different project, that's to build it. So everybody has different concept, some maybe portfolio issues that maybe that
they are really in need of a strategic supply of near-term fuel. So, as I said, I mean, we -- that process is going to
kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days. So that's what
we would like to – that's all I can say.

The 30-60 day comment was in reply to knowing when construction will begin, NOT 30-60 DAYS TO SELECT THE PARTNER.

Thanks, db.  That's the impression I got about the 30-60 days listening to the call too.  However, guess what, Pavel has an update out now and even he imo misunderstand that!  His comments further the erroneous impression that the 30-60 day timeline is related directly to the partner selection!  I would say that is making things worse.  I have passed that feedback to the Company, and they will supposedly try to address.

Pavel has it right.

Back up in the transcript to the beginning of Pavel's questions.  Pavel asks Phil 2 unanswerable questions:

Phil's Answer to both:

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that   process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to   know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

You can't know construction timeline which depends on scheme chosen without knowing which partner BoD selects.

You're WRONG, tree;  Pavel has it WRONG!  Go back to the transcript.  Two different questions and two different answers.  Furthermore, in the presentation, on page 5, they say, IN WRITING, "our BOD intends to meet with our advisors during MARCH for the purpose of...SELECTING OUR PARTNER(S) ..."  Phil did not give a time frame to the first question on partner selection, he should have said more imo, but it was in the presentation.  Pavel has couched the "30 and 60 days" completely within comments on partner selection and is reinforcing, unintentionally I'm sure, and erroneous impression that is increasing uncertainty, giving shorts more ammo, and hurting the stock even more. They probably will select a partner in March, as they said they intend.  What a sad farce all this is.

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that

  process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to

  know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

[Tree]

Phil:

That's kind of like answering a question "How long is a string?"  This depends upon unknown contingincies by bidders.  Will know much more in the next 30-60 days.

Here is the transcript:

<Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move forward as you are anticipating,
what do you think is the realistic timeframe to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?
<A>: You know probably we have to get with them and sit down and map it out, but one of the key is, what process are
they going to use, from the stick belt, and we have discussions from 36 months to 60 plus. So, I mean, everyone has
different project, that's to build it. So everybody has different concept, some maybe portfolio issues that maybe that
they are really in need of a strategic supply of near-term fuel. So, as I said, I mean, we -- that process is going to
kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days. So that's what
we would like to – that's all I can say.

The 30-60 day comment was in reply to knowing when construction will begin, NOT 30-60 DAYS TO SELECT THE PARTNER.

Thanks, db.  That's the impression I got about the 30-60 days listening to the call too.  However, guess what, Pavel has an update out now and even he imo misunderstand that!  His comments further the erroneous impression that the 30-60 day timeline is related directly to the partner selection!  I would say that is making things worse.  I have passed that feedback to the Company, and they will supposedly try to address.

Pavel has it right.

Back up in the transcript to the beginning of Pavel's questions.  Pavel asks Phil 2 unanswerable questions:

Phil's Answer to both:

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that   process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to   know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

You can't know construction timeline which depends on scheme chosen without knowing which partner BoD selects.

You're WRONG, tree;  Pavel has it WRONG!  Go back to the transcript.  Two different questions and two different answers.  Furthermore, in the presentation, on page 5, they say, IN WRITING, "our BOD intends to meet with our advisors during MARCH for the purpose of...SELECTING OUR PARTNER(S) ..."  Phil did not give a time frame to the first question on partner selection, he should have said more imo, but it was in the presentation.  Pavel has couched the "30 and 60 days" completely within comments on partner selection and is reinforcing, unintentionally I'm sure, and erroneous impression that is increasing uncertainty, giving shorts more ammo, and hurting the stock even more. They probably will select a partner in March, as they said they intend.  What a sad farce all this is.

Getit, Rest assured Pavel knows exactly what he wrote.  We agree more than you realize.  BoD is apparently getting summaries of bids March 2, Q&A likely,  and are meeting in central location March 9 with IBs.  Can we get immediate selection of SD winner - sure we can.  Will we? That depends on the contingencies and details within bids on how long it takes.  Phil said in response to Pavel's questions '30-60 days we will know much more'. Like I said Pavel's questions are unanswerable today, they may be answerable on Mon. March 11th though.  I just won't count on it though.

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that

  process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to

  know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

[jft310]

IMHO opinion it just doesn't matter.Wait it out.
What matters is this they have err had a partner selection process.
All the bids will be in end of day.TODAY.
The IBers will review the bids and render an opinion and present their findings to the IOC Board March 9-10. The Board will chose a winner.
News will happen:
Tomorrow or Monday recapping the bids by type.
March 6th with WA at RJ
And after the BOD meeting Mar 11th.
Might need more time to pin something down but I would be surprised if this were true after this extended time period.
As the 40-F states March is partner selection month.

[bertl05]

At the end of the day it wont matter if IOC can get a good deal done in the next month. If nothing happens by the end of march, it will look bad. Either way the CC and misunderstanding created by the QA is a major clusterfuck. All amusing if things work out in the end. But you get an idea now why IOC has always been a favorite of the shorts. You almost couldnt make a bigger mess of such a major CC if you tried.

Ce la vie. Picked up a few at $67. Ill hold the rest of my powder for the inevitable short SA piece soon to follow.

[Getitrt2]

Here is the transcript:

<Q - Pavel Molchanov>: Okay. And then, you know, assuming the process move forward as you are anticipating,
what do you think is the realistic timeframe to physically begin construction of the LNG facility?
<A>: You know probably we have to get with them and sit down and map it out, but one of the key is, what process are
they going to use, from the stick belt, and we have discussions from 36 months to 60 plus. So, I mean, everyone has
different project, that's to build it. So everybody has different concept, some maybe portfolio issues that maybe that
they are really in need of a strategic supply of near-term fuel. So, as I said, I mean, we -- that process is going to
kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days. So that's what
we would like to – that's all I can say.

The 30-60 day comment was in reply to knowing when construction will begin, NOT 30-60 DAYS TO SELECT THE PARTNER.

Thanks, db.  That's the impression I got about the 30-60 days listening to the call too.  However, guess what, Pavel has an update out now and even he imo misunderstand that!  His comments further the erroneous impression that the 30-60 day timeline is related directly to the partner selection!  I would say that is making things worse.  I have passed that feedback to the Company, and they will supposedly try to address.

Pavel has it right.

Back up in the transcript to the beginning of Pavel's questions.  Pavel asks Phil 2 unanswerable questions:

Phil's Answer to both:

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that   process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to   know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

You can't know construction timeline which depends on scheme chosen without knowing which partner BoD selects.

You're WRONG, tree;  Pavel has it WRONG!  Go back to the transcript.  Two different questions and two different answers.  Furthermore, in the presentation, on page 5, they say, IN WRITING, "our BOD intends to meet with our advisors during MARCH for the purpose of...SELECTING OUR PARTNER(S) ..."  Phil did not give a time frame to the first question on partner selection, he should have said more imo, but it was in the presentation.  Pavel has couched the "30 and 60 days" completely within comments on partner selection and is reinforcing, unintentionally I'm sure, and erroneous impression that is increasing uncertainty, giving shorts more ammo, and hurting the stock even more. They probably will select a partner in March, as they said they intend.  What a sad farce all this is.

Getit, Rest assured Pavel knows exactly what he wrote.  We agree more than you realize.  BoD is apparently getting summaries of bids March 2, Q&A likely,  and are meeting in central location March 9 with IBs.  Can we get immediate selection of SD winner - sure we can.  Will we? That depends on the contingencies and details within bids on how long it takes.  Phil said in response to Pavel's questions '30-60 days we will know much more'. Like I said Pavel's questions are unanswerable today, they may be answerable on Mon. March 11th though.  I just won't count on it though.

tree, I'm well aware it may or may not be March, but it's what they said in writing is the intent, and more likely to be imo, and that is not the point.  I have some understanding of how complex it could be.  However, it was NOT the answer to both questions and contradicts the presentation.  I have talked with Pavel and have my own impressions.  I think we DISAGREE more than you realize.  I think Pavel is reluctant to put out any "correction", but he will give Wayne an opportunity to clarify March 6 if we get nothing before then.

So, as I said, I mean, we -- that

  process is going to kick-off in earnest in the next 24 hours. We are going to

  know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days.

[admin]

IMHO opinion it just doesn't matter.Wait it out. What matters is this they have err had a partner selection process. All the bids will be in end of day.TODAY. The IBers will review the bids and render an opinion and present their findings to the IOC Board March 9-10. The Board will chose a winner. News will happen: Tomorrow or Monday recapping the bids by type. March 6th with WA at RJ And after the BOD meeting Mar 11th. Might need more time to pin something down but I would be surprised if this were true after this extended time period. As the 40-F states March is partner selection month.

Yes, I really have to agree with you there. What does it matter if they have to take a few more days or weeks? It isn't very likely to take too long, as they should be well acquainted with the bids, unless there is some last minute dramatic change, which will only be relevant if it's an improvement, so even that would be a good thing.

The important thing is to get it done in the best way possible, not to rush the process. For what?

[sfiaes]

Is Pavel's note from today posted anywhere?

TIA

[Tree]

Now, are there that doubt Phil is the MFIC?
What the MFIC says goes.
30-60 days "We (The MFIC and IBs and partners and IOC BoD) are going to know a lot more over the next 30 and 60 days."
Good thing the MFIC has a SL of shares in play.
This is a very instructive thread.