http://issuu.com/aspermont-aust/docs/png...entire_mag
"The development decision will be recommended by strategic partner and PNG will decide and approve the best commercialisation opportunity" - Collin
"There are no differences at Board level" - Collin responding to inquiry of BoD divisions
"The PNG Government is using seperate Elk/Ant estimates made by Gaffney Cline and Associates" We know that is lower at 6.6 T, still enough for an 8mtpa plant.
|
And Wayne said this in Platt's article yesterdy:
|
page 65. is the meat.
page 6 - PNG Expansion plans may include E/A gas.
page 38 - Gulf LNG start this year or early next year heating up real estate market.
Where we are now me thinkie:
Given, Gov't needs both a PNG LNG expansion and a Gulf LNG project for revenues and jobs. Gov't has agreed to 4T deal to XOM to allow commitment to expansion and keep on site workers on site working. This may delay signing of SD partner as Elk-3 results may now be needed. Also, by pulling out 4T's from GC #s of 6.6T at 'arm's length' price decided by the SD terms, less gas in play today could result in a lower $/Mcf. Lower $/Mcf good for both XOM and SD choice.
Pressure is heavy on O'Neill from at least 2 SM's as a result. XOM and likely RDS to make the Gov't decision. Likely many nice perks offered in Port Moresby nowadays from the SMs to O'Neill. Can he withstand temptation? IOC is in control of the commercial transaction, $/Mcf, but Gov't still has overall vice on IOC's nuttz to sculpt this deal.
Could well be a matter of fate at this time where this deal ends up and a good time for Phil to exit.
BTW, philstar.com reports that the bidding war and beauty contest reports are accurate and the $/Mcf still expected to be multiples of where we are trading.
Can we expect an assertive move between now and May CC by RDS, XOM or TOT? Seems like a safe bet.

