Misperceptions Debunked

[jft310]

Sydbod-We are talking about a public document the Citi report which you have a copy of. Hopefully you read the report. There are many out and out lies in the Citi report which could only have come from OSH. Why does OSH feels the need to lie to Citi ????. There are certain documents that only OSH could have and that Citi would not have .OSH has HUGE motive to lie about IOC to deflate the IOC stock price as they did to Citi and then to partner with a Total type and make a run at IOC.
Fact at just $1 per mcf IOC is worth $11 Billion today.
If you never knew about IOC's existence until 6 months ago then you are not following the OSH story very well. For years now the OSH slides tell of the IOC discoveries.Marked on the slides . How did you miss this key find of Elk Antelope in 2009. This hurts what you say here because the find of E/A was one of the largest finds on NG in the world and would impact your OSH investment in a large way. Or since you missed E/A well what else are you missing???

[Palm]

Sydbod, what we are talking about is big business for energy assets. As STP says, you won't likely find a company issuing a PR stating that they are intentionally working behind the scenes to thwart another company's efforts. Part of what we are talking about is just plain big business and what competition breeds. And some of that is just IOC putting on the big boy underwear and manning up to meet those things that "naturally" happen to protect "territory". However, there has been enough info from different sources that sure makes it appear highly likely that things have gone on behind the scenes. At some point one decides to put some weight with that info. Happens all the time. You choose not to believe it because you don't see anything in black and white. That's your choice. From experience most people know that after hearing something enough times you tend to believe.

If you don't believe it that's your choice, but enough credible sources have made many believers. You may want 100% substantiation on everything, but you'll be waiting a long long time for that. If you have been an OSH investor for some time and just heard about IOC 6 months ago, how many of OSH's presentations have you looked at? How many of the PNG publications have you read? IOC has been in PNG for much longer than 6 months.

[jft310]

I have no clues as to resourcearbs sources of information. I do have my own network of IOC chatters. We know 100% that OSH is saying bad things about IOC. The why is speculation. The Citi report was called an OSH Propaganda Piece by an IOC IPI investor. IOC mgt debunked many of the statements in the Citi report yesterday in a chat with me. Getitrt also had a seperate conversation with IOC mgt and Geez the same Citi nonsense was verified again. My sources agree with resourcearbs comments in a large way. Solution wait until Monday and we will know more about all of this. IOC will not bad mouth OSH but can debunk the misinformation in the market.

specifically, what did ioc say about the osh veto power issue?

Lets talk facts. Santos owns 4 % of PNGLNG. They are partner in PNGLNG. The Exxon design allows for an additional 6 trains at PNGLNG. Designed , funded and built that way. To think that a 4 % owner would have veto power is beyond laughable. To think that Exxon locked themselves into OSH finding more NG is laughable. Look at the WM report and see their are ways for Exxon to bring in a new partner who has the NG they need for the project.

[sydbod]

Thank you ADMIN for your position on the matter.

@ jft310,
I do not have access to the full document you talk about as the link you provided goes nowhere when I try it.
Maybe the document is behind a pay-wall or some such thing, but I would very much like to see the full document.

Your concern about ".OSH has HUGE motive to lie about IOC to deflate the IOC stock price as they did to Citi and then to partner with a Total type and make a run at IOC" is not something I would think seriously about since OSH is now financially strapped for money until their share of LNG returns start to come in some time late next year. Even then, they will be strapped for cash as they will require raising another huge amount of money for their share of train 3&4 expansion.
OSH is just too small and too poor to take a run at IOC. Even if OSH wanted to be the big bad boogiman, they are not in a position to be one.

About your comment of " How did you miss this key find of Elk Antelope in 2009" , yes I did realise the field was found and IOC was probably also mentioned, but there was no reason for me to look seriously at it as OSH and STO had no presence in that area of PNG, and there was no serious talk about that gas coming on line in the near future. Therefore IOC was a non entity for me at that time and there was no point in remembering or even seriously noting its presence. My estimation at the time looks to have been correct as that gas still has not been commercialised. My entry into IOC very recently also looks to have been a good decision since that gas now looks to be targeted for commercialisation.

[sydbod]

Lets talk facts. Santos owns 4 % of PNGLNG. They are partner in PNGLNG. The Exxon design allows for an additional 6 trains at PNGLNG. Designed , funded and built that way. To think that a 4 % owner would have veto power is beyond laughable. To think that Exxon locked themselves into OSH finding more NG is laughable. Look at the WM report and see their are ways for Exxon to bring in a new partner who has the NG they need for the project.

I believe santos has closer to 14% rather than 4%.

The PNGLNG plant was originally designed and funded for a total of 5 trains (2 initial trains with 3 trains expansion). The land area may be able to handle a much larger number of trains than that, but the loading warf will need huge expansion for that to happen.

Exxon never locked themselves into OSH finding more gas, but Exxon is part owner of common fields with OSH including PRL3 ..... yes the one holding P'nyang.

To bring in new partners into the PNGLNG project is almost impossible with the current mix of partners, no matter what Exxon may or may not want. To process other parties gas is another matter.

[jft310]

sydbod-OSH has no money but Total has the money therefore OSH would have a moneyed partner to run at IOC. Total can write a check.
Your timing with IOC may be good. I have been invested since 2005 and have a low cost basis using options to improve my cost basis.
If you use the bottom link on the citi report should pull up for you. If not, you can private message me and I can send you a word document with a email address . Worth a look. Then call Wayne Andrews and schedule a time to have a phone chat with him and he can blow apart the Citi report for you. Really a piece of work. Then you will see that OSH is ill intended. Then you can ask why???

[admin]

["To bring in new partners into the PNGLNG project is almost impossible with the current mix of partners, no matter what Exxon may or may not want."]

Apparently, Exxon has a different opinion..

[sydbod]

sydbod-OSH has no money but Total has the money therefore OSH would have a moneyed partner to run at IOC. Total can write a check.

On that point I would agree that Total could do it. Would they do it from past history .... wellllll that is also possible.

Would OSH have anything to gain from that?  I think OSH would have more to gain if  IOC became a full partner with OSH and Total in a new LNG project startup using gas from Triceratops. For this to happen IOC requires much more capital, and that is where I believe the IOC/Exxon deal comes in.

[Investor1979]

Thank you ADMIN for your position on the matter. @ jft310, I do not have access to the full document you talk about as the link you provided goes nowhere when I try it. Maybe the document is behind a pay-wall or some such thing, but I would very much like to see the full document. Your concern about ".OSH has HUGE motive to lie about IOC to deflate the IOC stock price as they did to Citi and then to partner with a Total type and make a run at IOC" is not something I would think seriously about since OSH is now financially strapped for money until their share of LNG returns start to come in some time late next year. Even then, they will be strapped for cash as they will require raising another huge amount of money for their share of train 3&4 expansion. OSH is just too small and too poor to take a run at IOC. Even if OSH wanted to be the big bad boogiman, they are not in a position to be one. About your comment of " How did you miss this key find of Elk Antelope in 2009" , yes I did realise the field was found and IOC was probably also mentioned, but there was no reason for me to look seriously at it as OSH and STO had no presence in that area of PNG, and there was no serious talk about that gas coming on line in the near future. Therefore IOC was a non entity for me at that time and there was no point in remembering or even seriously noting its presence. My estimation at the time looks to have been correct as that gas still has not been commercialised. My entry into IOC very recently also looks to have been a good decision since that gas now looks to be targeted for commercialisation.

OSH may be cashstrapped, but, Total isn't. If they are spending on seismic surrounding IOC's discoveries , they obviously would " love " to have IOC's currently certfied resources, since they may have already made a bid.  As a financial decision, it  appears that it would be the much better decision to buy all of IOC, than just some of its assets. i.e. Paying only $200 /share would be paying about $1.70 a certified mcf. Plus you get the bulk of TRI for free ,plus the refinery and all other potential targeted fields. Very attractive to  OSH/TOTAL or any number  of many cash heavy majors, NOCs, etc.

Those who" found " and researched IOC following their Elk announcements were able to buy IOC at around $20. I think that would have been a much better entry point for investors. SP  sure had been volatile thru the lst 4 years, but, very worthwhile as an investment.

[Investor1979]

Thank you ADMIN for your position on the matter. @ jft310, I do not have access to the full document you talk about as the link you provided goes nowhere when I try it. Maybe the document is behind a pay-wall or some such thing, but I would very much like to see the full document. Your concern about ".OSH has HUGE motive to lie about IOC to deflate the IOC stock price as they did to Citi and then to partner with a Total type and make a run at IOC" is not something I would think seriously about since OSH is now financially strapped for money until their share of LNG returns start to come in some time late next year. Even then, they will be strapped for cash as they will require raising another huge amount of money for their share of train 3&4 expansion. OSH is just too small and too poor to take a run at IOC. Even if OSH wanted to be the big bad boogiman, they are not in a position to be one. About your comment of " How did you miss this key find of Elk Antelope in 2009" , yes I did realise the field was found and IOC was probably also mentioned, but there was no reason for me to look seriously at it as OSH and STO had no presence in that area of PNG, and there was no serious talk about that gas coming on line in the near future. Therefore IOC was a non entity for me at that time and there was no point in remembering or even seriously noting its presence. My estimation at the time looks to have been correct as that gas still has not been commercialised. My entry into IOC very recently also looks to have been a good decision since that gas now looks to be targeted for commercialisation.

OSH may be cashstrapped, but, Total isn't. If they are spending on seismic surrounding IOC's discoveries , they obviously would " love " to have IOC's currently certfied resources, since they may have already made a bid.  As a financial decision, it  appears that it would be the much better decision to buy all of IOC, than just some of its assets. i.e. Paying only $200 /share would be paying about $1.70 a certified mcf. Plus you get the bulk of TRI for free ,plus the refinery and all other potential targeted fields. Very attractive to  OSH/TOTAL or any number  of many cash heavy majors, NOCs, etc.

Those who" found " and researched IOC following their Elk announcements were able to buy IOC at around $20. I think that would have been a much better entry point for investors. SP  sure had been volatile thru the lst 4 years, but, very worthwhile as an investment.