IOC's sucky Data Room

[Tree]

IOC's 'inadequate data room' has been used by short's as evidence that bidders lacked full information and IOC was inflating their resource #s.

Ever stop to think that IOC was less than forthcoming in it's data room simply for self preservation?

Could be bidders were shown enough to bid but not enough to be enticed to buy-out IOC.

What if that was part of the industry rub against Phil.

Sucky data room by design.

[CAC]

IOC's 'inadequate data room' has been used by short's as evidence that bidders lacked full information and IOC was inflating their resource #s.

Ever stop to think that IOC was less than forthcoming in it's data room simply for self preservation?

Could be bidders were shown enough to bid but not enough to be enticed to buy-out IOC.

What if that was part of the industry rub against Phil.

Sucky data room by design.

+++++++++++++++++

I know that's just a hypothetical scenario, but it would be reason enough for me to think he should have been shown the door.  Intentionally deterring a buyout offer?  Yikes!  The shareholders can certainly choose to reject a buyout offer if they deem it insufficient, but I would hate to think a CEO would take steps to prevent the shareholders from even getting to see, evaluate, and consider such an offer. 

[Tree]

IOC's 'inadequate data room' has been used by short's as evidence that bidders lacked full information and IOC was inflating their resource #s.

Ever stop to think that IOC was less than forthcoming in it's data room simply for self preservation?

Could be bidders were shown enough to bid but not enough to be enticed to buy-out IOC.

What if that was part of the industry rub against Phil.

Sucky data room by design.

+++++++++++++++++

I know that's just a hypothetical scenario, but it would be reason enough for me to think he should have been shown the door.  Intentionally deterring a buyout offer?  Yikes!  The shareholders can certainly choose to reject a buyout offer if they deem it insufficient, but I would hate to think a CEO would take steps to prevent the shareholders from even getting to see, evaluate, and consider such an offer. 

Actually CAC I think the scenario is more than hypothetical and likely think it has much truth.  There is a bit of evidence to support it also.  Spring 2011 (pretty sure, could have been 2010) CC Phil stated in response to mentioned high interest in the project from majors and specifically Shell  experiencing cost blow-outs in AU projects , and I paraphrase:

'Let's stay focussed of our first deal and after that, we can roll out the 'Rolodex of Reefs' and show the world'.

That implies data on 1 reef, enough for an LNG project would be shared.  Not all data on all prospects.

[sageo]

IOC's 'inadequate data room' has been used by short's as evidence that bidders lacked full information and IOC was inflating their resource #s.

Ever stop to think that IOC was less than forthcoming in it's data room simply for self preservation?

Could be bidders were shown enough to bid but not enough to be enticed to buy-out IOC.

What if that was part of the industry rub against Phil.

Sucky data room by design.

Tree - Like your thought process ! Very plausible !!

[Palm]

Agree; there has for a long time been a fear of the wrong eyes/ears getting info before the right time and a lowball offer being made and/or an Operation Zebra type of thing occurring where a major might try and take IOC's licenses (but of course we know that type of thing never occurs). There was even a point back in 2010 or so where IOC responded to the crap shorts were throwing about and called out OSH specifically on spreading false/misleading info on IOC's formations, quality and quantity of finds etc. I think when Ant 2, T2 and Ant 3 all hit and IOC came out last year with there slides stating "According to the old models these finds shouldn't even be here. However the new seismics that have been done show that what's actually here is much different than what was expected." In other words, what theyve said all along is true and these other companies hate the fact that they walked away from what are now huge reservoirs full of gas and liquids.

Serious bidders only are welcome I believe IOC said not too long ago.

[ArtM72]

In a conversation with Ford at the AGM he stated each of the bidders wanted and was given access to data on different combinations of IOCs prospective resources. So this conversation might better be framed considering there is likely not "a" data room but more likely many, perhaps each with its own "quality"

[jft310]

Let's let Pet tell us again that the scales that IOC used on some of its slides were left off or distorted sometimes. IOC has more assets then many think and feared they would get bought out cheap before proving them out and monetizing them. Nada but smart good business for long term investors.This is the monetization process right here and right now. Multiple deals for its assets. Exxon is but deal one.

[sageo]

Let's let Pet tell us again that the scales that IOC used on some of its slides were left off or distorted sometimes. IOC has more assets then many think and feared they would get bought out cheap before proving them out and monetizing them. Nada but smart good business for long term investors.This is the monetization process right here and right now. Multiple deals for its assets. Exxon is but deal one.

jft- Like I told  Tree,"good thinking" ! You guys have really got your"thinking caps" on in the right direction !! " Exxon is but deal one". Go get 'em,man ! Yeah for our team.

[kerekesc]

Let's let Pet tell us again that the scales that IOC used on some of its slides were left off or distorted sometimes. IOC has more assets then many think and feared they would get bought out cheap before proving them out and monetizing them. Nada but smart good business for long term investors.This is the monetization process right here and right now. Multiple deals for its assets. Exxon is but deal one.

jft- Like I told  Tree,"good thinking" ! You guys have really got your"thinking caps" on in the right direction !! " Exxon is but deal one". Go get 'em,man ! Yeah for our team.

No, this cann't be true.  Peter, the PNG Geologist, "clearly" stated that this was a dataroom below international standards!

[Tree]

Let's let Pet tell us again that the scales that IOC used on some of its slides were left off or distorted sometimes. IOC has more assets then many think and feared they would get bought out cheap before proving them out and monetizing them. Nada but smart good business for long term investors.This is the monetization process right here and right now. Multiple deals for its assets. Exxon is but deal one.

jft- Like I told  Tree,"good thinking" ! You guys have really got your"thinking caps" on in the right direction !! " Exxon is but deal one". Go get 'em,man ! Yeah for our team.

No, this cann't be true.  Peter, the PNG Geologist, "clearly" stated that this was a dataroom below international standards!

Just imagine........if IOC's data room wasn't so inadequate then maybe IOC could have received more than a paltry minimum of 6 bids from SMs, IOCs and NOCs and maybe we wouldn't be saddled in exclusive negotiations to the highest bidder and most profitable public company in the world that needs IOC's gas for PNG LNG expansion.    Oh what could have been.....hgis....