Posts: 485
Threads: 45
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation:
57
What I am questioning here is the impression IOC management has given thru this multi-month (or you could say multi-year) process of choosing a selldown partner. It has seemed to me, and evidently many others from their SHU comments over these months, that a detailed deal announcement was always about 3-4 weeks away, but this has been the case for over half a year.
Let's recount some history. Very early in the year we hoped for a deal announcement and then were informed final bids were due Feb. 28, and that the board would meet in March to choose one. Discussions here at SHU were questioning if we would get an announcement in early March or late March, or might things stretch "all the way into April." As time went on there was much talk of an announcement by the end of April, yet still nothing. On May 24 we were told IOC was in exclusive negotiations with Exxon, with a 30-60 period stated by PM O'Neill. We were soon told that all the major points were agreed upon. Mgmt said that the 30-60 period was more a maximum than a minimum, and that they hoped to get it done sooner.
We are not dummies here at SHU, and many of us speak with management regularly. The various predictions made by those here of "end of March," "end of April," "before the AGM," "end of July" (take your pick) did not come out of thin air. It was the impression management was giving. Of course management has never given an exact time or timeframe publicly, and there are a few here at SHU who always said it would take a very long time, but my point is that it seems clear that it has taken much longer than mgmt indicated it would.
So the question is why. Did they not realize how long it takes? Did the deal situation constantly change so much that their current forecasting was always behind? Did mgmt realize it would take so long but was afraid to make that clear in fear the stock would tank? I think every possibility should be considered. I welcome all respectful opinions, but please don't start calling me a "short" (or worse) just because I am criticizing mgmt.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Movieguy' pid='26829' dateline='<a href="tel:1376064 Wrote:
What I am questioning here is the impression IOC management has given thru this multi-month (or you could say multi-year) process of choosing a selldown partner. It has seemed to me, and evidently many others from their SHU comments over these months, that a detailed deal announcement was always about 3-4 weeks away, but this has been the case for over half a year.
Let's recount some history. Very early in the year we hoped for a deal announcement and then were informed final bids were due Feb. 28, and that the board would meet in March to choose one. Discussions here at SHU were questioning if we would get an announcement in early March or late March, or might things stretch "all the way into April." As time went on there was much talk of an announcement by the end of April, yet still nothing. On May 24 we were told IOC was in exclusive negotiations with Exxon, with a 30-60 period stated by PM O'Neill. We were soon told that all the major points were agreed upon. Mgmt said that the 30-60 period was more a maximum than a minimum, and that they hoped to get it done sooner.
We are not dummies here at SHU, and many of us speak with management regularly. The various predictions made by those here of "end of March," "end of April," "before the AGM," "end of July" (take your pick) did not come out of thin air. It was the impression management was giving. Of course management has never given an exact time or timeframe publicly, and there are a few here at SHU who always said it would take a very long time, but my point is that it seems clear that it has taken much longer than mgmt indicated it would.
So the question is why. Did they not realize how long it takes? Did the deal situation constantly change so much that their current forecasting was always behind? Did mgmt realize it would take so long but was afraid to make that clear in fear the stock would tank? I think every possibility should be considered. I welcome all respectful opinions, but please don't start calling me a "short" (or worse) just because I am criticizing mgmt.
Fact the time factor is not in IOC's control.They are cutting a deal with Exxon who works at their pace,Exxon entered the party late. This is not a short term option play. Would you prefer a deal done quickly with mistakes...?...
Posts: 890
Threads: 95
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
117
08-10-2013, 02:37 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-10-2013, 02:48 AM by Petrovale.)
[/quote]
Fact the time factor is not in IOC's control.They are cutting a deal with Exxon who works at their pace,Exxon entered the party late. This is not a short term option play. Would you prefer a deal done quickly with mistakes...?... [/quote]
JFT, Movieguy's question was "why", during the past two years, little or nothing -- deal wise -- has ever been in IOC's control, not whether any of us hold options or have been beaten by our wives... The question posed is perfectly legitimate, and begs some critical reflection, perhaps even self-reflection.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Petrovale' pid='26831' dateline='<a href="tel:1376066 Wrote:
Fact the time factor is not in IOC's control.They are cutting a deal with Exxon who works at their pace,Exxon entered the party late. This is not a short term option play. Would you prefer a deal done quickly with mistakes...?... [/quote]
JFT, Movieguy's question was why, during the past two years, little or nothing -- deal wise -- has ever been in IOC's control, not whether any of us hold options or have been beaten by our wives...
[/quote]
Phil's gone and we have a new CEO who will speak Tuesday. Whining about what Phil did or did not do achieves nada .
The only people concerned are those with options. Others know IOC has the assets and maybe inspite of Phil's bumbling will get it done. Exxon is quite anxious to get this done. They have a process that made them Exxon and investors need to wait to get it right.
Posts: 472
Threads: 10
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation:
148
[quote='Movieguy' pid='26829' dateline='1376064840']
What I am questioning here is the impression IOC management has given thru this multi-month (or you could say multi-year) process of choosing a selldown partner. It has seemed to me, and evidently many others from their SHU comments over these months, that a detailed deal announcement was always about 3-4 weeks away, but this has been the case for over half a year.
Let's recount some history. Very early in the year we hoped for a deal announcement and then were informed final bids were due Feb. 28, and that the board would meet in March to choose one. Discussions here at SHU were questioning if we would get an announcement in early March or late March, or might things stretch "all the way into April." As time went on there was much talk of an announcement by the end of April, yet still nothing. On May 24 we were told IOC was in exclusive negotiations with Exxon, with a 30-60 period stated by PM O'Neill. We were soon told that all the major points were agreed upon. Mgmt said that the 30-60 period was more a maximum than a minimum, and that they hoped to get it done sooner.
We are not dummies here at SHU, and many of us speak with management regularly. The various predictions made by those here of "end of March," "end of April," "before the AGM," "end of July" (take your pick) did not come out of thin air. It was the impression management was giving. Of course management has never given an exact time or timeframe publicly, and there are a few here at SHU who always said it would take a very long time, but my point is that it seems clear that it has taken much longer than mgmt indicated it would.
So the question is why. Did they not realize how long it takes? Did the deal situation constantly change so much that their current forecasting was always behind? Did mgmt realize it would take so long but was afraid to make that clear in fear the stock would tank? I think every possibility should be considered. I welcome all respectful opinions, but please don't start calling me a "short" (or worse) just because I am criticizing mgmt.
*************
Right. IOC, themselves, have often times given us timing hints...and it wasn't just Phil. Some on this Board apologize for IOC's delays by telling us how complex the deal must be. Okay, well didn't IOC know that this was a complex process when they chose to hint at timing? And I think th new management may have done it again very recently in response to Dumba's "prove your worth" comment by stating that that "a detailed report would be coming soon".
Posts: 332
Threads: 46
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
99
Not to beat the dead Phil horse but look at the timing of these two events:
April 23, 2013 - Phil retires
May 24, 2013 - Exxon exclusive
This timing IMO clearly indicates that real SD talks were going nowhere until Phil was forced to leave. So essentially these complex talks really only got serious in May of this year. I have heard from my best sources that IOC was spinning its wheels prior to the IOC/XOM agreement. In that light, it has not taken that long. Yet...
Posts: 890
Threads: 95
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
117
[/quote]
Phil's gone and we have a new CEO who will speak Tuesday. Whining about what Phil did or did not do achieves nada .
The only people concerned are those with options. Others know IOC has the assets and maybe inspite of Phil's bumbling will get it done. Exxon is quite anxious to get this done. They have a process that made them Exxon and investors need to wait to get it right.
[/quote]
JFT, investors expect the new CEO to put to rest the Phil legacy, and announce a deal imminently. To think that only options holders are concerned, is a misguided thought that you should eliminate from your mind. Nobody likes to watch dead money for more than two years. Sure, they will ultimately succeed. Movieguy is still expecting an answer to his question, I suppose.
Posts: 804
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
169
'jft310' pid='26832' datel Wrote:
'Petrovale' pid='26831' dateline='<a href="tel:1376066 Wrote:
Fact the time factor is not in IOC's control.They are cutting a deal with Exxon who works at their pace,Exxon entered the party late. This is not a short term option play. Would you prefer a deal done quickly with mistakes...?...
JFT, Movieguy's question was why, during the past two years, little or nothing -- deal wise -- has ever been in IOC's control, not whether any of us hold options or have been beaten by our wives...
[/quote]
Phil's gone and we have a new CEO who will speak Tuesday. Whining about what Phil did or did not do achieves nada .
The only people concerned are those with options. Others know IOC has the assets and maybe inspite of Phil's bumbling will get it done. Exxon is quite anxious to get this done. They have a process that made them Exxon and investors need to wait to get it right.
That's a complete strawman JFT. For some strange reason when people want to know answers to legitimate questions you break into auto-response mode, options and whining (or used to be criticizing) Phil babble. I've read the question 3 times, I can't find how your response is relevant to the question asked. If you have nothing to say in direct response to the question why answer at all?
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Petrovale' pid='26835' dateline='<a href="tel:1376067 Wrote:
Phil's gone and we have a new CEO who will speak Tuesday. Whining about what Phil did or did not do achieves nada .
The only people concerned are those with options. Others know IOC has the assets and maybe inspite of Phil's bumbling will get it done. Exxon is quite anxious to get this done. They have a process that made them Exxon and investors need to wait to get it right.
[/quote]
JFT, investors expect the new CEO to put to rest the Phil legacy, and announce a deal imminently. To think that only options holders are concerned, is a misguided thought that you should eliminate from your mind. Nobody likes to watch dead money for more than two years. Sure, they will ultimately succeed. Movieguy is still expecting an answer to his question, I suppose.
[/quote]
ALL timing info would be blessed by the CEO.The fact others talked about it means Phil told them what to say. Only 3 people at iOC know what's happening and WA was not one.
The new CEO first chance to talk is Tuesday . Lets give him a fair chance to scope out the situation and then report back to us.Isn't that how you would want to be treated....
As to the wait with the stock trading close to flat for several years the history of the markets shows all the returns come in short periods. The longer the base the higher the move from that base. I have used every dip to add. Recently added below $70 it's called active portfolio management which needs to be employed by others.Whinning doesn't make deals happen quicker , active Management allows one to make money as you wait. Try it,,
Posts: 6,851
Threads: 697
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
441
'tarulestheday' pid='26834' datel Wrote:Not to beat the dead Phil horse but look at the timing of these two events: April 23, 2013 - Phil retires May 24, 2013 - Exxon exclusive This timing IMO clearly indicates that real SD talks were going nowhere until Phil was forced to leave. So essentially these complex talks really only got serious in May of this year. I have heard from my best sources that IOC was spinning its wheels prior to the IOC/XOM agreement. In that light, it has not taken that long. Yet...
Agree
|
