Exclusivity over: source

[j4j]

This does not sound like an SPA is complete. If it were complete then it would have been and/or needs to be announced immediately, especially to put this article to rest. The article implies that the deal with XOM is not done and that other bidders can now make an offer. There is a positive and negative take to this. It is confusing. The company must clarify.

don't you think that if ioc's lawyers demanded an immediate release on may 24 when ioc's discussions became exclusive, there would be demands for a similar release if negotiations failed or if the exclusivity period ended.  Separately, there have been other media reports in png that the 60-day exclusivity had ended, yet the CEO said on Tuesday on t he conf call that the negotiations remained exclusive.

[ltinvest]

LOL. Nothing has changed. Havent we learned to smell a rat yet?! Is anyone really falling for the anonymous source on options expiration? There would be a release from the company just as there was announcing exclusive negotiations.

I would like to see the Exxon deal finalized so we can engage others on the monetization of the additional gas at E/A.

[Tree]

"Industry source" on OE day. This will be interesting.

Guess the 'source' reads SHU.

http://shareholdersunite.com/mybb/newreply.php?tid=4276&pid=26327

[cybersssss]

The market tends to fall for the anonymous source as will the stock. Just as the company had to comment on the "leaked" XOM exclusivity, they should need to comment on this. True or False

[Tree]

The market tends to fall for the anonymous source as will the stock. Just as the company had to comment on the "leaked" XOM exclusivity, they should need to comment on this. True or False

Hession has stated  'improving internal and external communications' is a priority.  If it is true that exclusivity is over, then we get IOC comment.  If it is false, we get the same comment Exxon made in the article:

...“It is not our practice to comment on commercial discussions,” a spokesperson said."...

[Resourcearb]

The market tends to fall for the anonymous source as will the stock. Just as the company had to comment on the "leaked" XOM exclusivity, they should need to comment on this. True or False

If this is true, it can only be construed as a positive for InterOil as it indicates the company is in a position of strength in these ongoing negotiations.  Unless there were other bids that could pressure Exxon to grant InterOil the terms it's seeking, InterOil wouldn't have been incentivized to not extend exclusivity.  Blair Price did a poor job of writing the article, but "it's dead" clearly refers to the exclusivity, not the negotiations.  The key here is that InterOil has made the voluntary decision to pressure closure by not extending exclusivity; this was not Exxon's choice.

[Palm]

The market tends to fall for the anonymous source as will the stock. Just as the company had to comment on the "leaked" XOM exclusivity, they should need to comment on this. True or False

If this is true, it can only be construed as a positive for InterOil as it indicates the company is in a position of strength in these ongoing negotiations.  Unless there were other bids that could pressure Exxon to grant InterOil the terms it's seeking, InterOil wouldn't have been incentivized to not extend exclusivity.  Blair Price did a poor job of writing the article, but "it's dead" clearly refers to the exclusivity, not the negotiations.  The key here is that InterOil has made the voluntary decision to pressure closure by not extending exclusivity; this was not Exxon's choice.

"If this is true, it can only be construed as positive..."

We can say that but its OE day also and we know how this works; planned attack on pps is what it is (if that's what's going on), and if that's the case we will see that early heavy volume that knocks it down followed by sporadic bursts to keep it down. Look for a pattern similar to Tuesday; unless there is a comment released by IOC.

[cybersssss]

It is up in the air as to how the market interprets this. However, this can be construed negative as much as positive. Positive as in your scenario Resourcearb or negative in that negotiations were not going the way interoil wanted them to so they took away exclusivity.

The big IF is.... IF this is true or not. I would expect a comment from the company. Any comment would suffice, but in the article the company spokesperson said they did not know the answer to the question of exclusivity and would look into it. No follow up to that?

A comment is in order from IOC.

[ltinvest]

"The big IF is.... IF this is true or not. I would expect a comment from the company. Any comment would suffice, but in the article the company spokesperson said they did not know the answer to the question of exclusivity and would look into it. No follow up to that?"

Exactly who was that company spokesperson? Not named either? Hmmmmmm.

[ellerslick]

"Industry source" on OE day. This will be interesting.

CEO says yes, industry source says no.