Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 4.2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Two year anniversary
#51
" It's a poor sort of memory that only woks backwards "

Through the Looking Glass

" We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad."

"How do you know I'm mad." said Alice.

"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."

Alice's Adventures in Wonderland

Grin
Reply

#52
Tree,

Which came first IOC's sell to TOT or IPI's sell to OSH? IOC sold their (and the IPI) stake to Total. The IPI investors said not so fast. We want to sell to OSH. OSH said, we want our 22% of the gas to go to Train 3 of PNG LNG. InterOil then transferred ownership of E/A into a separate whole owned subsidiary and sold it to Total. OSH filed suit because the dispute in the JVOA. To continue to blame the delay of certification solely on arbitration and OSH (Botten and Civelli) is wrong. Hession did not lock down the IPI stake before he sold. Furthermore, after arbitration was settled, InterOil still claimed certification payment by YE 2015. The very first time a delay was mentioned was June 2015 at the ASM because the test results were so good they estimated the field was much bigger and they wanted to be paid for every molecule of gas. Since then we have had two additional delays and neither have to do with arbitration.
"And maybe someday we will find , that it wasn't really wasted time"
Reply

#53

'Gator' pid='65143' datel Wrote:OSH owes IPI Resource base payment. >7 tcf would deliver higher returning LNG project (PNG LNG “look-alike&rdquoWink and trigger certification payments (US$0.775/mcf for volumes >7 tcf based on average of two certifiers – Gaffney Cline and NSAI)

Ah ok thanks. When you mentioned "draft choice" I was thinking you were having a good time in an English pub, so I couldn't really immediately place that, my mistake...

Reply

#54

'Gator' pid='65043' datel Wrote:How have any of your 7000+ posts help? What are your motives? Are you a paid pumper or just blind to the fact that this has been an epic failure on the part of current management to do the one and only thing that matters to this company and shareholders: GET PAID FOR THE ASSETS! With you (and management) it’s always perfect and someone else’s fault when thing go wrong. The board of directors should find a new CEO that can complete the task, but they won’t because they get free stock for doing nothing. The longer it drags on, the more shares they will collect. Hession has become a multimillionaire over the past 2 years, while shareholders have the stock cut in half under his watch. The stock has underperformed its peers even in a bad energy sector. Why? Because they have not done the one thing that matters, get paid. Delay after delay is standard for Hession. Didn’t he have the same problem at Woodside? My motives are clear: I want a CEO that is help accountable. I have a fiduciary responsibility to my clients. My clients, my family and I have lost significant amounts of money and time waiting. Shareholders should be revolting against this company. Two years after this deal was announced, we still don’t know any of the two things that are vital to value this company: How much gas do we have, and when will we be paid for it?
'Gator' pid='65146' datel Wrote:Tree, Which came first IOC's sell to TOT or IPI's sell to OSH? IOC sold their (and the IPI) stake to Total. The IPI investors said not so fast. We want to sell to OSH. OSH said, we want our 22% of the gas to go to Train 3 of PNG LNG. InterOil then transferred ownership of E/A into a separate whole owned subsidiary and sold it to Total. OSH filed suit because the dispute in the JVOA. To continue to blame the delay of certification solely on arbitration and OSH (Botten and Civelli) is wrong. Hession did not lock down the IPI stake before he sold. Furthermore, after arbitration was settled, InterOil still claimed certification payment by YE 2015. The very first time a delay was mentioned was June 2015 at the ASM because the test results were so good they estimated the field was much bigger and they wanted to be paid for every molecule of gas. Since then we have had two additional delays and neither have to do with arbitration.

I would be ok with the delay if Interoil came out with a definitive statement like,  We can now be certain the low end gas estimate will come in at X and at a minimum the certification payment will be Y.  Nobody can value the statements were looking for all of the molecules.  The company as been analyzing the data for a long time, they better have some clue as the the amount of gas at this point or they need to be replaced by somebody who does.

Reply

#55
FWIW, I agree with Tree on all this.

That includes the FACT that IOC did NOT sell any "IPI position" to Total. The interest intended to be sold to Total was completely owned by IOC. The intent was for IOC to then replace part of that interest sold out of its interest by purchasing the Pac LNG and IPI interests. When IOC was outbid by OSH for the Pac LNG/IPI interests, IOC and Total had to modify the agreement to reach the intended final result. The actual factual and legal details of the agreements matter.

Furthermore, in addition to arbitration and JV partner status and gas usage issues, Gator continues to ignore the huge effect on the schedule of the problems with the rig at Ant 4, as if Hession had a much better rig standing by he could have used instead. They also had to give up on that rig and could not use it to satisfy any other drilling needs, but Ant 5 had already been completed in a fraction of the time with a capable rig. All that was after they had to give priority to the three exploration wells over appraisal to meet license requirements, with limited personnel and other resources. I don't think there is any way in hell Mulacek could have accomplished an equivalent PRL 15 deal and all that.
Reply

#56

'Tusker' pid='65145' datel Wrote:" It's a poor sort of memory that only woks backwards " Through the Looking Glass " We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad." said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here." Alice's Adventures in Wonderland Smile

Tusker - "You must be",said the Cat,"or you wouldn't have come here." (I am smiling) . Referring to "mad",it sounds very similar to what my remarkable wife said to me about 2 years ago in Dec.2013. Ha,ha. She may have said "have you lost your ever-lovin' mind? I can't remember exactly,but I can now equate it to "mad". Oh well,I'm not sure about mad, but as I said the other day" I'm just to doggone old and stubborn to get out now" . Hope that in spite of everthing ,you have a pleasant day .

Reply

#57

(12-08-2015, 05:07 AM)kkozkkoz Wrote:

(12-05-2015, 01:28 AM)Gator Wrote: How have any of your 7000+ posts help? What are your motives? Are you a paid pumper or just blind to the fact that this has been an epic failure on the part of current management to do the one and only thing that matters to this company and shareholders: GET PAID FOR THE ASSETS! With you (and management) it’s always perfect and someone else’s fault when thing go wrong. The board of directors should find a new CEO that can complete the task, but they won’t because they get free stock for doing nothing. The longer it drags on, the more shares they will collect. Hession has become a multimillionaire over the past 2 years, while shareholders have the stock cut in half under his watch. The stock has underperformed its peers even in a bad energy sector. Why? Because they have not done the one thing that matters, get paid. Delay after delay is standard for Hession. Didn’t he have the same problem at Woodside? My motives are clear: I want a CEO that is help accountable. I have a fiduciary responsibility to my clients. My clients, my family and I have lost significant amounts of money and time waiting. Shareholders should be revolting against this company. Two years after this deal was announced, we still don’t know any of the two things that are vital to value this company: How much gas do we have, and when will we be paid for it?
(12-08-2015, 04:34 AM)Gator Wrote: Tree, Which came first IOC's sell to TOT or IPI's sell to OSH? IOC sold their (and the IPI) stake to Total. The IPI investors said not so fast. We want to sell to OSH. OSH said, we want our 22% of the gas to go to Train 3 of PNG LNG. InterOil then transferred ownership of E/A into a separate whole owned subsidiary and sold it to Total. OSH filed suit because the dispute in the JVOA. To continue to blame the delay of certification solely on arbitration and OSH (Botten and Civelli) is wrong. Hession did not lock down the IPI stake before he sold. Furthermore, after arbitration was settled, InterOil still claimed certification payment by YE 2015. The very first time a delay was mentioned was June 2015 at the ASM because the test results were so good they estimated the field was much bigger and they wanted to be paid for every molecule of gas. Since then we have had two additional delays and neither have to do with arbitration.

I would be ok with the delay if Interoil came out with a definitive statement like,  We can now be certain the low end gas estimate will come in at X and at a minimum the certification payment will be Y.  Nobody can value the statements were looking for all of the molecules.  The company as been analyzing the data for a long time, they better have some clue as the the amount of gas at this point or they need to be replaced by somebody who does.

IMHO, kkk, that is ridiculous, and  no one in the industry could or would dare make those kinds of statements before all the data was in, or even before certification.  There is no comparison between having "some clue as (to) the amount of gas", and having independent certifications of the resources.

Reply

#58

'ArtM72' pid='65133' datel Wrote:

'Tree' pid='65132' datel Wrote:

'Gator' pid='65131' datel Wrote:

Naaah, 13 months of freaking arbitration which ended 10 months ago didn't cripple timelines.

You just made my point about poor management. What caused the arbitration delay? I think it was Hession selling 75% of E/A when InterOil didn't own 75% of E/A.  He made a deal with Total for the stake the minority investors owned when IOC did not and could not make a deal for the minority investors.  Furthermore, within three month, TOT and IOC changed the % and welcomed OSH into the project.  The arbitration didn't slow down certification.

You just made my point about conveniently overlooking the damage arbitration did to timelines delays, which  you view out of context.

If you want to point a finger at poor management, point it at Botten.  He was legally wrong and lost.   He caused the arbitration and the resulting timeline delays you assign to Hession.  OSH's poor management caused arbitration.

The arbitration didn't slow down certification. 

This an absurd claim  To make you correct, a yet not legally determined PRL 15 JV should have pressed on with the re-certification process?  This is laughable to even promote. TOT has been PRL15 Operator 4 months and 7 days.  That's it.

I don't think that is an absurd claim at all.

It was certainly within IOC's capacity to continue the drilling program knowing that regardless who its partner was to be IOC would be reimbursed.  Those holes had to be drilled and IOC had the money to drill them. The terms of any partnership with Boten had to be at least equivalent to the terms in the Total agreement,  That meant IOC would have had its costs recovered from OSH rather than TOT if OSH won the arbitration.  Instead, Hession appeared to stop and wait.  When he finally did get going he put a bad rig on A4.  And we are still waiting for testing results from A4ST.

Of course it is possible that Hession was constrained in what he could do by the first JVOA.  If in the original JVOA IOC ceded well operations on signing the PSA then there wasn't anything Hession could do if Total decided to wait the arbitration out.  That is of couse pure speculation as the JVOA, an attachment to the PSA, was never released.

So I'm caught between two working hypotheses.  First, a nefarious plot by major international business interests tied to Australia to delay Papua LNG.  Second, incompetance and/or hubris on the part of Hession. Either way the resource payment appears as distant today as it appeared two years ago when the PSA was signed.

IMHO, Art, these comments are even more absurd.  I have heard no information indicating Hession "put a bad rig on A4" knowing there was one much better available, and there were testing results from A4ST released on Nov 18.

I am also confident there are correct "working hypotheses" between your claimed extremes, and there is no way "the resource payment appears as distant today as it appeared two years ago when the PSA (sic) was signed".

Reply

#59

'Gator' pid='65146' datel Wrote:Tree, Which came first IOC's sell to TOT or IPI's sell to OSH? IOC sold their (and the IPI) stake to Total. The IPI investors said not so fast. We want to sell to OSH. OSH said, we want our 22% of the gas to go to Train 3 of PNG LNG. InterOil then transferred ownership of E/A into a separate whole owned subsidiary and sold it to Total. OSH filed suit because the dispute in the JVOA. To continue to blame the delay of certification solely on arbitration and OSH (Botten and Civelli) is wrong. Hession did not lock down the IPI stake before he sold. Furthermore, after arbitration was settled, InterOil still claimed certification payment by YE 2015. The very first time a delay was mentioned was June 2015 at the ASM because the test results were so good they estimated the field was much bigger and they wanted to be paid for every molecule of gas. Since then we have had two additional delays and neither have to do with arbitration.

Here's the timeline Gator. Lawyer and Gov't approved all throughout.  As of Dec. 5, 2013, TOT has been IOC's 'daddy' in all things PRL15, like it or not.  IOC was no longer sovereign as there was a JVOA in place as of 3/28/14, the same day OSH filed the dispite.  Your initial post in this thread was devoid of truth in context of the 15.5  months following Dec. 5, 2013.

I've laid out a non-exhaustive clarity of timelines, understanding of definition of preemptive rights and the realities faced by IOC/TOT throughout the arbitration process which ended 10 mos. ago.  If it fails to sink in, then oh well.  Keep on ragging at Hession because 'you are a frustrated long' and surely the only one out here.  SHU was conceived to keep IOC story factual and intellectually honest.  SHU has become a whinerfest and feelings sounding board as many who have kept things accurate here with facts (without the additional incorrect editorial coment) have tired and become bored with that task and have stopped posting.

*December 5, 2013

InterOil Selects Total SA for PNG Gas Development

*December 6, 2013

InterOil Announces Approval of PRL39 By The PNG Government and Clarification on The Transaction With Total SA

*27 Feb 2014    OSH announcement

Acquisition of interest in PRL 15       

*February 27, 2014

InterOil Welcomes Oil Search as Partner In Major Gas Field

*13 Mar 2014  OSH announcement

Completion of acquisition of PAC LNG's interest in PRL 15

*March 26, 2014

InterOil Acquires Minority Interests in PRL15   (Not Pac Lng, 1.0536% from minor partners)

*March 26, 2014

InterOil and Total Close Elk-Antelope Transaction

*28 Mar 2014  OSH announcement

PRL 15 Notice of Dispute

*March 28, 2014

Elk-Antelope Joint Venture Operating Agreement

*February 10, 2015

Arbitration claims dismissed – Total declared a party to PRL 15 JVOA

Reply

#60
Could Hession or anyone at Interoil keep Civelli from cutting a deal with Oil Search ???Nope !!
It should be obvious nothing happened during the arbitration , time lost 13 plus months . Whose fault ???? Not Interoil . That should be obvious to everyone . So the starting point 2 years from the signing of the deal is correct but has a dead period , the arbitration , which literally changes the time partners were working on getting things done . Everyone should understand that .
Beating on management about things they have no control over means that person has an agenda .
Beating on the company every Friday has an agenda .
Never forget we have an asset that keeps growing and it will be monetized . Based on Total's hiring plans for Papua LNG discussed in the Post Courier they are on board or why hire peeps???
If anyone thinks the current price of LNG isn't part of the monetization of the asset I have a beautiful bridge for you . Hint Hession and Interoil don't control the price of oil and LNG . With these lower prices Total continues to say 2021 first gas . Someone in Japan wants our gas and China should want our gas . Appears Botten may want our gas . How much ???
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)