(12-29-2015, 03:20 AM)Getitrt2 Wrote: As far as I know we don't have access to the agreement between OSH and Pac LNG, but my impression is that the drilling of an A7 will not have any effect on their calculations of the additional payment due Pac LNG. It comes down to whether Total agrees to an A7, and I personally do not give much credence to the conspiracy theories here; but maybe I am too naïve.
To my understanding OSH has to pay its license fee based on the resource estimate per year ultimo. So, IOC has the opportunity to evaluate the assessment of the recent seismic research on the westflank. If this assesment is a disappointment, they will be more motivated to proceed with A7. However, IOC needs an ally in the JV who has to decide to drill A7. Total is probably not interested in A7. However, IOC can help OSH with the extra gas for train 3. Together with OSH IOC has a majority in the JV.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
Relker I like that train of thought of us helping Exxon with their train 3 needs . Hope that's turns into reality . To achieve reality would most likely require a pro rata share of the LNG revenue vs an outright purchase of our gas .
Posts: 2,623
Threads: 61
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
225
'jft310' pid='65575' datel Wrote:Getit=disagree if they find more gas before their appraisal process within PRL-15 is complete then Oil Search pays more.Thus OIl Search would not want to start on Ant 7 before their deal is complete with PACLNG. Oil Search has zero incentive right now to approve Ant 7. Since we have enough gas for a two train then Total would be best served to defer Ant 7 so any gas found with required payment would roll into the second appraisal.Additional gas helps with trains above two. Hession would love to receive more money on this first payment but has not convinced the others . Been talking about it for months but no approval yet. Easy to see why no approval yet.
What are you basing that on about Ant 7, why do you say that? I have not gone back to verify it, but I seem to recall OSH projecting its certification in the April timeframe. If Ant 7 were to be spud tomorrow, which it certainly will not even if approved tomorrow, it would not provide adequate information in time for that. IOC does not require OSH approval, just Total's, and Total potentially could use more information for properly sizing the trains, whether two or three, and to better understand the project potential.
Posts: 2,623
Threads: 61
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
225
You guys just won't give up, huh. I feel sure that IOC is not going to bargain with OSH for an Ant 7 with some commitment to sell E/A gas to OSH and Exxon, even if it could, which I doubt, and that IOC negotiations for further monetization is focused on TBR.
A lot of issues have been dealt with in the transition agreement referring the transfer of the operational control. I assume that IOC did not give up its possible discovery bonus with nothing in return. However, I agree with you (Getirt2) that we all are chewing betelnuts.
Posts: 8,568
Threads: 1,342
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
380
'Getitrt2' pid='65591' dateline='<a href="tel:1451431 Wrote:
[quote='jft310' pid='65575' dateline='1451398743'] Getit=disagree if they find more gas before their appraisal process within PRL-15 is complete then Oil Search pays more.Thus OIl Search would not want to start on Ant 7 before their deal is complete with PACLNG. Oil Search has zero incentive right now to approve Ant 7. Since we have enough gas for a two train then Total would be best served to defer Ant 7 so any gas found with required payment would roll into the second appraisal.Additional gas helps with trains above two. Hession would love to receive more money on this first payment but has not convinced the others . Been talking about it for months but no approval yet. Easy to see why no approval yet.
What are you basing that on about Ant 7, why do you say that? I have not gone back to verify it, but I seem to recall OSH projecting its certification in the April timeframe. If Ant 7 were to be spud tomorrow, which it certainly will not even if approved tomorrow, it would not provide adequate information in time for that. IOC does not require OSH approval, just Total's, and Total potentially could use more information for properly sizing the trains, whether two or three, and to better understand the project potential
Getit - Oil Search has moved their certification to June/July 2016 . Any gas found within PRL 15 they must pay for . So Ant 7 doesn't get a positive call till after closing the sale with PACLNG. If then . In 6 months Interoil has not received Ant 7 approval . Why would Oil Search vote to pay more to PACLNG ????
The Basis of Design is per the press full speed ahead thus Ant 7 gas is not a determinant of train size since the well has not even been approved yet .
Posts: 2,904
Threads: 58
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
259
12-31-2015, 05:05 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2015, 05:06 AM by ArtM72.)
(12-30-2015, 10:52 PM)jft310 Wrote:
The Basis of Design is per the press full speed ahead thus Ant 7 gas is not a determinant of train size since the well has not even been approved yet .
Are there any news releases or authoritative sources that give examples of how the "Basis of Design" is "full speed ahead". Examples might be contracts, HOAs, MOUs or other similar vehicles with companies outside the JV. I have to thinki at least they know the unit size to be installed for layout to begin in order to generate probable cost.
On second thought, maybe not. A unit size decision having already been made might influence someone's buy/sell decision thus be material. So it couldn't be material. So confusing.
MH please help. You're our only hope. MH please help. You're our only hope. MH please help. You're our only hope.
Posts: 2,505
Threads: 219
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
109
'ArtM72' pid='65605' datel Wrote:
'jft310' pid='65598' datel Wrote:
The Basis of Design is per the press full speed ahead thus Ant 7 gas is not a determinant of train size since the well has not even been approved yet .
Are there any news releases or authoritative sources that give examples of how the "Basis of Design" is "full speed ahead". Examples might be contracts, HOAs, MOUs or other similar vehicles with companies outside the JV. I have to thinki at least they know the unit size to be installed for layout to begin in order to generate probable cost.
On second thought, maybe not. A unit size decision having already been made might influence someone's buy/sell decision thus be material. So it couldn't be material. So confusing.
MH please help. You're our only hope. MH please help. You're our only hope. MH please help. You're our only hope.
Hession and his incopetent buddy Kirk are the problem, not the solution.
Posts: 440
Threads: 58
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
198
12-31-2015, 07:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2015, 07:26 AM by 2126.)
Per Michael Hession:
"The Elk-Antelope LNG project (now PapuaLNG) in Papua New Guinea has entered basis of design, a significant step following site selection for the development and the choice of a project name... Over the coming months, Papua LNG, which will be operated by Total SA, will further define site locations and pipeline corridors as part of project development... Selection of the final development concept, including the size and capacity of facilities, is expected in early 2016 when appraisal of the Elk-Antelope field has been completed... This will be followed by front-end engineering and design with early works scheduled to begin later in 2016. With Total operating the project and ramping up its presence in Papua New Guinea, we remain on track to take a final investment decision in 2017." [Source: http://www.interoil.com/archives-from-th...p-forward/] July 2015
Also regarding Ant 7:
""As Antelope-6 is currently the last joint venture-approved appraisal well, InterOil's certification payment from Total could be expected within four to six months of completion of this well." [Source: http://www.interoil.com/investor-relatio...15-update/] November 13, 2015
Posts: 2,505
Threads: 219
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
109
12-31-2015, 07:32 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-31-2015, 08:32 AM by Putncalls.)
"could", not should! He dances with the words like a professional politician. His buddy wouldn't know what a drilling rig looked like it, if the bit was up his but.
|
