IOC Update re Call for Special Meeting

[steve3752]

RE: RSUs and 2016 Managment Information Circular for AGM

This from Cynthia Black at IOC:

"- One RSU converts to one common share, with time restrictions on the conversion. 

- The management information circular should be available in a few weeks. If you are a registered shareholder, you should automatically receive a copy by mail. It will also be posted on our website."

RE: Hession 'skin in the game"

If one buys shares with cash from one's compensation or one obtains shares as compensation, I see little difference in the final outcome: one has 'skin in the game'

RE: Speculation that MH is seeking to sell IOC to OSH and become OSH CEO, and then sell OSH to Woodside and become Woodside CEO.

Speculation is simply speculation. That is not 'street smarts' . . .

The belief concerning MH's intention to sell IOC to OSH was attributed to PM.  If that is indeed PM's belief, it is likely supported by more than just speculation.

2126

He does not buy shares. They are given to him. Please stop distorting this. Others within management have made open market purchases out of their personal funds like most executives do who believe in their company, while he has chosen not to use his own funds.    The facts are facts. He has chosen not to spend a penny of his own money.  That is his right and is a negative reflection on him in my opinion and others I would guess share my opinion.

Are you denying that he has not made open market purchases when others have?

What does that tell you when the head of a public company takes shares that are given him, but refuses to use his own money to buy a single share?  Is that a good thing?

How?

[steve3752]

RE: RSUs and 2016 Managment Information Circular for AGM

This from Cynthia Black at IOC:

"- One RSU converts to one common share, with time restrictions on the conversion. 

- The management information circular should be available in a few weeks. If you are a registered shareholder, you should automatically receive a copy by mail. It will also be posted on our website."

RE: Hession 'skin in the game"

If one buys shares with cash from one's compensation or one obtains shares as compensation, I see little difference in the final outcome: one has 'skin in the game'

RE: Speculation that MH is seeking to sell IOC to OSH and become OSH CEO, and then sell OSH to Woodside and become Woodside CEO.

Speculation is simply speculation. That is not 'street smarts' . . .

The belief concerning MH's intention to sell IOC to OSH was attributed to PM.  If that is indeed PM's belief, it is likely supported by more than just speculation.

Before MH I remember there was a time when all the executives of IOC made a large purchase out of their personal funds on the open market at $75.00 per share.

I believe Wayne Andrews puchased $1 Million dollars worth at $75.00 per share.    That is having skin in the game.  Not selling what you have been given and did not  pay for is not having skin in the game where I come from.   Sure it would be worse if  MH sold. So he is holding his shares. Big deal.  He knows what he would look like if he sold.

[2126]

What I stated was: "If one buys shares with cash from one's compensation or one obtains shares as compensation, I see little difference in the final outcome: one has 'skin in the game'"

What you stated was: "He does not buy shares. They are given to him. Please stop distorting this. "

I never said he bought any shares. Please don't distort what I say.

[Putncalls]

If IOC is short of cash all they have to do is call for the certification. Why would PM be concerned with MH selling IOC short?

[steve3752]

What I stated was: "If one buys shares with cash from one's compensation or one obtains shares as compensation, I see little difference in the final outcome: one has 'skin in the game'"

What you stated was: "He does not buy shares. They are given to him. Please stop distorting this. "

I never said he bought any shares. Please don't distort what I say.

The facts are he has never bought on the open market. That is  what I am talking about.  That does not instill confidence and is shameful in my opinion.  Not the type of leader I want in a company I invest in.

Others in current  management have invested in the open market and he has not. Why?

[katytrader]

RE: RSUs and 2016 Managment Information Circular for AGM

This from Cynthia Black at IOC:

"- One RSU converts to one common share, with time restrictions on the conversion. 

- The management information circular should be available in a few weeks. If you are a registered shareholder, you should automatically receive a copy by mail. It will also be posted on our website."

RE: Hession 'skin in the game"

If one buys shares with cash from one's compensation or one obtains shares as compensation, I see little difference in the final outcome: one has 'skin in the game'

RE: Speculation that MH is seeking to sell IOC to OSH and become OSH CEO, and then sell OSH to Woodside and become Woodside CEO.

Speculation is simply speculation. That is not 'street smarts' . . .

The belief concerning MH's intention to sell IOC to OSH was attributed to PM.  If that is indeed PM's belief, it is likely supported by more than just speculation.

Before MH I remember there was a time when all the executives of IOC made a large purchase out of their personal funds on the open market at $75.00 per share.

I believe Wayne Andrews puchased $1 Million dollars worth at $75.00 per share.    That is having skin in the game.  Not selling what you have been given and did not  pay for is not having skin in the game where I come from.   Sure it would be worse if  MH sold. So he is holding his shares. Big deal.  He knows what he would look like if he sold.

  Weren't the purchases related to an offering at $75?  If so, one might assume that they were trying to jack up interest to ensure that the offering was fully subscribed.  But my memory may be off and I am too lazy to look up the factoid.

[will2bgreat]

Thanks everyone for a good discussion.

Let's be clear, there are no angels here.  Phil could not cut a deal, and Mike cut the deal but can't seem to get it implemented (at least in a timely fashion).

Steve, I tend to think along your lines of thought concerning IOC but I think there is a reason why.  From my POV, this discussion is happening because we do not have a clear vision from the current IOC management on where we are heading.  Basically, we are walking into the abyss hand in hand and IOC management is saying, trust us.  However, the trust factor is wearing thin, because of missed deadlines and lack of funds.

2126 and Kaliboo, while I do understand what you are saying, we must be realistic with our funds available.  This was sort of like when my wife and I went house shopping; she showed me what she wanted, but I had to show her what we can afford.  Kaliboo, your post about sharing work activities actually got me thinking if IOC can remain a seperate company.  If our spend rate has to remain where it's at to develop Papau LNG (and I suspect go up), then maybe we should sell the company.  And if that is the case, sooner is better than later.

Just my thougts.

[trans]

Thanks everyone for a good discussion.

Let's be clear, there are no angels here.  Phil could not cut a deal, and Mike cut the deal but can't seem to get it implemented (at least in a timely fashion).

Steve, I tend to think along your lines of thought concerning IOC but I think there is a reason why.  From my POV, this discussion is happening because we do not have a clear vision from the current IOC management on where we are heading.  Basically, we are walking into the abyss hand in hand and IOC management is saying, trust us.  However, the trust factor is wearing thin, because of missed deadlines and lack of funds.

2126 and Kaliboo, while I do understand what you are saying, we must be realistic with our funds available.  This was sort of like when my wife and I went house shopping; she showed me what she wanted, but I had to show her what we can afford.  Kaliboo, your post about sharing work activities actually got me thinking if IOC can remain a seperate company.  If our spend rate has to remain where it's at to develop Papau LNG (and I suspect go up), then maybe we should sell the company.  And if that is the case, sooner is better than later.

Just my thougts.

I have always felt taking on an obligation to develop 8 million acres area in PNG was far far too much for a smaller capitalized company like IOC.  Then it was cut to 4 million acres, ok but still way to big for ioc  handle financially again.  PNG also should not have allowed this ,but i guess ioc was the only taker tat the time.    Realistically, IOC should have taken on much less license area and had the capital assembled or access to bring it to market.  Now this surfaces, as it would have anyway imo, to stress the situation.  I'm not sure, at this time, if IOC has the capital or access to be a partner in this LNG venture where they stand now.  Therefore, ioc needs to be sold, sold down, or whatever to put them in the proper perspective capital wise to be there in the end.  Something has to happen, hopefully a selldown or two if they prove more gas is there, which we all believe. But it takes big bucks to drill those wells and develop.  Let's hope for the  best,but since 7 years ago, I have felt the $400 figures would never come to pass.  Time is money, and imo that $400 would dilute one way or another down to about a $ 125-150 per share figure at best......in the end .  Now it seems ioc is at the mercy or good graces of  Total.  Let's see how it turns out......just my thoughts.

[jft310]

One solution is multiple farm deals. We own @70 percent of TBR . Time for a farm deal . The drop in the price of oil has certainly hurt .

[Putncalls]

Why a farm deal now? That's stupid. Oil and gas prices should only rise from here.