Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 4.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Latest
#1
The renewed strength of the share price of takeover target InterOil Corp is signalling further pressures for Oil Search plans to take control of the company for $US2 billion, in the wake of a significant protest vote by shareholders last week.

Shares in InterOil rallied 1.8 per cent in overseas trading on Friday to end the week basically flat as the Oil Search shares slid 3 per cent, declining in line with the weaker oil price after its recent gains.

Oil Search is offering 8.05 of its shares for each share held in InterOil, along with a so-called "contingent value right", which will give InterOil shareholders access to any increase above 6.2 trillion cubic feet equivalent of oil and gas in the Elk-Antelope field in Papua New Guinea, which it is hoped will form the basis of a proposed new export gas project.

InterOil founder Phil Mulacek has been strongly critical of the Oil Search offer, which he argues undervalues the potential of the Elk-Antelope reserves, its core asset, which could be as high as 15 trillion cubic feet equivalent of oil and gas.

Advertisement



Mr Mulacek put forward several board nominees at last week's annual and special meetings of InterOil shareholders which would have given him board control if he succeeded. While his attempted board coup failed, he claimed 31 per cent of the shares voted at the meeting supported his nominees.

"It is clear to us that a substantial number of institutional and individual shareholders share our frustration and dissatisfaction with the board," Mr Mulacek said after the meeting.

Oil Search is seeking to take control of InterOil via a scheme of arrangement. Under Yukon legislation, which is where InterOil is registered, two-thirds of the votes cast must support the offer for it to succeed, which is a lower threshold than for similar votes in Australia. Even so, the high level of dissident voting at the shareholder meeting indicates that success for Oil Search is not guaranteed. InterOil shareholders are to meet on July 28 to consider the merger proposal.

Oil Search continues to argue that the development of the oil and gas assets of the Elk-Antelope acreage would be cheaper if done using some of the infrastructure of Papua New Guinea's existing gas export project, in which ExxonMobil and Oil Search are shareholders. At a time when the global gas export market is over-supplied, Oil Search claims only new projects that can be developed cheaply will proceed.

The PNG government is keen to ensure the gas export project moves forward since other oil and gas ventures, such as the Stanley project backed by Spain's Repsol​ and the ASX-listed Horizon Oil, have been stalled due to the downturn in the price of oil, despite government pressure for this project to progress.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/interoil-...z4C1eTulKl
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook
Reply

#2
Nice to see journalists looking past the corporate spin.
Reply

#3
along with a so-called "contingent value right"

The media is beginning to see past the spin for sure.

In the interim, Botten hints a delay on EA certification with IPI to be resumed after A7 is drilled which could be stretched out to miss the timeline. At which point IOC shareholders will be told they get all of the upside in OSH pps appreciation. It's always something further out.

There have been two EWT's on A5. Dr. Libor Plus 6 says there is enough gas for two trains. Botten is on record saying 5T's but they come up with 6.2T's to serve who? Simple math says they know there is 7.4T's and the diff was split down the middle and viola. 6.2!!! But no, we have to drill A7 first.

So in the end, shareholders will be put in a position to vote on a deal with no end in sight other than OSH shares with one unknown IOC exec getting a seat on OSH BOD (shhh...its a secret) to be acquired by an Aussie listed company buying a NYSE listed company (incidentally David Wu told me last fall that an Aussie listed company could not buy a NYSE listed company in a stock deal, yet another lie) that has Yukon based corporate by-laws doing business in PNG.

It doesn't have to be this complicated, but Botten has Dr. Libor Plus 6 buns up kneeling for his 50M dollar payday. Yet he is not the one being screwed here, IOC shareholders are.
Reply

#4
"Oil Search continues to argue that the development of the oil and gas assets of the Elk-Antelope acreage would be cheaper if done using some of the infrastructure of Papua New Guinea's existing gas export project, in which ExxonMobil and Oil Search are shareholders."

Again, we see OSH and IOC unable to get beyond the non-sequitur that XOM, OSH and TOT can do what XOM, OSH, TOT and IOC cannot do. They simply can't and won't answer the question why they think IOC would stand in the way of sharing PNG LNG's infrastructure even while Total is the JV operator. In other words neither OSH nor IOC can produce a logical reason for this buyout.

I'll produce two:
1. The Hession contract's extraordinary Change of Control provisions and
2. Saxon Palmer's projection last June of gross prospective and contingent 17 TCFe unrisked P50 resources with an additional 35 leads, all in addition to Elk/Antelope (Slide 20 http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documen...202015.pdf).
Reply

#5
Art -Or we agree with PET's work on asset size . He is voting no on the deal.
Reply

#6
To my opinion, their desire for "integration" of the projects means Unitization and equal ownership of all assets. IOC doesn't have the CA$H to do this easily.

It's not a coincidence that OSH says they will wind up with NET 29% of Papua LNG (exactly the same as their PNG LNG Stake) to align their interests.

TOTAL will buy into PNG LNG using their NET 48% Share of Papua LNG.

It is sheer stupidity to have two separate LNG Plants side-by-side run by two separate oil majors when you have the opportunity to have only one operator.

They can be run separately and still have some minor integration, but major savings come by Unitizing
Drivel Maven with Personality
Reply

#7
Stavros -

You're right. IOC doesn't have cash. On the other hand they have what all the other partners need. Without IOC's gas, nothing will happen. Should be worth something.
Reply

#8
Yes indeed "something"

OSH and TOTAL have offered "something" and Hession and the BOD accepted "something" on behalf of me and you and other IOC Shareholders.

My minimum definition of "something" is the current RAW DEAL + $42 per share = $85 per share.

What we have right now is Sum Ting Wong
Drivel Maven with Personality
Reply

#9
How about $85/share for PRL-15 then take what's left, fire the BOD, rehire Mulacek and get the band back together? Not a great deal, but one that at least has an upside entrusted with someone who knows how to find HC.

Whatever happened to David Holland?
Reply

#10
They let Dave go , he's in the Phillipines last report .
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)