XOM Analysts Meeting - Weds March 1

[2126]

Our Canadian lawyer stated one had to chose one or the other and could not do both . He stated Exxon was looking for reasons to throw out dissenters .

Each shareholder has the option to dissent or take the deal. We have already verified that our IOC shares have been surrendered and that the physical dissent certificates from IOC have been issued in our case to DTC for our registered shareholder Schwab for our dissent. Waiting on an initial offer.

[jft310]

You miss the lawyers point , he stated you can do what you want as you say but your dissent shares should be kicked out as all your shares treated like in the approved deal . His legal opinion who won in the Appelate Court .

[Northoil]

[quote='jft310' pid='79746' dateline='1488815011'] Our Canadian lawyer stated one had to chose one or the other and could not do both . He stated Exxon was looking for reasons to throw out dissenters .

Each shareholder has the option to dissent or take the deal. We have already verified that our IOC shares have been surrendered and that the physical dissent certificates from IOC have been issued in our case to DTC for our registered shareholder Schwab for our dissent. Waiting on an initial offer

________________________________

2126 - when you say "We have dissented with some of our shares, sold some, and held some for the outcome of the CRP. " I assume they are tranches  in different accounts or titled  differently or distinguished from each other in some way.  Please put JFT out of his misery.

Also, all of us, I'm sure, would greatly appreciate any information you might be willing to release on both the initial offer and, if rejected, on the subsequent dissent phase.

[2126]

[quote='jft310' pid='79746' dateline='1488815011'] Our Canadian lawyer stated one had to chose one or the other and could not do both . He stated Exxon was looking for reasons to throw out dissenters .

Each shareholder has the option to dissent or take the deal. We have already verified that our IOC shares have been surrendered and that the physical dissent certificates from IOC have been issued in our case to DTC for our registered shareholder Schwab for our dissent. Waiting on an initial offer

________________________________

2126 - when you say "We have dissented with some of our shares, sold some, and held some for the outcome of the CRP. " I assume they are tranches  in different accounts or titled  differently or distinguished from each other in some way.  Please put JFT out of his misery.

Also, all of us, I'm sure, would greatly appreciate any information you might be willing to release on both the initial offer and, if rejected, on the subsequent dissent phase.

We held/hold IOC shares in 11 different accounts, in various forms and names including IRAs, Roths, trusts, joint accounts, individual accounts, kid's accounts, etc. Not too worried about Exxon's attorneys. I will definitely post any info that I receive regarding the dissent process.

[Palm]

You're exactly right 2126; law says you can do what you are doing and be OK. Exxon can say what they want and threaten whatever, but the law will prevail. I'd guess you're not too concerned.

[Northoil]

You're exactly right 2126; law says you can do what you are doing and be OK. Exxon can say what they want and threaten whatever, but the law will prevail. I'd guess you're not too concerned.

_________________________________________________________

It was pretty clear, except to JFT, what the situation was in selling, holding and dissenting.  It was obvious (again, except to JFT) these were different accounts, which 2126 confirmed.

I don't think Exxon is threatening anybody. Dissenting shareholders have to follow a certain procedure which is laid down in the relevant law.  The MIC simply tells shareholders what the procedure is and the penalty for not following it.  I would say that it's information to be applauded, not threatening.  Not every shareholder has access to law teams.

Will Exxon play hardball from here on?  You betcha!  Exxon has high ethical standards and goes to great lengths to protect its reputation.  At the same time, they know their way around a courtroom.  Being concerned is a healthy reaction, but it's not in response to threats.