We made the Post

[Gator]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/interoil_fiasco_scorches_paulson_NjJOhxPX5PyxbzrFARmfHI

The NY Post

InterOil fiasco scorches Paulson

By KAJA WHITEHOUSE

Last Updated: 11:47 PM, August 19, 2013

Posted: 11:10 PM, August 19, 2013

A small oil and gas exploration company burned its investors yesterday — including hedge-fund titan John Paulson.

The controversial InterOil Corp. said its months-long exclusive talks with a unit of ExxonMobil Corp. to develop gas fields in Papua New Guinea had ended without a deal.

Non-exclusive talks continue, InterOil said.

Reports by the company earlier this year of interest from several bidders in developing the gas fields pumped the stock from the mid-$50s to an intra-day high of $106 in May — and attracted the interest of the well-known Paulson & Co.

The hedge-fund mogul started buying InterOil ahead of the massive rise.

Paulson bought 1.87 million shares of InterOil in the first quarter, making him the company’s eighth-largest shareholder with a stake worth roughly $160 million.

Last quarter he pared the holding, but still owns 1.73 million shares and is the ninth-largest investor.

News that the talks with the ExxonMobil unit were no longer exclusive sent InterOil shares tumbling 11.7 percent, to $63.30 — their lowest close since early February.

While InterOil has plenty of reserves, it has yet to extract from its Papua New Guinea gas fields — a technicality that has made the stock a target of short-sellers like hedgie Whitney Tilson.

InterOil shares are off 27 percent in the last seven trading days and are now down nearly 19 percent over the last 12 months.

Meanwhile, the company announced a $75 million secured line of credit.

A spokesman for Paulson declined to comment.

[Tree]

Flat out LIE.

"The controversial InterOil Corp. said its months-long exclusive talks with a unit of ExxonMobil Corp. to develop gas fields in Papua New Guinea had ended without a deal."

"The controversial InterOil Corp. said its months-long exclusive talks with a unit of ExxonMobil Corp. to develop gas fields in Papua New Guinea had ended without a deal."

[freddiekingman]

I would have liked an other title...but hey...we're close Gator....

Tanx

[Gator]

Fact: The exclusive period had ended without a deal.

Fact: The stock is down 19% from a year ago.

Fact: The stock is down 26% this month.

Maybe a deal will still be work out, but InterOil shareholders have been waiting for a sell down of E/A for 4 years.

[Stavros]

There are no lies in the article
It is proper use of the English language.

FACTS:

1. IOC and XOM were holding Exclusive Negotiations
2. The exclusive talks had ended without a deal
3. Non-exclusive talks continue

[Tree]

There are no lies in the article It is proper use of the English language. FACTS: 1. IOC and XOM were holding Exclusive Negotiations 2. The exclusive talks had ended without a deal 3. Non-exclusive talks continue

Sorry you cannot read correctly the quote I highlighted.  The quote is a lie.  The quote does not state what you state.  The quote alone is a repeat of last Friday's Reuter's article which all agree was innacuate.

[Stavros]

Let me reiterate what I said Tree; I was trying to be helpful but you got sarcastic on me.

I read the quote that you highlighted.

I repeat it below:

"The controversial InterOil Corp. said its months-long exclusive talks with a unit of ExxonMobil Corp. to develop gas fields in Papua New Guinea had ended without a deal."

1. IOC has engaged with XOM in months-long exclusive talks
2. The EXCLUSIVE TALKS ended without a deal

The statement is 100% TRUE and absolutely not misleading because the article then immediately takes it further and makes it plain as the 9+ TCF in Elk/ Antelope that the NON-EXCLUSIVE talks between IOC and XOM continue ... which means they are still trying to reach a deal but competition is now back in the playing field which puts pressure on XOM.

We all appreciate it when you post information that helps us make our investment decisions.

Please continue doing that ...

[Gator]

Stavros is correct. The article was correct. Tree you might not like the way the article was written, but it is factual.

[CAC]

There are no lies in the article It is proper use of the English language. FACTS: 1. IOC and XOM were holding Exclusive Negotiations 2. The exclusive talks had ended without a deal 3. Non-exclusive talks continue

Sorry you cannot read correctly the quote I highlighted.  The quote is a lie.  The quote does not state what you state.  The quote alone is a repeat of last Friday's Reuter's article which all agree was innacuate.

*************************

Some people just can't stand anybody ever saying anything that isn't glowingly positive about IOC.  Where's the lie?  I read it to be completely accurate and true.

[tarulestheday]

OK, I think we have determined that the article is both painful to read and 100% accurate.

In hindsight, was the exclusivity a mistake on IOC's part and could it have been a requirement on XOM's part?

I personally think that this event is a major turning point for the company in that major investors consider this a failure and will move to push for the sale of the company. Just as I was beating the drums a few years ago that the major investors were pushing to oust Phil, I now have some evidence that they are pushing for a buyout.