Several Hedge Funds and our gas

[jft310]

Several smart sucessful Hedgies have this perspective on IOC's gas. They believe Total and IOC will cut a deal for current found gas and all future gas found, Each train with a very large LNG project has better returns because the base costs are better covered or spread out larger revenue. Example a new pipeline for trains has all 3 trains revenue to spread out their costs .

Some of their clues are the sacking of Duma, the use of Govt money to buy out the minority. Now we have Kavo in trouble. Could the Govt, OSH and IOC band together and get a good deal.? Drag Total along. Maybe so.

USE or FLUSH..

[jft310]

This would require a good LNG rate vs build your own plant with a Total and a future promise to process any future gas at those same terms.

This would be a Grand Slam home run for shareholders . All IOC has to do then is find more gas in their leases. They think if they can figure this out so then will Hession and others ,

If Exxon will not give us the right terms we build our own plant with Total and keep all our gas for that plant. So they think.

[Tree]

Wood MacKenzie June 2013 report:

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG. These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

XOM PNG LNG partners OSH and soon Gov't are now PRL 15 partners.   IOC/TOT could possibly cough up a small stake to bring XOM into  PRL 15.  That would make OSH, PNG, IOC, TOT and XOM partners in PRL15.  Revised PNG LNG unitisation agreement anyone?

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG.

These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

[jft310]

Treeman brilliant as usual.

[jdeo1969]

Wood MacKenzie June 2013 report:

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG. These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

XOM PNG LNG partners OSH and soon Gov't are now PRL 15 partners.   IOC/TOT could possibly cough up a small stake to bring XOM into  PRL 15.  That would make OSH, PNG, IOC, TOT and XOM partners in PRL15.  Revised PNG LNG unitisation agreement anyone?

Very interesting.  Good find.  That may be exactly what is going on currently.

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG.

These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

[Tusker]

Wood MacKenzie June 2013 report:

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG. These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

XOM PNG LNG partners OSH and soon Gov't are now PRL 15 partners.   IOC/TOT could possibly cough up a small stake to bring XOM into  PRL 15.  That would make OSH, PNG, IOC, TOT and XOM partners in PRL15.  Revised PNG LNG unitisation agreement anyone?

Guess your called Tap Root for good reason.   Now, would it not be helarious if we get a Leg Up at Ant Deep?

"ExxonMobil would need to agree terms with it's partners to bring the gas into PNG LNG project.  This would require it's partners to acquire equity in PRL 15 and agree to a revised project unitisation agreement or accept a tolling fee for Elk/Antelope gas to be processed through PNG LNG.

These options would allow all partners to benefit from expanding the existing project.  However, the level of reward available may depend on each partner's abiity to committ to the sizeable investment required to expand the project."

[Relker]

From an financial point of view it is more beneficial for IOC to sell gas from Tricerops or the other fields. The ownership stake in Tricerops is higher that 30%. Because the owners of PNG LNG are not willing to give up part of their ownership, it is more logical to sell the field or strip the gas and send it via a tie in to PM. Tricerops is very close to the pipeline. May be E/A can be used as a back up. For selling the whole Tricerops field time is needed. It is a complicated filed which takes a lot of time to appraise.

[jft310]

Relker how do we know the PNGLNG owners are not willing to give up a portion?What if Exxon were to partner with us in some way at some place. If a Exxon came on as a partner , with OSH and the govt voting yes it seems logical we could get an ownership position. Then there is the tolling idea. On the road show Hession stated that 2.5 T's of Triceratops gas could be partnered with Exxon. Lots of things for them to discuss.,Bottom line they need gas.

[CAC]

Relker how do we know the PNGLNG owners are not willing to give up a portion?What if Exxon were to partner with us in some way at some place. If a Exxon came on as a partner , with OSH and the govt voting yes it seems logical we could get an ownership position. Then there is the tolling idea. On the road show Hession stated that 2.5 T's of Triceratops gas could be partnered with Exxon. Lots of things for them to discuss.,Bottom line they need gas.

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

We at least know that the PNGLNG owners weren't previously willing to give IOC what they wanted (possibly the ownership portion).  That presumably is why the "exclusive negotiations" with XOM ended without a deal. 

[jft310]

CAC- I wonder how OSH buying into PRL15 changes the position of all the owners of PNGLNG. .?Is it a vote issue or a veto issue??