Tusker and Getit;
In as much as I cannot respond to you on SHU and in view of the fact that there are several erroneous assumptions made tonight by you on SHU regarding yours truly, here goes:
First, my fear of IOC losing its PPL's is not because of "unconformity" as you state, but rather because they expire!!. Period. Furthermore, I could not find anything in PNG Oil and Gas Act which provides for renewals or extension. Also, Duma has publicly declared his intention to put such PPL's out for rebidding.
I understand mgm't has provided verbal assurances that this is NOT a problem. We all know about mgm't assurances.
However, in a privaye conversation with W.A. he acknowledged that there is NO assurance that IOC will be granted extensions or new PPL's.
If I am wrong, and I truly hope I am wrong, I will await someone showing me, in black and white, where in Oil and Gas Act it provides for new PPL's and or extensions.
Palm recently addressed the issue of Triceratops and he is correct, and I am grateful for his due diligence.
Second, with respect to 'the dramatic and flair" , several attendees at the agm get together on the night before the agm were convinced that I MUST BE Eric Sussman. ( As an aside, I purposely wore a UCLA polo shirt to create a spark ). To prove that I was NOT Eric, I was asked to show my drivers license which I did, just to amuse them.
So Tusker, I thought you were a real gentleman and was impressed with how gracious you were in greeting me at the Baker St lounge. I'm a little surprised at this public taunt by you.
Now that we got that straightened out, I am looking forward to someone dispelling my fear of IOC losing its PPL's. Until then, I will stand my ground.
More importantly, It sure would also go a long way in pre empting any "short" argument or rumors that Duma is close to announcing IOC's PPL's will be allowed to expire.
This argument has boiled down to how much risk is there that IOC will lose its leases.
Michael, Getit has acknowledged that there it is not certain, but then again, what is certain in PNG?
I do not think that comments Duma allegedly made 6 months ago in a conference in India is strong evidence that IOC's licences are in jeapordy. Then again, I don't think Duma's comments on anything are reliable as he has shown a pattern of talking out of both sides of his mouth.
It does not appear that IOC management is particularly worried at the moment and they did receive an extension on their other licences in the past.
So there is a risk, it is just a question of the magnitude. Neither side is going to win this argument until the leases are taken or renewed. If you think the risk is too high, you may want to sell.
Getit believes that IOC has done enough investment on the license to receive an extension, Mspieks doesn't.
We have a better chance of having this board agree to a definition of the word "soon" than resolving this.
I don't know why people think IOC has met its drilling commitments.
From the Form 40-F filed 2/27/13. Exhibit 99.1, Page 12:
Wells in both PPL 236 and PPL 238 are required to be drilled by March 2013 in order to meet our license commitments. During November 2012, we lodged an application for variation to extend the term of our Licenses and to defer our drilling commitments with the DPE. As at February 27, 2013 no decision had been advised with respect to our applications for variation.
And so far no additional drilling and no variation announced. And this was not the first time IOC had asked for a variation on its commitments.
spieks, the "unconformity" statement last night was from Tusker, not me; so I don't know why or what from last night you are attributing to me.
When I went through the "Act" long ago, I did not find anything that said the leases could not be extended, and got the impression they could be. Furthermore, I have heard from a source I consider reliable that there is a history of such renewals or extensions in PNG where companies have made investments as expected, which is certainly the case with IOC.
You say, "Duma has publicly declared his intention to put such PPL's out for rebidding." I have been following everything very closely for a long time, but do not remember hearing or seeing any such thing. You demand something in black and white. Show where he "publicly declared" that; back up your statement with something more than a vague recollection or impression.
I mentioned you in as much you have been my most vocal critic on this issue of risk.
From your request to Palm last night to share his research, it became obvious that you did not know the answer. Furthermore, you have evaded all my requests for the basis for your views. Thus I wanted to know how you could state I am a "liar, distortionist and fear mongeror" if ALL YOU HAVE IS YOUR OPINION. At least my views are based on facts: the PPL's expire in March AND there is NO guarantee that PNG will renew or extend the PPL's.
EVEN W.A. CONFIRMED THIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AND, if this comes down to a decision for Duma to make ( ie., O'Neil doesn't over rule him), how can you be sure Duma will be generous to IOC , especially with RDS whispering in his ear.
Thus the RISK.
I have NEVER stated IOC WILL lose its PPL's. I have merely pointed out there is a RISK.
If you read my posts as stating otherwise, I apologize for the inarticulateness.
So, how am I a "liar, distortionist and fear mongeror" if my views are based on facts and yours is based on opinion. May I suggest you look in the mirror?
MS, I would hope you will provide the board your support for when and where Duma "publicly" stated he intends to put IOC's PPLs out for bid/rebid. You ask others for proof/support to be considered credible, please return the favor
Sentiment: Strong Buy
As I have previously stated, Duma is reported to have made these statements at a presentation ( hosted by GAIL , I believe) in India.
His comments were NOT recent ( not last 6 months or so but, nevertheless are telling as to his support for IOC. He is NOT a supporter of IOC; that is irrefutable).
USE or flush.
MSpieks- Interesting post.
I am most interested in your comment that "Duma has publicly declared his intention to put such PPL's out for rebidding.." Where did you see or hear him mention this about IOC's PPLs. This is the first I hear of this.
We are all just trying to get to the bottom of all this.
I share your concern.
Until the PNG government grants or announces that it will grant extensions, the reasonable assumption is that they will expire -- because, in fact, they do at a future date certain.
All the speculations, assurances, musings, and denigrations in the world will not change that current fact.
I await a PNG government announcement or announcements on the subject.
I also await THE DEAL.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
No one cares Michael. Oh yeah, you're the creepy guy at the AGM that needed to touch who ever you are speaking too. This is the same thing, creating posts to make sure you are the attention. Creepy.
Regarding me addressing Getit in the previous post, Getit has, on numerous occasions called me "a liar, a distortionist and a fear moneror" when I've brought up this issue. I have challenged him numerous times to show where I was wrong in my conclusion that IOC was at risk for losing the PPL's.
He never responded to my challenges.
Tonight I find out why he never responded.
It is because he didn't know the answer!!!!!!!!!!!!! I guess he was relying on mgm't representations. We all know what credibility such representations have had in the past.
Tonight Getitwrong has asked Palm to provide his research that such expiration is not a problem. Obvious that he didn't know the answer yet he felt it was appropriate to call me "aliar, a distortionist and a fear mongeror" merely because I raised an issue which threatened his beloved IOC. '
So much for his credibility.
spieks, i am always interested in more information from a credible source (like Palm) about something I care about where more information may be useful, even where I already have opinions or conclusions. I have responded to this issue on a number of occasions to varying degrees and not always to you. You have raised it repeatedly, and I don't intend to spend time responding fully every time; look it up if you want more, from me and others. This is not something with a definitive answer in black and white. You have to put a lot of pieces together to reach a confident conclusion, which I have, although I recognize there is no certain guarantee, as with most things in life.
To say that I called you "a liar, a distortionist and a fear mongeror(sic)" "merely because I raised an issue which threatened his beloved IOC" is itself a lie proving your status, or at best an erroneous statement indicating little concern on your part about whether what you say or state as "fact" is really true. Anytime I have used those terms would have been in characterizing specific statements from you, and you would have to link them to those to prove they were wrong or try to properly evaluate them. Until then I stand by them. I have little concern about my credibility to honest and objective people, which excludes you imo, and imo you have a lot of reason for concern.
Mr. Spieks if you are truly that worried about the PPL#$%$ the sell button and get out. Otherwise, you are speculating. Speculating without information. Raising doubt on the issue by stating the oil and gas minister is going to rebid the licenses. If you have that kind of knowledge and are fearful your investment will collapse in March is it not time to move on. Or, do you get enjoyment by tweaking the longs and Shu members. Or are you just talking out loud so we can all gauge your fear! Which is it. It gets real tiresome and the #$%$ about defending yourself here is ridiculous. This is a stinking message board for goodness sakes. Nobody here knows anything because Mr. Hession prefers it that way. You don't think he has licenses on his agenda if indeed they need to be addressed with the government. Come-on Man! If you don't trust which you don't then why stay here. Must be more to it for you personally.
Sentiment: Strong Buy