Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

InterOil Corporation Message Board

raiseyou33 17 posts  |  Last Activity: Jul 13, 2015 3:07 PM Member since: Apr 6, 2010
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    The XOM OFFER

    by mspieks Jul 13, 2015 9:26 AM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 13, 2015 3:07 PM Flag

    This was all speculation.

    "We think it could occur"

    Every report said a final offer could not be made after the appraisal of ELK/ANTELOPE.

    By the way, these numbers only add up to 4.5 billion but what is 500 million when comparing deal terms?

  • Reply to

    The XOM OFFER

    by mspieks Jul 13, 2015 9:26 AM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 13, 2015 2:59 PM Flag

    You have stated with absolute certainty that you KNOW there was a specific offer made for 5 Billion dollars for 4.6 tcfs.

    I have stated that there has never been any public confirmation of any SPECIFIC OFFER made for which I can compare to the offer made by Total that was ultimately accepted.

    You state Hession was an idiot for not taking Exxon's offer.

    I state I cannot come to that conclusion without knowing the specifics of Exxon's offer.

    You say, I will provide the proof and provide an analysts report that only talks about a potential deal and does not provide ANY SPECIFICS WHATSOEVER.

    EVERY ONE HERE KNOWS THEY WERE NEGOTIATING. WHAT WE DON'T KNOW IS WHERE THE NEGOTIATIONS ENDED.

    I am not trying to prove that an offer was not on the table. I have consistently said, I don't know of any specific deal and therefore need proof that there was one before I can agree with you that Hession made a mistake.

    You state THREE BROKERAGE firms discussed the amounts OSH would have to come up with IF offer is accepted.

    Where is the actual specific offer mentioned?

    You supply this drivel and call me obtuse.

    We can let everyone read this exchange. If I am the one missing something, please let me know.

    Raisyou.

  • Reply to

    The XOM OFFER

    by mspieks Jul 13, 2015 9:26 AM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 13, 2015 1:36 PM Flag

    MS

    I read the report you attached.

    ExxonMobil has signed an MOU with InterOil to negotiate exclusively with InterOil
    regarding its Elk/Antelope gas resource. We think there is a potential deal which
    would involve ExxonMobil acquiring gas reserves from Elk/Antelope which would
    provide feedstock for an expansion train. ExxonMobil has stated that 4-5tcf would
    be required from Elk/Antelope to underpin a train, and media reports have
    suggested 4.6tcf of gas reserves would likely be acquired.
    We think that Exxon could sign a deal with InterOil in the next few months. However,
    we imagine any deal would be highly contingent on results of additional appraisal on
    the resource, particularly given Exxon’s preference to market 1P reserves. Our
    understanding is that drilling to date on Elk/Antelope has been on the crest of the
    structures and not on the flanks which means there is significant uncertainty about
    the resource size. We think that a further 2 or 3 appraisal wells would be required to
    adequately define the resource. Given the time required to drill and evaluate in PNG
    (prepare communities, prepare site, drill the wells, then get an independent
    certification), we think this appraisal could likely be complete by 2H14. Rigs 702 &
    703 will remain fully utilized on Hides drilling based on current drilling rates, so a
    timely appraisal of Elk/Antelope will require another rig to be mobilized.

    There are just as many "which would" "could sign" "we imagine" "would be highly contingent" as I remember.

    Nothing here that substantiates the actual deal terms you say Hession stupidly rejected.

    If you have something more substantial so be it. If this is all you have, you read like Ken.

    Raiseyou.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 10, 2015 3:19 PM Flag

    My mind is open to facts. But you do see the irony don't you? You harp on the pump crew for their anonymous tips, spouting speculation and calling them facts, and you do the same thing.

    I have never been interested in the "I heard" posts from anyone.
    I cannot compare the deal we have to the deals we don't based upon "I heard".

    You may be right in what you say but without substantiation, it means nothing to me.

    Maybe others here feel differently.

    Raiseyou.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 10, 2015 11:09 AM Flag

    That cannot be. There must be some other sordid reasoning based upon incompetence or corruption. There is no way that the simplest most logical explanation is true.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 10, 2015 9:01 AM Flag

    You are in Kencooksam territory MS with all of your alternative deal information that you have obtained outside the public space.

    If you cannot substantiate any of this, it is pointless to post.

    I am not going down the rabbit hole to argue against the merits of the deal IOC obtained against the whispers of better deals that may or may not have been made.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 10, 2015 8:58 AM Flag

    My point was at the time the deal was made, Hession did not have as much knowledge of Elk/Antelope or the other prospects as he does now.

    Maybe he would have been inclined to make a different deal at the time had he known then what he knows now. We will never know and I cannot backseat drive with 3 subsequent years of drilling and seismic.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 9, 2015 2:32 PM Flag

    I call it hearsay at best, heresy at worst.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 9, 2015 2:27 PM Flag

    If they are so common knowledge how come they have never been published when every rumor about this company found the web.

    If investors in this company learn anything, it should be to never blindly accept what management pronounces, especially when those pronouncements do not make sense.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Phil.

    A lot of people could have saved a lot of pain if discounted everything that man had to say, especially about the value of the deals in the works.

    We shall see.

    Raiseyou.

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 9, 2015 2:22 PM Flag

    But this is something EVERYONE takes for granted.

    Prove up All the prospects. What if they don't pan out into a sting of pearls. What if Elk Antelope is all we have.

    This is not my expectation but taking 5 billion for everything we Knew we had was not without risks itself.

    Raiseyou

  • Reply to

    No Absolution for Hession

    by mspieks Jul 9, 2015 1:33 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 9, 2015 2:10 PM Flag

    I disagree with this assessment. This was not my interpretation of events.

    Hession did say the deal was a good deal. However, all of the Phil-speak hype that was pumped around had made expectations of a good deal completely out of hand.

    I thought and continue to believe the deal was a good deal. I also thought that there was no way the deal would satisfy investors who were still high on Phil's BS.

    Any deal made without phantom under-capitalized partners WAS transformational as we finally had a &$^$% prayer that something would actually be built to monetize this stuff.

    Bonk was continuously posting comparable deal values but was constantly assaulted with non comparable deals. Does anyone else cringe every time they hear the name "Cove".

    There has been no publication of the supposed terms that IOC rejected from Exxon. There are many people here who say they know what the deal terms were but no one has provided a credible source so I reject their "knowledge"

    The deal with Total, was not limited to an asset sale, it allowed IOC to retain a greater piece of the pie in the future. Since signing the deal, all efforts and monies have been spent on defining the pie.

    The stock price has been recently hit by macro uncertainty and slumping energy prices. All of which are beyond IOC's control. IOC is not even in control of this project anymore. If you want to criticize the timeline, going forward, please realize this is TOTAL's timeline now. We are along for the ride.

    Phil was always the problem, even if some only realized it after the fact, including his crony board.

    Regards,

    Raiseyou

  • Reply to

    Yawn

    by raiseyou33 Jul 8, 2015 12:57 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 9, 2015 9:39 AM Flag

    I do have sympathy for those who have lost money.

    But there is a difference, in my opinion between the drop in price following the Phil overhyped "deal" and the current drop which, in my worthless opinion, has nothing to do with the fundamentals of the company.

    I believe IOC dropped because of global macro concerns. As I believe this thing is getting done, even at these prices, I consider this price swing more noise than anything else.

    I cannot argue about past sunk costs. I am only interested in the prospects for this company over the next 2 years and I still see fundamental improvement.

    I like the deal, I like the partners, I like the management team, and I like the execution.

    I could not say and did not say any of these things when Phil was around.

    I have involuntary convulsions of laughter whenever I hear the word "FLEX", LOL.

    We shall see.

    Regards,

    Raiseyou.

  • raiseyou33 by raiseyou33 Jul 8, 2015 12:57 PM Flag

    There remains so much irrational emotion in this stock. Wake me up when the global fear trade has ended.

    I see nothing specific to IOC to make me doubt this investment any more this week than I did last week.

    If it hits the 30s I may buy some more. Otherwise, hit the snooze button.

    Keep checking boxes.

    Raiseyou.

  • Reply to

    It's a bloodbath!!

    by reality_gerald Jul 7, 2015 10:55 AM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 7, 2015 2:39 PM Flag

    This is silly.

    Raiseyou

  • Reply to

    Interesting IOC price action today

    by artinv12 Jul 2, 2015 3:12 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 2, 2015 4:00 PM Flag

    I never see anything in the short term swings. Too much noise.

    Very happy with the trend though.

    Raiseyou

  • Reply to

    Hand Wringing ; Why?

    by mspieks Jul 2, 2015 11:24 AM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jul 2, 2015 12:37 PM Flag

    There is upside from here just from continued de-risking of the project which will go forward even at these prices.

    For all the criticism, I remain very happy with the new management team. No more Phil-speak, just quiet methodical advancement of the project based upon sound reasoning and fundamental enhancement.

    Keep checking boxes.

    Any macro upside to global prices would just be gravy.

    It will be a slow march up, the question is, how high?

    Regards and Happy 4th.

    Raiseyou.

  • Reply to

    Thirty five points above the low.

    by hottubber99 Jun 24, 2015 3:31 PM
    raiseyou33 raiseyou33 Jun 25, 2015 10:28 AM Flag

    I have been very lucky trading the emotion of this stock.

    Don't even mention his name, he is not a person, he is a bot.

    Raiseyou

IOC
34.54+0.16(+0.47%)Aug 28 4:03 PMEDT