Seeking Alpha

Shareholders Unite

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Shareholders Unite's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Comparative Analysis Of Interoil [View article]
    Uhm, your main argument used to be that InterOil doesn't have reserves. You might wanna check how much reserves OilSearch had before Fid (final investment decision) in Dec 2009, and what Fid did to the reserves (it five-folded them).

    And Exxon didn't partner with Austex either, does that "proof" they don't have "anything"? what kind of a dumb argument is that?
    Mar 24 02:45 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Comparative Analysis Of Interoil [View article]
    Yes, I got sidetracked by ["Austex trades at $0.64 per mcfe of 3P reserves, very close to the $0.63 per mcfe of contingent reserves Interoil trades for"]. still it's a quarter gas and IOC's possible + probable + proven numbers are a bit lower than that.
    One might also have to be reminded that OilSearch had almost no proven reserves until FID, and how profitable is it to get the oil and gas out of the ground there?
    Mar 24 10:47 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Comparative Analysis Of Interoil [View article]
    When I see an article not mentioning the gas from poor PNG sells for a multiple (in the order of 4x) of the gas from rich US, I start to have my doubts..
    Mar 24 08:46 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    I never denied the existence of that guarantee, bonk. you know that. Suggesting I did is misleading.
    Mar 22 02:36 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    They did say something else that might be of interest in that presentation:
    ["The fact that the surface pressures after the tests returned immediately to original maximum pressure also indicates extremely strong capacity to flow"]
    Mar 21 01:59 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    Lets just resume here for a moment:
    - You argue previous license holders extensively explored the area but you fail to provide any evidence, and when confronted with evidence that only two wells have been drilled previously, you cite extensive seismic studies, once again without any evidence
    - And because these previous license holders abandoned the area this is proof of, well, what? That Elk/Antelope can't be a commercial resource?

    How can we distill ANY info about the commerciability of a resource from actions of parties like previous license holders BEFORE the discovery of the resource was even made?

    This is a fabulously bizarre 'argument,' on a par with your "imploded wells" or "there are no liquids, look at the flame" stuff.

    The previous license holders abandoned because they didn't find much and because gas prices were low they didn't make much of an effort. InterOil did find much, because they used new methods and/or were luckier and gas prices are high, there is nothing more to it. Parties are now coming back to the gulf, like Total, OilSearch, Shell.

    And you wanted a farm-in partner. PRE is a farm-in partner. Now it suddenly isn't good enough because they're not an international operator, more proof of your ever shifting goal posts.
    Mar 20 06:25 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    Straw man. How can they decide on the commerciability of something which:
    - They haven't discovered, drilled, tested, cored, logged, third party vetted, etc.
    - Contains source rock of a different, much better quality than previously found (that is, several flavors of reef)

    It is also extraordinarily clear in the article I gave you that there was a reason for not continuing, low gas prices and no market outlet.

    And InterOil does have a farm-in partner, Pacific Rubiales.
    Mar 20 05:34 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    The business insider piece was an annonymous source and it's a value judgement what constitutes "extensively" explored. Even if extensive seismics was done, they didn't discover much but IOC did because they used different methods and/or were more lucky

    More importantly, the previous license holder didn't:

    - Find Antelope
    - Drill Antelope
    - Core Antelope
    - Flow Antelope
    - Log Antelope
    - Appraise Antelope
    - Have it third party vetted

    So what is your point? Antelope cannot exist because the previous license holders didn't find it?

    There about 40 of these prospects there, how many of these were found by previous license holders. Could this have something to do with why companies like OilSearch and Total are returning to the Gulf?
    http://bit.ly/10cYZoB
    Mar 19 11:20 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    Boston, a couple of grown-ups (myself very much excluded) are trying to have a serious discussion that's actually very worthwhile, perhaps we could enjoy that without your harping. For starters, you even get the most basic facts wrong. How many Antelope wells are there, you say? Three? Oh boy..

    You also might have to consult a map to see how close these wells are.
    Mar 19 10:15 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    Bonk, Indo, thanks for all these contributions, from something of a farce, this has become an infinitely better discussion all of a sudden, very interesting.
    Mar 19 07:54 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    I know Elk doesn't contain a reef, which is why I made the comparison with large parts of Antelope that doesn't contain a reef either.

    From memory, Ross Smith's last report called both reef and dolomitization a positive.

    Also from memory, I think the other 500 meters do not contain all that much gas either, so whether it moves might not be all that important, something like a 80/20 rule applies here. I think Pet has even done some calculations on SHU.

    When I argued you could sort of answer the question yourself, that's what I meant, as Elk is similar rock and doesn't contain all that much gas either.

    Also from memory, the logs of one of these open hole tests showed gas coming only from the top, basically.

    Keep in mind as well that after GCA there was another well drilled. I have a feeling that matters more for the GCA assessment than the GLJ one.

    Thanks for keeping this a refresingly rational and civilized discussion, much appreciated. I hope Indo participates, as he knows several orders of magintude more than me about this stuff.
    Mar 18 07:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Ditch The Euro, But Not Just Yet [View article]
    Socialism in Europe??
    Define socialism..
    Mar 18 07:20 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    It's remarkable that we're now going from a waterwell "argument" to wells where only the top produces. It is progress of some sort, but we could have gotten there without about the 100 comments in between.

    Bonk, you can construct your answer yourself. Elk doesn't contain all that much gas, which the parts of Antelope that resemble Elk, you can answer that yourself.

    When you say "just 200 meters" I have to disagree though.. 200 meters is a large well by any standard.

    You might also have drawn some conclusions why Ross Smith Energy Consultancy was so critical, but basically admitted they were wrong after Antelope1 hit the reef (which they previously argued wouldn't exist).

    But this, of course, is just my 2c.
    Mar 18 06:35 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • InterOil's Increasing Value Proposition [View article]
    It is remarkable in itself that when confronted with previous lies, you used to call them "personal attacks" now you've found a fancy term for it, but it doesn't take away anything from your persistent history of lying.
    Mar 18 06:26 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Ditch The Euro, But Not Just Yet [View article]
    Yes, thanks. Can only agree with that.
    Mar 18 04:14 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
2,851 Comments
4,130 Likes