Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (155637)	8/18/2011 11:34:11 AM
From: CommanderCricket	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206085

Jacob, Those are very good questions but miss the bigger picture. IOC's cost for NG supply for their project is 1/0th that of XOM project 300 miles to the west. The reasons are many and not worth the effort to lay them out. IOC's NG costs are actually below zero as the condensate stripping pays for the all the up front capital costs. The NG is a by product that could be given away but instead will sell for anywhere from $12 - $15 mcf on a long term contract. The cash flows will be enormous. XOM chose to take on the capital costs themselves while IOC is setting up toiling agreements where the 80% - 90% upfront capital costs are paid by others. Suggest reading the latest IOC presentation, Morgans Stanley and Macquire's latest update along with Liquid Nuigini latest. liquidniuginigas.com shareholdersunite.com shareholdersunite.com interoil.com