Upstream article, page-10

True story, Gridder, and I truly appreciate and respect your postings.

I have been impressed that FAR mgmt have been as gracious as could possibly be expected under the circumstances, if not more so, whenever referring to Woodside. CN and company are class acts. The professionalism and competence of management are some of the main reasons I have faith in FAR, and they help me to not over-think (read sweat) my position excessively.

And yes, the arbitration before the ICC is FAR v COP.
COP are the ones who made the "sale".

That being said, WPL were the buyers, and they must certainly have known the nature of the deal. To me, it's akin to being a receiver of stolen goods. You're not guilty of the theft itself, but as a receiver, you bear a certain burden of culpability... especially if you are not in a position to claim ignorance. Even if unwitting, however, there is still a burden, less-so perhaps, but a degree of culpability remains. And I for one do not for a moment believe that WPL was an unwitting participant. Let us not forget the magical disappearing indemnity clause (I would still love to get unbiased, complete detail of that little nugget of fair play). And then there's always the question of whether, or not, CNE was also in the know. I imagine that they were.

Yes, moving forward, FAR should continue acting in a professional manner toward WPL, and always leave that door open in the event that we would choose to partner with them in the future. And WPL has friends... lots of friends. That must also be considered. But as a FAR shareholder, I will reserve my right to bear some animosity toward WPL, and to intermittently take a swipe at them from the touchline in my own irreverent and less-than completely mature fashion ... until after they're out of this picture when we achieve PE reset via arbitration and buy COP's 35% WI Senegal (with a little help from our friends).

-walk