I see a lot of nostalgic talk about former management. Both the...

I see a lot of nostalgic talk about former management. Both the former and current management have been unable to convince the market to buy in to their new technology.

The former CEO was unable to deliver a project in Indonesia, Iran, Gladstone or North America (x 2). I am unconvinced anything would be different today if there had been no change in command.

The current CEO comes with a proven track record in the industry but has also been unable to convince the industry.

Collectively they have taken a half a billion dollars from the market while numerous other projects proceeded in that time.

It's a very conservative industry that is clearly not prepared to take the risk.

To those who say "just build it and the will come" - that is just not how it works in this industry. "Mega projects" (+$1billion) simply do not proceed unless they are underwritten by long term contracts that guarantee costs will be recovered (e.g. take or pay contracts). No bank or financier, who ultimately must stump up the cash, will ever take the risk.

LNG's Achilles's heel has always been their inability to find a party willing to commit their resource (gas) to their project / technology. This is common to all the aforementioned projects.

Former management is now repeating this model elsewhere and is facing the exact same challenges once again.

I would be wary of any new management coming on board without direct links to reserves, or a committed strategic partner, as they too will trod down a familiar path.