joint ventures, page-29

robjb5,

i think you are inflating your research and comprehension abilities. excuse me for being so frank!

1-There was no "in principle agreement" between PXA & GSG.
There was an "assignment of rights" to CBM/CSM only, from PXA to GSG..Contractually binding upon only those two parties

RESPONSE - there was an IN PRINCIPLE AGREEMENT between PXA and GSG over the CSM and tight gas....refer to the MPS term sheet.

2-Upon GSG becoming wholly owned by QGC, then, unless agreed otherwise, as a condition of sale,any agreement established prior to the sale would be null and void, because of an inability to implement, on the part of PXA,
the previously established "assignment of rights"..

RESPONSE - what are you referring to? PXA has been bought by QGC and there is absolutely NO evidence that i can find that GSG has or has not finalised its in principle agreement with PXA. if they have not been finalised then GSG is a NULL and VOID topic. But YOU are happy to discuss them in other posts.

3-I do not know..But, I would ask myself this question.
Why would QGC incurr a liability to spend all of that money upon exploration, with CTP, IF the CBM/CSM rights were excluded,and the only entitlements were to conventional OIL & GAS.????

RESPONSE - the scenario follows that prior to executing their takeover of PXA they BOUGHT the rights to the CSM and tight gas off GSG. under the terms of the IN PRINCIPLE AGREEMENT that GSG had with PXA it was GSG that would incur the costs of the CSM and tight gas exploration. So NO, qgc under these circumstances wouldn't be incuring the liability as you suggest IF they bought PXA without these unconventional play rights.

4-The CBM/CSM rights were assigned by PXA to GSG,and this was announced by CTP at the appropriate moment.I can not see that there is a second transaction for any party to be 'made aware of"..

RESPONSE - when did CTP announce that PXA had farmed its rights to the CSM and tight gas to GSG????

5-Do you really think that CTP would have entered into this arrangement with BGC/QGC without being fully understanding of contractual obligations incumbent upon both parties?

RESPONSE - CTP didn't enter in an arrangement with BGC/QGC. it was PXA that enetered into the agreement with BGC/QGC and the fact is CTP were taken by surprise!

you are a bit rude to call any other CTP posts other than yours, "UNINFORMED COMMENT."

most offer their humble opinions and are open to discussion but unfortunately we seem to disappoint you.

OH and how many shares you got BIG BOY....LOL....rhetorical question!

good luck

cheers