Well goodaye NZ Coaster,good to read your viewsyou have summed...

Well goodaye NZ Coaster,
good to read your views
you have summed it up pretty clearly, and its good to hear what other s/h think.

"Anyway, keen to hear thoughts on the above as it is better than watching the clock." - yep ain't that the truth?

"And a last request to the Directors – please do not allow the current due diligence period to go on past 10 December – enough is enough." - yep , its like watching a glacie move.

But I do understand what the motives of the Directors was in allowing d/d without a "drop-dead date".

There are a couple of points I was thinking of.

The way the ASX release was termed, there was no exclusivity period provided to the "proposer" for the 3 week period - it appears to be a non-solicitation period. So the way i read it, is if a party comes to WCL, then WCL can still talk to them, and allow them to do d/d. Also, if a prospective purchaser has already looked at the books, there is nothing stopping them doing further d/d as well. But I am not certain. I will admit that at the AGM, it was referred to as an "exclusivity" period.

my thoughts re the the purchase of MPO has always been that it was just one part of the pie- the other parts of the pie included WCL and its management, reserves and infrastructure, plus Mitsui in some form.
Petro buying a standalone MPO "field" just does not make sense - all they have bought is a few blocks of dirt, and a Production License. And I bet that PL will lapse if they don't use it.
With that premise in mind, I was thinking that Petro (if they are the mystery proposer) would have obtained NDRC approval to acquire WCL at the same time they applied for approval to purchase MPO assets. because imho, its all part of the same plan.
Possibly the same scenario applies re FIRB approval. But anyway, I think FIRB approval will simply not be a problem, as WCL is too small to be an issue for FIRB.

My impression is that there is no point in executing a GSA (with its attendant commitment to very large fund raising for development expenditure), if such an execution means that it would kill-off any chance of a takeover. A Petro or whoever would simply not be interested.

Re other bidders - I have no idea.

But, if interested parties are thinking like us, and view Petro as the logical purchaser, then they might well be sitting back and waiting to see what price is offered, and what the response is from our Board.
The Board's view is critical.

As for counter-bidders, also got no idea - but this was in todays Australian:

"Gas supply contract availability for 2013-14 is very tight, and for 2015 and beyond not available," the report said. "This has placed a number of gas users in a precarious position. These users are unable to commit to capital investment across their business to secure future sustainability, not to mention continuation of current operations."

So I cannot understand why big gas users on the East Coast would not be interested - they could get the reserves, production, infrastructure and the proven mgt - AS A TURN-KEY PACKAGE. And they get certainty of supply, plus a natural hedge against price increases.

Alcoa is already doing it in WA.

All interesting stuff, and we shareholders seem to be on the same page.

it will be interesting to see what happens at the conclusion of this 3 week period, because, based on the ASX release, it would seem that there is no requirement for anything specific to happen?

But we would expect an announcement or update at least.

On another note, it seems that the Bumi parcel is keeping a lid on the SP.

cheers