re: more questions ?
dvk13,
Just a couple of things.
Woodsides reserves are moving in the exact OPPOSITE direction to Shells !
It has nothing to do with how one measures the reserves. Or any changes to policy.
Woodside in regards to Browse basin has reported the same for three years, no change !!
Now their web site changes the reserves estimate UP not down. The exact opposite direction to Shell.
WPL has been playing this game long enough.
How can they justify using USD $22- when the actual price was 75.5% higher in a presentation to investors ?
How did the Auditor possibly sign off on this ?
Could you explain all the one line releases regarding Mauritania with no elaboration's whatsoever ?
Could you explain why WPL chose not to release Tiof 6 results itself ?
Could you explain why it chose to release the same day full results of a well in Indonesia that intersected 9 meters gross oil and they had a 8% share of the well but chose not to release tiof 6 where they hit 124 meters and hold a share over 50% ?
No one can explain the assertion that unless it is over 6 trillion cubic feet of a billion barrels of oil it is not commercial, maybe you can ?
Can one explain why Browse basin was moved down into scope for recovery when the takeover by Shell in 2001 failed ?
Anyone want to have a stab at why absolutely no news other than one statement every year on WPL'S single largest deposit from 2000 - 2004 ... Browse/Brecknock ?
Numerous press articles came out about the deposit being too hard to develop or others putting it down between 2000 and 2004, since their was zero public information flow about the deposit from WPL where do you think the negative information was coming from ?
Was there any attempt from WPL during the period to counter the bad press ?
Browse basin the last hole was drilled and reported on the 15/8/2000. Now three months later Shell makes the takeover offer, do you think there might be some correlation ?
Browse basin was upgraded slightly in terms of resource as a result of this drilling by 1.5 trillion cubic feet to 20.5 trillion . Do you think if Woodside now has on its web site its 28 trillion cubic feet that is the full extent of it ?
Would it be fair to assume from past and present very conservative announcements in this field the actual reported size now of 28 trillion could be 80 % of less of what is actually there ?
If it was at 80% would this make the size in reality 35 trillion cubic feet ?
If it was at 70% would this in reality make the size 40 trillion cubic feet ?
Now remembering not a single hole has been drilled since August 2000. If the reported size each year since then has been 20.5 trillion, and its now 35 trillion , how would you view this ?
If not a single hole has been drilled since late 2000, and the resource has been sitting on WPL'S reserves statement each year under the dubious scope for recovery, could you explain late last year how development was being planned in 2012 ?
Do you think it was in the right category in light of the development plans ?
With the falling down of Timor/Sunrise it appears the deposit may be developed and start production as soon as 2008. Do you think it should remain in the scope for recovery since production seems to be planned so soon ?
If no hole has been drilled in over 4 years, how can one upgrade a resource by 33% with a straight face ?
Did you happen to know the partners in the failed Timor Sunrise development ?
Woodside owns 33.4% of Sunrise, regarded as the richest prize in the Timor Sea. Its partners are ConocoPhillips (COP) with 30%, Royal Dutch/Shell Group ( RD) with 26.6% and Japan's Osaka Gas Co. (9532.TO) with 10%.
Want to have a stab at the share of the Browse/Brecknock/ Scott reef holders ?
Well Woodside holds 50% .... shell owns more than 8% so the rest is pointless. Shell has control.
Gee ... was the Sunrise deposit also held by a majority Shell/ Woodside ?
Is the guy in charge of the Woodside interests an employee of Shell's who was seconded to WPL ?? Hmmm let me see ....
I think these are fair and reasonable questions ?
Not too sure WPL or Shell would agree.
ASIC and ASX ... hmmm
The Government .... well Costello has no idea and managed both to look foolish and stupid at the same time with his comments, that's no mean feat.
Actions by our largest Oil/Gas producer not only effect shareholders in it but the country as a whole.
On top of this minor holders in projects with it are hurt.
In the case of Mauritania its ROC and HDR shareholders.
Big picture it is time someone called this fiasco what it is. With Australia production of Oil falling to near zero by 2010 the hole in the trade deficit even now is around 8 billion a year and will rise to 18 billion by 2010.
The longer we play footsies with our massive reserves of LNG the longer the deficit remains in such a bad way.
If it isn't in the shareholders interest to intervene, it certainly is in the countries interests to. No question about that !
Costello thinks it was successful his blocking move in 2001, yep, WPL'S man in charge of North West Shelf .... is he a seconded Shell employee ?
Is the man who decided and negotiated the fate of the Sunrise/Timor development also a seconded shell employee ?
Because I know you won't bother looking ....
Agu Kanstler .. Director new ventures ... From shell 1995
Steve Ollereamshaw ... CEO NWS ventures, from shell November 2002
David Maxwell .... ??? 1996 joined Director gas bus unit seconded from shell
Cheers
HDR
hardman resources limited
