Member Info for Oleo

Usually oilfield service companies do not buy shares from an oil company.

What does it mean.

To keep it simple. Oil companies own and operate oil and gas fields. But oil companies do not have enough engineers, rough necks, software, tools, rigs, pump units, chemicals to run operations. Oil companies pick up the phone and call oil field service companies like Schlumberger, Halliburton, Baker, Weatherford, NOV, Liberty, H&P .... Oil companies ask for offers, oilfield service companies send an offer and finaly perform a job, service, do simulations, drill a well, frac a reservoir, do clean out with coiled tubing unit, do measurements in wells, build gathering lines ...

Thats it. Usually service companies do not get a share of an oil field and usually oil companies do not buy shares from an oil company.

Bryan Sheffield experienced in the past, that when he was a tiny oil company, that the big service companies with their fancy technology were bot very interested in offering jobs because he was too small.

Convincing H&P, Liberty, and Baker to buy TBN shares he wants to be sure that this service companies are commited to the Beetaloo and will always deliver their best oilfield service in the Beetaloo.

The Japanese buy shale gas assets, but not from us

Hart's: Japanese energy giant Jera is making a $1.5 billion move into the U.S. shale patch, acquiring Haynesville gas assets from Williams and GeoSouthern to fuel its growing LNG ambitions.

We can assume with a high probability that the Sheffields are very interested in including South Africa's Karoo in their collection of international shale gas/oil assets, which already includes Libyan shale assets. The Libyan shale asset and the South African Karoo exhibit the same target profile for the Sheffields. Just like Beetaloo, the Karoo and the Libyan shale assets are gigantic—meaning they are so large that a major oil company cannot ignore these assets. The Karoo shale gas has previously attracted the interest of Shell and Chevron. How can Mr. Philip O'Quigley as CEO of FOG justify assigning a value of zero dollars to Falcon's Karoo shale gas asset in South Africa? I offer FOG one symbolic US dollar to buy and take over the Karoo asset from FOG if POQ thinks there is no value in the Karoo.

LOL

Philip O'Oquigley has to hurry up with the FOG-TBN merger. Otherwise, he cannot justify giving the Karoo away for zero $.

The problem is the FOG CEO Philip O'Quigley, who is not capable of farming out or selling our 22.5%. The current deal with TBN is a capitulation, in which the FOG shares are simply passed on. In contrast, in Australia it is already being discussed that there will be a bidding war to farm in at TBN after the merger with FOG.

I would feel more comfortable if POQ had engaged some well credentialled farmout/takeover professionals to flog this Beetaloo shale gas asset rather then waiting for some fish of unknown size to take the bait.

Seldom the first offer is the best offer.

Why do you think the first TBN offer is the best offer?

"The transaction followed initial discussions between Dick Stoneburner (Interim CEO and

Chairman of Tamboran) and Philip O’Quigley (CEO of Falcon) a few months prior. "

Why do we NOT see initial discussions between Philip O`Quigley and the CEO of ADNOC, or Qatar Energy, or Inpex, or KOGAS, or BP ...?

Why did Philip O`Quigley have initial discussions with TBN , a company that definitely does not have enough cash to pay us 1.000 $/acre?

Do you believe Philip O'Quigley acted in good faith when transferring the FOG shares to TBN, to secure the best result for the FOG shareholders?

The plans about building this big pipeline from Beetaloo to the LNG facilities in Darwin is very very good news.

The Beetaloo is passing all tipping points and fullfills all criteria to end up as an asset for one of the major oil companies

Agree, except one part:

"While it is disappointing to anyone who had held FOG shares for years, believing that it would be sold for 1000/acre or whatever, it seems pretty clear our best possible outcome is this deal with TBN. "

The management in Dublin did not show any active selling of the Beetaloo asset.

There was no data room, which is the first step for a farmin.

We did not see that the CEO of FOG establishe close relationships with the decisionmakers of potential buyers like ADNOC, Qatar Energy , Kogas, Petronas, PetroChina, Shell, BP, Exxon , Total, or with any of the big japanese players like Inpex etc.

Let`s organize and see if we could get a 1 , 2, 3 billion $ offer for FOG.

Monetizing a minimum of 1 billion $ would correspond to the true value of FO's acreage.

.. or fire sale merger.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqwRcXCT1J8

at 1:12 Dick Stoneburner says:

".. hundreds of millions of Dollars to spend in the future of this basin. And quite honestly, Falcon would have had a hard time keeping up with the capital expenditures to develop the basin. So Philip O'Quigley and myself , you know, began discussions, and led to a merger discussion .which I think is going to be good for both.companies ..."

As a shareholder of FOG I am not interested to join the phase of capital expenditures of hundreds millions of Dollars.

As a shareholder of FOG I want to see FOG sold before entering this phase.

As a shareholder of FOG I want to see a takeover of FOG.

I do not want to see that TBN is selling a share of FOG at a higher price in the next minute - than the price for the merger.

FOG is not a distress sale. Tell me one reason that FOG must be sold for a fire sale price.

Contrariwise, Mitsui would invest over US$1.0bn in two tranches to earn a 35% WI in 406k acres (~142k net acres) in the 7,500 $/acre range.

After

FO`s 1 million acre went (merged) for 169 $/acre to TBN.

In such a scenario. Do you think this is a good deal for FO shareholders ?

In this Mitsui scenario, Mitsui would put around 1 billion $ on the table

We talk about values of 7-8,000 US$/acre

Our 169 $/acres CEO is praised for his negotiation skills. But not capable of offering FOG`s 22,5% Beetaloo (1 million acres net) to the Japanese for 1 billion $ ???

I like this scenario from Fitz:

Headline Terms

Counterparties: Tamboran Resources (Operator), DWE & Mitsui & Co. (Investor)

Asset scope: 406,000 acres within the Beetaloo Basin core development fairway (Velkerri B primary target, Velkerri C optional).

Farm-in interest: Mitsui earns a 25–30% working interest in the designated acres.

Headline deal size: over US$1.0 billion across two tranches (work-program carry + cash components).

Operator: Tamboran remains operator. Mitsui gains strong JV governance rights and LNG offtake alignment.

Consideration & Funding Structure

Tranche 1 – Appraisal & Early Development (US$400m)

Mitsui funds Tamboran’s 100% share of 12–15 appraisal/development wells, pad facilities, and compression expansions

Earns 20% WI in Phase 2 Area = Val of US$5k/acre

Tranche 2 – Pipeline & Processing Commitment (US$600–750m)

Triggered by APA/TBN sanction of Beetaloo–Ballera pipeline (1 Bcf/d design)

Mitsui funds Tamboran’s carry on initial processing trains + well program (30–40 wells)

Earns additional 15% WI, bringing Mitsui to 35% WI total

Performance ratchet linked to Tranche 1 outcome increases Mitsui total commitment to US$1.15 billion

Val US$8k/acre

Development Outcome

Production: ~1 Bcf/d into East Coast market by 2029–30

Pipeline: APA’s Beetaloo–Ballera (~US$3–4bn capex, ~1 Bcf/d capacity). Mitsui may co-invest in midstream equity

Cash Flow Split: Tamboran retains ~45% WI, Mitsui ~35%, balance held by DWE

Offtake Rights: Mitsui secures LNG equity marketing rights and East Coast domestic allocation.

Summary

Mitsui would invest over US$1.0bn in two tranches to earn a 35% WI in 406k acres (~142k net acres).

The implied val is ~US$7,000-8,000 per net acre, benchmarking Beetaloo’s derisked Phase 2 core at par with top-tier U.S. shale plays.

Good interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqwRcXCT1J8

so POQ finally became active and started a talk with Dick Stoneburner.

Do you think it was POQ idea and motivation to talk with TBN?

Back slapping for getting 169 $/acre instead of getting a minimum of 1,000 $/acre?

Https://ceo.ca/insiders-dashboard?symbol=FO