The tiny Irish stock on the brink of landing 'the first' post-sanction oil deal in Iraq. Ref 'Fleet Street Letter' 12-04-04..

Aldwickk,

There are currently no problems with the streaming prices - what issues are you having at your end?

Ian

my only issue is that the sp is nt going up HA HA!!!!!!!!!!

sorry, but i just had to say as it really make me laugh!!!!!!!!

Just looking through my PET file and found the article about the contracts being awarded in November, also mentions the research projects from the article this morning, lets hope we truly do only have a few more days to wait.

Good luck all

Tokyo

Iraq to award oilfield development contacts in November: official
Dubai (Platts)--1Nov2004/110 am EST/610 GMT
Iraq has plans to award oilfield development contracts to multinational oil
companies in November, the head of the State Company for Oil Projects Ahmed
al-Shammaa told Platts Monday. The contracts are for the development of the
Khormala Dome in northern Iraq near Kirkuk and Hemrin located northeast of
Baghdad. "We expect to award the contracts in November and sign them in
December," Shammaa said. The contracts were discussed during a meeting between
oil companies and Iraqi oil officials, including a delegation from the State
Oil Marketing Organization, during a three-day meeting in Amman last week. He
also said there was some expectations that oil field development contracts in
the south could be finalized before the end of the year. Iraq's oil ministry
had received in August separate offers for technical studies on the Rumaila in
the south and Kirkuk oilfields in the north. The ministry had expected to
award the contact in late September to one of 14 companies bidding on the
deal, but security concerns pushed back the contacts award date indefinitely.

Hi all,
What a disappointment that nothing was forthcoming from the conference.
Do you guys think that we may still get word by the end of the month, as indicated?
My nerves are in shreds. Besides, I am supposed to be checking the final proofs for my novel and that has to sent in tomorrow. What a distraction all this is proving to be.
Sabine

Thans Tokyo, as per my previous post, the MM,s are taking full advantage of this situation. I am not at all phased, although my screen is on all day!. This will happen

Afternoon all,
I don`t think we have to worry about the lack of action for PET from these meetings as they are obviously not about the same contracts that PET are in the running for.

Firstly, the tenders PET put in were the first post Saddam contracts and were put out to tender the latter part of 2003, if my memory serves me right.
Secondly the Iraq procurement meetings are for further contracts, studies etc., remember that Shell said PET`s contracts(we hope!) were too small for them to consider, especially in the current security situation, adnlet`s face it it is worse now than when they were invited to tender !
Thirdly, PET did`nt send anyone to Amman, according to a reliable source anyway. Surely if they were handing out thore contracts they would have sent someone out there.
All IMO,
regards,
Dexter

ps. apologies if i`ve repeated anything but i have`nt been around much the last couple of days.

'CONTRACTS WILL BE ANNOUNCED BY THE END OF THE MONTH' Lets not forget this too. It could be there intention to announce after the dust settles fron the conference this week.

Just relaxing with a glass of wine after a hard day's decorating. Just read again what my friend Dexter says above. Nothing has changed. Life is going on as usual - we don't have all these terrorists blowing up oil fields. Procurement conference was nothing to do with PET's contracts. These exploration studies are nothing to do with PET's contracts. Look again at Tokyo's note repeating the statement by the Oil ministry. End of November. Why? because there was a lot of work to do by PET and ministry themselves. Important for them to keep to schedule because they need the fields on stream - they could miss the date for various reasons but I expect we would be told. So, don't worry folk; join me in a glass of wine and toast PET and the Iraqi Oil Ministry! Cheers
Eric

Teeling could have mammoth press as the Danbury Dome is imminent too.(PRE).

PET and PRE together would put him up there as

King Teeling the Wildcatter With the Midas Touch!

Morning all. I get the feeling ive missed something along the way! Other BB posters are talking about a conference/press announcement on Monday from PET?

Sorry, i dont wish to sound stupid but can anyone here enlighten me on this! The talk is of a press release with announcement of contracts etc awarded with an RNS to that effect coming over this forthcoming weekend. Dont get me wrong, i certainly hope this is the case, but can any guys on this most excellent and informed thread help.

Many thanks guys/gals

Gra1969

gra

Well, that's what we are waiting for; almost bound to be a conference and not just an RNS. Question is whether it is just speculation or hard news. Probably not the latter as the opening this morning is quiet but positive. Like my feelings: quiet but positive!

Eric

Morning Eric,
This is quite exciting really, shame ive got work in the middle of it all! still pc will be on!!!!!

Good Morning Pet's Lovers!

Let me try to put paid to this idea of the interim government not being able to award contracts and that a newly democratically elected government will be the only one to do so; and may even cancel contracts awarded by the current "temporary" government as some tosser (you know him) keep 'reminding' us.

First the 'Iraqi' US drafted constitution stipulates that on no account should any subsequent government change parts of the constitution, namely those that 1) some US military forces and some military bases (14 altogether) will remain indefinitely in Iraq. 2) And more to the point, the privatisation of Iraqi resources must not be undone, and therefore any contracts awarded by the current Iraqi government must be honoured.

Now with regard to the newly elected government come January election, I can assure you it will change only in name and few individuals. At least Allawi and his close friends would form a party, as would others, to take part in the elections. The results are known even before the 'elections' take place: Allawi and his party would win the election and would carry on as the US'prime minister in Iraq.

A perfect analogy is Afghanistan. Karzai, who was supposed to be a temporary prime minister to prepare for 'democratic' elections, has just been 'elected' the 'proper' prime minister of his country. In effect he is in control of only Kabul. All the former warlords still control the provinces, having put themselves as candidates and won after threatening the local people with their guns. In one of this province called Parvan, Karzai's nominee failed to win by a margin of 90%. However, he declared himself the winner and therefore the governor of the province. When the people rebelled, guess what he threatened them with: you stop your rebellion and go home or I will call on the US warplanes to bomb you!" These are his exact words. However, he still failed to take the province because the warlord who had threatened the local populace with either you vote for me or you will be killed", won because the people rebelled against Karzai's candidate for fear of being killed by the warlord. This is democracy for the Afghan people: threatened with death by both sides.

So we should forget about any material effect re any contracts by the new government after the January elections. Nothing will change, in my view and from several experiences of similar situations.

Now why is the ministry of oil using the after January elected government as an excuse not to award big contracts to big cos such as BP, Shell or the Halliburtons? As I have always said, the Iraqis are being very smart here. They want to delay as long as possible (not being able to prevent it completely) awarding big contracts to big cos who are seen as the main reason for the war, i.e., oil! The Iraqi oil ministry want to see small cos steal a foot on the big cos: hence they have been awarding oil contracts to mostly small cos and mainly from neutral countries: Brazil, China, Iran etc....

Remember few weeks ago the Iraq oil minister stated clearly that the Iraqi oil company "will retain its structure because it has always served Iraq well or words to that effect. What he means is no privatisation of Iraqi oil and therefore control will remain under the Iraqis, whilst his government has, as I say above, agreed under US pressure, to privatise other resources such utilities, telecom etc... Big contracts of over $1 billion of the latter have already been awarded to the likes of Bechtel, Halliburton etc. So why not big oil contracts?

Think about it for one minute: why is the current government able to award small contracts and not big ones? Isn't Iraq in hurry to have BIG investment? Further, which is more important to Iraqis, having permanent US bases in Iraq or big US/British oil cos? So why is this temporary government able to award US forces permanent military bases and not able to award big oil cos contracts?

Another thought: what is the best opportunity for the big US/British cos to get big contracts? NOW, under this temporary government and as the country is in a mess preoccupied with security, and under the US/British military control, or when there is an elected government which should bring some stability to a people who are and would remain very anti US/British because of two wars/ten years of destructive sanctions? I think it is clear that it is now. Yet this same big cos have so far failed to get any big contracts. Forget their claim that the country is insecure and the government is only a temporary one: its a face saving tactic, no more than that. Wouldnt they want to at least set foot in Iraq if only to steal a march on their competitors? Further, why these reasons have not prevented small contracts to small cos such those mentioned above?

Some people may see a contradiction in the argument above, namely that since the current government is in the hands of the US, why is it not able or willing to award big contracts to US big cos?

The answer is simple: even the US cannot have total control of the current Iraqi government given that it is busy fighting the resistance. They cannot push even their puppets too far and risk having the whole of Iraq up in arms. Therefore even the US has to play the give and take approach if only to help their puppet in the eyes of the Iraqi people. More importantly, even the Prime Minister Allawi or any other government official cannot have the power in a situation of war that he can have in a no war situation. On the contrary, in a war situation, especially one involving guerrilla or terrorism, when the government is also the target, the top people in the country becomes the most vulnerable and those at a lower echelon such as junior officials or mere civil servants find themselves the most powerful: the resistance or terrorist targets the top echelon not the lower echelon because the latter are seen as just doing their job and not responsible for the big decisions which affect the country. The point I want to make here is the top echelons would kneel down to the lower ones and would never dare to antagonise them (as they do in normal times) for fear that the latter would give away their whereabouts or itinerary to their foes, who would then easily assassinate them. This has occurred on numerous occasions in the civil war in Algeria in the 90s, and is occurring now in Iraq as has been publicised many times before and recently with regard to the director of the ministry of oil or the governor of Mosul, Iraq 3rd biggest city. Few weeks a go I posted an Observer interview of an Iraqi resistance leader, who by day is a civil servant and by night a fighter. He said that a lot of junior government officials were working for them by providing them with information. (I could post it here again if anyone wants to read it)

Therefore at the moment in Iraq, the real power lies in the hand of the lower echelons rather than the top. In this context those top US puppets would as life insurance not go against the wishes of the lower rank officials and therefore try not to award contracts to big cos seen as being from the countries that have tormented the Iraqis for a long time.

Instead they would want to see small cos from neutral/friendly countries such as our PET benefit.

Finally lets not forget the current Iraqi Minister of Oil was a General Director of the Oil Ministry under Saddam. And in all the ministries, all the ranks below minister and deputy minister are people of the former regime, for the simple reason that the US realised, after it sacked most of them, that the country could not function without them. Even the notorious Mukhabbarat (secret services) is still alive and kicking, even in the Iraqi embassy here in the UK, according to an Iraqi friend who paid a visit recently.

Good Luck to all Pet's Lovers!

Sorry about the long posst!

hemacik

Well done and thankyou. Fits my own perspective, particularly re continuity over the elections. Allawi comes over well; e.g. re Fallujah which was clear had the interim government behind it. Also important, and to the benefit of PET, is the continuity of the Oil Ministry with the past, to the benefit of PET.

Eric

hemacik16, good post and detailed opinions, it does get the dulled grey cells thinking about some previous info, stating that WHEN PET get contracts, there could be a 'big' move to take over the company. should it be the case that PET initially get something SOON (I hope) the bigfoots step in after the dust has settled, which, with a long term plan may be the case. it would indicate the comfort zone the the oil ministry will be in when awarding contracts to smaller companies (their old friend PET) that could infact be swolled up, in the near future. We could call it 'initial front company PET.' any thoughts welcome

watcher

connected to the above, would this be very positive for the share price? One surge up on RNS 'next week' about the contracts. Then up again when bigfoots try the buy out of PET, just looking at best case scenario for my investment, which will grow at the end of this month if no RNS by monday the 29th.
watcher

Can anyone confirm, or is it just a rumour regarding an announcement on Monday????

Thanks Aldwick, people have posted on that poster, so I took away the post, as he latter posted something completly opposite to what he said originally, looks like Katie is shorting the stock again or looking for some cheap stock, as one week she is positive the next negative.

One thing is for certain, this close to the end of November, the only news I am going to trust is going to come from either the Iraqi oil minister or PET themselves, anything else positive or negative shall be read but looked upon as speculation or rumour and nothing more.

the research I have done, and keep reading over and over again is keeping me positive, and believing that PET will walk away with at least one of the contracts, It is still just a matter of when, but it is the when and the waiting that is killing most investors, would not be surprised to see this roll over into December, then the de-rampers will be out in full force.

Anyone who is getting nervous I suggest you look through the thread and follow some of the website links, there you'll find alot of interesting info on why we feel PET will win, also gives you peace of mind when people start posting negative things about PET, it shows you that half the de-rampers over the other side, really don't know what they are talking about.

Keep strong people, and fingers crossed for an RNS soon to put us out of our waiting misery!!!!



Tokyo

Tokyo.
Go back to the other side Katie as some info for you.

over the past two weeks I have had to cross many parts and now it come down to crossing more parts. There is nothing left so i have uncrossed a few things and backed-up the sound information and viewpoints to help me hold on maybe until the RNS is eventually out there, even it is after 30th. I might even get a top up, thumps up from she who must be obeyed.