Saturday, October 01, 2016

This Day In PetronasLand....Deny, Deny, Deny.



Please see Updates at bottom of post and a most interesting reader-driven discussion in the comment thread

Apparently, there will be no sale of the non-existent Sparkle Pony factory.

At least, it would appear, not before May of 2017:

Malaysian state-owned oil firm Petronas says it's not considering selling its stake in a proposed multibillion-dollar liquefied natural gas export terminal in B.C.

The company issued a statement yesterday (Friday Sept 30, 2016) saying it "categorically denies" allegations made in a news report that selling its stake in the Pacific NorthWest LNG project was up for consideration...

What's this apparent turnabout all about this time Alfie?



Lede, above, from a CP report published on
Update, Saturday afternoon: Grant G of the SGoods and I are having a little trouble finding Petronas' own, actual 'categorical denial' of sale consideration (see comments)...Has anybody seen it/got it (i.e. separate from 'news' reports saying that it has made said statement)?
Updatier, Sunday morning: I heard from Martin MacMahon of CKWX on the Twittmachine who said that the NatGas Ministry of prov. gov't gave him the heads-up that Petronas was denying intentions to sell PNWLNG before a media release from Petronas. The latter was described in a follow-up story by WX's Renee Bernard...Last night I asked Mr. MacMahon a follow-up about whether he actually asked Petronas for a comment before he ran his story. I also  asked Ms. Bernard if she actually saw a statement from Petronas and if it was the same one being trumpeted on the Twitmachine by a PNWLG PRish person with close ties to the BCL Party. Neither Mr. MacMahon nor Ms. Bernard has gotten back to me as of 8:00am Sunday...You can read all about this in the comments...I'll have a follow-up post later. 
Updatiest, Sunday Dinnertime...Have day job work week prep to attend to...Will try to follow-up soon.


Grant G said...

Grant G comment...Part 1

OK...Here is the last OFFICIAL press release statement from Petronas..



PETRONAS is pleased that the Government of Canada has given a conditional approval for the proposed Pacific NorthWest LNG project.

On behalf of the partners of the proposed project, PETRONAS would like to thank the Government of Canada, the Canadian Environment Assessment Agency, area First Nations, local residents and all other relevant stakeholders for their constructive participation in the process of reaching this approval.

PETRONAS and its partners will study the conditions imposed by the Canadian authorities and conduct a total review of the proposed project prior to deciding on the next steps forward.


This link takes you to Petronas's press releases for 2016..


And here is the same story reported by Reuters..


Malaysian state oil firm Petroliam Nasional Bhd, or Petronas, said it "categorically denied" a Reuters report that it was considering selling its majority stake in a $27 billion Canadian liquefied natural gas (LNG) project.

Petronas is weighing several options for the project that was approved earlier this week by Canada, but had yet to take a final decision, Reuters reported on Friday citing three people familiar with the matter. Other options are also being considered, including putting the project on ice.

"Petronas reiterates that, together with the project partners, it will study the conditions that come with the approval and conduct a total review of the project prior to making a decision on the next steps forward," the company said in a statement on Saturday.

Read the article Ross

What you have is the same press release saying Petronas an partners will review the project...That statement was made September 28th...

The CBC and Reuters is reporting an alleged verbal statement saying

"categorically denied"

Grant G said...

Part II

But but but...I can't find that phrase in any statement from Petronas..Petronas keeps referring media back to the September 28th press release(the one about reviewing the project and conditions with partners..

On cknw yesterday(Sept/30th), during their newscast...CKNW reported and aired Rich Coleman saying.. Paraphrasing here..:I called Petronas and they "categorically denied" they were considering selling" then Coleman referred to the Sept28th press release about reviewing the project and conditions...

In other words...Show me the whole Petronas statement denying they are considering selling...

However...Petronas and partners might be interested in what Coleman is prepared to do/giveaway in a new rejiggered PDA...

Lastly...Does Rich Coleman really think that a ginormous energy company would keep him privy to their financial moves?..Does the B.C. media believe Petronas would give Coleman the straight goods?

Big media is lazy, and bought..

I don't see the statement denying anything..

And..Michael Smyth's last article..His research is lacking, the information he writes for his readers is inaccurate, false, a lie?

Michael Smyth wrote...

"but there's no guarantee the proposed Pacific Northwest LNG project near Prince Rupert-the first to be approved-will actually get built" snip

Michael Smyth is wrong..CAPP..LNG spindoctors..BC's media...They have been running a bogus narrative, they have been reporting that BC's and the BC Liberal's LNG industry is being held up by regulatory delays and red tape...

Wrong..Shell Canada had 40 year export permit, an environmental certificate and First Nation did AltaGas, ..and so does Woodfibre...

Shell deferred, Altagas bailed and Woodfibre has no buyers...Chevron in Kitimat, they too would have gotten all the permits...Chevron bailed early...

Petronas is not the first approved..the 4th to be approved..

Lastly...Petronas won't go forward unless one of two things happen...#1-They find Asian buyers willing to lock in for LNg buys for decades at a price of $14 and up...

#2- British Columbia slashes its cut to nothing in a new PDA...

on the last point...Coleman may well do it...and if LNG price does zoom back up in the future..

British Columbia would be locked into a share of nothing, a percentage of zippo..


RossK said...


I saw some statement on Twitter with the denial on Twitter...Will try and find it again.

Also found it interesting that MMcMahon of WX was reporting that the BCL gov't was reporting that they had been told by Petronas that they had no plans to sell.

There is sure some KloutKlubbish-type deflector spinning going down.


RossK said...


Here's a link to the Tweet mentioned above.

I've asked the author for a link (the fact that it didn't have one is why I didn't include it in my post in the first place).


Grant G said...

Mr. K....The author of the tweet has not provided a link..

That tweet(er) you linked to is...

Spencer Sproule...Who is Spencer Sproule?

Are you ready?

From Vaughn Palmer(December 4th/2014)..See if you can spot the cryptic clue

"Petronas and its partners in the Pacific Northwest LNG project continue to review the economic viability of the project which, in time of declining oil prices, presents challenges," said the release issued over the name of Spencer Sproule, the former B.C. Liberal staffer now employed as senior adviser for corporate affairs on the project.


Hmm..another press release issued over the name of Spencer Sproule, the former B.C. Liberal staffer...

If I was betting man Ross...I'd say that Vaughn Palmer went in search of an official press release confirming something that the BC Government said of Petronas was true....

And all he could find was some words over Spencer Sproule's name, the former BC Liberal staffer..

By the way..Spencer is still a BC Liberal staffer.


RossK said...

Something circular going down?

(still no response from the good Mr. Sproule)


Grant G said...


They have nothing either..real thin..they have this in that linked article.

"categorically denied"

no link, no name,...

Bigtime story making going on

Don F. said...

We are all doing what they expect, being distracted from the real issues ! What does it matter what Petronas said or didn't say???
The issue is that this is ass backwards. There is a natural flow to this that is being ignored big time.
There was two ways for this to play out neither requiring more time as though time was of the essence as we were led to believe.
a] the government could have presented Petronas with the conditions and stated they would approve project IF petronas met all conditions. This would have left the power in the hands of our government where it should be!
b] The government, as it did, conditionally giving approval if Petronas met conditions afterwards. This giving the power to Petronas where now we are being held hostage to these silly games.

All this aside from the fact they are all playing with traditional native lands that by supreme ruling requires consent.

RossK said...


I agree with the power shift driven by the 'approval'.

Of course the Clarklandian wizardry wanted to use it purely to bamboozle the local rubes, but the bigger story is that it put Petronas in the driver's seat in more ways than one.


What Grant and I really wondering is the following:

Is this 'categorical denial' stuff purely the invention of the local wizards that has been designed to protect their rube bamboozlement play?


Grant G said...

I hear what you are saying Don F...

However, confriming sources is now needed in British Columbia..

Let me jog your memory..The ongoing health researcher firing...

The BC Liberals for over a year, maybe two...BC Liberals said there was an RCMP investigation...The media ran with it..

BC Liberals were allowed to stay quiet because there was an investigation going on..

But..there was no investigation...BC Liberals played the people, played the RCMP and played the media..

Lew said...

Malaysian newspaper today quotes categorical denial of sale decision, but no link to actual Petronas doc.$27-bln-canada-lng-project/

Guess Petronas PR team doesn't work the weekends...

RossK said...

Thanks Lew--

Still haven't heard from the author of the 'in case you missed it' press release tweet which has garnered a most interesting group of re-tweeters.


Anonymous said...


fyi When searching for a take from non-English news source, I type keys words into Google translate.

A search in Malay, brings 'different' results than a search in English…interesting that…

Anonymous said...


CBC: "...Earlier, Reuters issued a report, citing three unnamed sources, that Petroliam Nasional, or Petronas, was weighing options for the project as its finances have been squeezed after crude oil prices have collapsed by more than 50 per cent since mid-2014. LNG prices for delivery into the main markets in northeast Asia have slumped more than 70 per cent over nearly the same time period."

RossK said...

Thanks SH--

Ya, we discussed the Reueters' piece yesterday.

Clearly that piece is the one that has generated all the pushback.


Anonymous said...


I bet I read that yesterday…starting to forget what I remember…

This is what the Game Players are counting on. And. I'm trying to keep up!

RossK said...


Ya, it is, indeed what they're counting on.

Still no word from the fine BCL Party- and PNWLNG-affliated fellow who authored the 'in case you missed it' press release tweet.

Interestingly, that tweet has been retweeted by Stephanie Cadieux and Michele Cadario.


Lew said...

Sproule tried same message on Twitter to David Schreck. I asked whether he had anything on Petronas letterhead and what source he’d copied message from.
David Schreck asked him, “Didn't see source on what you Tweeted. How high up the chain of command at Petronas & why not on their site!”

He didn’t respond to me, but to Schreck he said, “- statement sent to any media that requested it. Issued by PETRONAS Media Relations.”

So rather than simply put a press release on their site, Petronas is responding individually to media outlets. Really??

RossK said...

Thanks for that Lew.

Wonder if there is a local division of 'Petronas Media Relations'?

I'm going to ask Martin MacMahon who sent him the press release, assuming he got one.


Don F. said...

There was a Chinese petroleum analyst/adviser based in Calgary speaking with terry Mewleski yesterday on Power and Politics CBC. What he said I found rather interesting as did Mr.Mewlwski.
Basically the message was that there is no chance for Petronas to sell given the world price on natural gas now or in the foreseeable future. So even if they wished to sell it would be virtually impossible.
The situation is that they only have the option to put the project on ice or look for another way to proceed not based on the world price. This is where the conversation got interesting!!
His opinion is that China, who already has shares in the project. would buy Petronas interests but only for a different business model wherein they control the extraction, the pipeline, the processing and the transport of the product so they would not be tied to world price. This he said may be Canada's only option for moving forward on LNG in the given environment that exists. This would of course require a total renegotiation not subject to the conditions set out.
Given this Petronas could make the statement we are now consumed with. It really wouldn't matter in that situation.
At any rate in their eagerness it appears our Government has been placed in the precarious situation by people much smarter than themselves. I myself am not surprised.
I only pass along what was said so now the waiting game begins where again time is on THEIR side.

Grant G said...

Let me repeat what I posted in the above comments...


Northwest LNG project continue to review the economic viability of the project which, in time of declining oil prices, presents challenges," said the release issued over the name of Spencer Sproule, the former B.C. Liberal staffer now employed as senior adviser for corporate affairs on the project.


Don't you see...Spencer Sproule..BC Liberals gave Petronas Spencer Sproule as a go-between ..a go-between the BC Government and Petronas..

Spencer Sproule's job title is..senior adviser for corporate affairs on the PNW LNG project.

That's it...Spencer Sproule no doubt has the authority to use a Petronas letterhead to make his own statements..

Let me be clear....the so-call "categorically denied" phrase going's alone, not part of a larger/longer statement, and then readers are referred back to the September 28th press release about reviewing the project..

By the way...Spencer K Sproule just blocked me on Twitter..


RossK said...

Very interesting news Lew, especially given that Mr. Coleman essentially said he is ready to re-open the agreement that Ms. Clark said is 'dusted and done'.



I've heard from Martin MacMahon of CKWX. He says that his colleague there Renee Bernard saw the release from Petronas and used as the basis to update his original story late last night (i.e. Friday).

I've asked Ms. Bernard if what she saw is the one that Mr. Sproule (who I have still not heard from) posted on the Twittmachine.


Alison said...

My guess what happened here...

After news of PNWLNG federal approval broke, reporters immediately went online and discovered that Petronas has been selling off bits of PNWLNG for the last three years. They called Petronas for off-the-record confirmation that yes, Petronas is always in the market, and then *broke* stories that worked out nicely in terms of headlines for them, but not so nicely in timing for the Sparkle Pony Express.

Here's one of those industry reports from 2013:

What does Petronas’ sale of its Canadian LNG assets mean for exports?

Nine months after purchasing Progress Energy, Petronas is shopping stakes in its Canadian LNG business to buyers in India, Japan and beyond
August 27, 2013

Less than a year after the Canadian federal government re-wrote the rules for foreign investment in Canada, one of the companies whose acquisition was approved with the introduction of the new rules is selling a stake in its Canadian LNG assets.

Reports out of South Asia yesterday indicated Malaysia’s state oil company Petroliam Nasional Bhd., or Petronas, was shopping a large stake (rumored to be 10 per cent) of its Canadian LNG business. That business is comprised of Progress Energy Canada Ltd., which Petronas acquired last year, a proposed export-focused liquefaction facility, pipeline and terminal through Pacific Northwest LNG and other upstream natural gas assets.

It is unclear whether Petronas intended to sell stakes in this LNG business to just one buyer, as it did in March when the company sold a 10 per cent stake in its planned $11 billion liquefied natural gas project on B.C.’s North Coast to Japan Petroleum Exploration. Rumors are that Petronas is in discussions with New Delhi-based Indian Oil Corp. for a stake in the Canadian shale and LNG export terminal.


While it seems odd that Petronas would be willing sell large stakes in the Canadian LNG business so soon after its long pursuit of Progress Energy, the news might actually be in Canada’s best interests.

Petronas’ chief executive Shamsul Azhar Abbas told Bloomberg reporters in Kuala Lumpur last November that “We’re basically helping [Canada] to find an alternative outlet. They are counting on one market, which is the U.S.”

If the planned $11-billion LNG export terminal was partly owned by companies based Malaysia, India and Japan, that could mean three natural export markets for Canadian LNG, allowing Canadian producers to find as many as three alternative outlets. By committing to purchase stakes in the LNG export facility, investors in Japan (and possibly India) would effectively be committing to market a share of the product."

End of report.

I think this report was before they sold off a bit to Brunei but I could be wrong.

RossK said...

Aaaaaahhhhh, past history illuminates again.

Thanks Alison--


Is what we saw from the good Mr. Sproule some sort of bizarre non-denial denial that they have plans to 'sell' the (not stated) 'entire' factory?

In which case, I suppose it would be more of a limited hangout.


RossK said...

Sunday morning Twitmachine correspondence update...

After Mr. MacMahon of CKWX was good enough to respond to my query last night I followed up by asking him if he had actually asked Petronas to comment on what the prov gov't NatGas ministry told him that they were denying intentions to sell. Mr. MacMahon has yet to get back to me about that.

Given that Mr. MacMahon told me that his colleague Renee Bernard had written a follow-up story addressing Petronas' statement, I asked Ms. Bernard if she had actually seen the statement and if it was the same one that had been tweeted by the good Mr. Sproule. Ms. Bernard has yet to get back to me about that.

I'm off to the river with the Whackadoodle for our Sunday morning walk/beach guitar strum/stick throw fest...I'll follow up with a 'what we know now' post later.


Anonymous said...

BC media- informing the public or shaping public opinion.?And to whose benefit>?

Don F. said...

Even if it is found that Christy Clark or Rich Coleman penned this release in their own hand… what has been accomplished?
We all know they are more than capable of doing so and probably did. Meanwhile countless hours are spent and they have accomplished their diversion.
The Federal government walks away without being questioned about their willful blindness or total incompetence to understand the issue which is that we as British Columbians are being sold down the river. Norm Farrell's latest article provides great insight.

RossK said...


If the project remains 'viable' in Petronas' hands that helps legitimize Mr. Coleman's further negotiations to 'get to that number' he knows about which could very well mean that even more of our assets and regulatory leverage will be given away to the current 'owner' of the project.

However, if the citizenry were to get uppity because they come to view that the project is not viable, well....It would seem to me that the give away (either to the current owner or a future owner) would become, in my opinion very difficult.

And that is why, if there was a diversion, it is important to expose it for what it is.

Both for now and future diversionary attempts.

(and besides, we are amateurs....thus, our hours are free)


Grant G said...

The health researchers firing scandal..

BC Liberals faked out the media and public, and faked out the affected research workers with a claim there was an ongoing RCMP investigation...

There was no RCMP investigation...That fake claim by the BC Liberals also allowed them to remain silent and refuse to answer questions as there was..

an ongoing RCMP investigation..

I read Farrell's column Don F...

I don't understand you and Norm's critique of Ross K's post and subsequent comment thread..

It does matter..if it proven that Petronas is considering selling their stake in the project...That means Petronas believes the project is uneconomical..

Thus...It would make it politically unpalatable to BC's public to give away the remaining crumbs in a new rammed through the BC Legislature by the BC Liberals PDA..


Don F. said...

My apologies Ross.
I have learned to trust your judgement on things, it is only because of the magnitude of the rip off and all involved that I questioned.

RossK said...

Please, please don't apologize Don. I welcome your comments.

The discussion and back and forth in response is really valuable because it makes you think hard about your arguments and expositions.

In fact, I would argue that such honest discussion is what is valuable on an amateur blog and what is missing from the comments on (no fewer and fewer) proMedia sites. The Tyee seems to sit somewhere in the middle.

Of course, it is entirely possible that there is nothing at all to the specific matter at hand. However, unless I've missed something, I, personally have not seen hard evidence to put it to bed yet.


Don F. said...

I agree with your analogy that by exposing the source of the release people in B.C. will see this for what it obviously is.
I remember the health Care firings well and the lies told by our government but ask what became of that?
My opinion is that because of the federal government total lack of competence, or willingness to overlook the obvious, that they are involved in this up to their necks and this opens the door for ALL canadians to see and not have it confined to our province.
Perhaps I am wrong!
My comments on Mr. Farrell's site were not to diminish anyone's concerns, it is obvious there are so many dimensions to this that we are seeing it perhaps from different angles.

RossK said...


It's a good, big picture-focussed, discussion going on over at Norm's place too...



Anonymous said...

A 'hats off' to anything but amateur Ross, Grant, Norm, Don, Lew, it is you who are the authentic investigative pros in this province. Much intrigue the past few days especially 24 hours. My naive wonderment—which is less painful for Min Coleman et al. —back to fall lege for Petronas give-away or snap election now. Just wondering.

Grant G said...

What I want to know is...

Did former BC Liberal political staffer Spencer Sproule, who now serves as a go-between the province and Petronas..

Did Spencer Sproule himself produce the 2 words in question.."Categorically denied"

all the media who carried the story...not one has those two words as part of a larger statement..


I've talked to Horgan in the past, we specifically discussed Spencer Sproule...

as in Spencer Sproule is a political animal/ the same vane as B Zubyk. would think that Petronas' Bossman/CEO Wan Zulkiflee Wan Ariffin would be the one to issue a statement, put his name behind it..

A little more...We know something else...Friday past, Rich Coleman said on CKNW radio..Coleman said he called Petronas and got an assurance that the rumors were false..

Petronas has 10,000 thousands of employees, they are a huge company, when Reuters and others reported that according to Petronas insiders, Petronas was shopping their stake in PNW LNG...

Why didn't Petronas on their own make a public statement denying the rumour..

What, it took a phone call from Rich Coleman to Petronas to wake them up?

It doesn't ring true..

BC Liberals are merely running/playing the clock game..trying to keep the fantasy alive until at least May 2017

RossK said...


Interesting question.

Here's another that I'm pretty sure the wizardy concerned is probably asking itself...If, as Sam Cooper of The Province is suggesting, the RE Bubble has popped, what might the resulting economic number shift look like come spring?


RossK said...


Given that I don't listen regularly during the day...

When did Mr. Coleman make this statement on NW...Was it Friday Sept 30th (i.e. after the Fed approval and the Reuters 'sources say' piece) or the previous Friday, Sept 23rd?

Grant G said...

Friday ..2 days ago...I'll check the audio vault

Tom Kirkman said...

Correct, Petronas PR team does *not* work on weekends.

Grant G said...

OK Ross K.....I just finished browsing cknw's audio vault..

Friday, the noon news..12:00pm..CKNW reported the Reuters' story...further into the noon news Robert Levy comes on to talk the markets(he's a regular market reporter..

Levy talked about the Petronas story, the selling, and how difficult it would be in this market to sell their share... 12:15 PM Friday the Petronas selling their stake story was alive... I went to the 1:pm newscast on cknw..

And there it was...CKNW reported the story again..only then..

only then did cknw's radio voice say...

paraphrasing here..

"but the province disagrees, according to natural gas minister Rich Coleman...he called Petronas and was reassured the rumours weren't true...." snip

So..12:00 pm major news the story was alive and trending..including Robert Levy weighing in

Rich Coleman and the Clarkettes must have been fuming..

by 1:00 pm Friday...Rich Coleman claimed he had made a call to Petronas and was reassured the rumours were false..

Cue Spencer Sproule..

anywho..Still waiting for an official response from someone further up the Petronas food chain..

Grant G said...

Vanishing comments or what...I swear there was another long comment here a few minutes ago..

RossK said...

Thanks for that Tom K--


Got it Grant.

That squares with what CKWX' Martin MacMahon told me...That he got his denial from the prov gov's NatGas Ministry BEFORE there was any 'official' denial from Petronas.

By the way...still nothing on the Petronas website...Is it Monday morning in Malaysia yet?...

Hang on, let me check...

Why, yes, I believe it is:

7:32 AM Monday, October 3, 2016 (GMT+8)Time in Malaysia

So, I guess we can expect that release to be up on their website any minute now...


Tom Kirkman said...

Yes, it's Monday morning here in Malaysia. Expect a minimum of 5 working days for Petronas to issue a press release on any current topic. No, I'm not kidding.

Grant G said...

Exiting proposed westcoast LNG projects..

Seems like a growing trend..Alaska's proposed LNG project..$50 billion, big gas, big volume..

Exxon..BC..and the rest of the consortium have bailed...Exxon mobile wants to sell their stake in the project..

This is literally breaking news...Alaska Guvnor and the state are/have taken over the project...

Guvnor Walker has gone on many recent Asian LNG selling trade missions..

Guvnor Walker is obsessed, like a gold bug, only in his case, an LNG bug..

For those who have followed this Alaska LNG story are aware of...

Walker is acting and sounding desperate, big energy and big energy buyers can see it..

Here is a little more LNG sauce for those golden prosperity geese

Pakistan just signed a 20 year LNG supply deal with Qatar..

Price is rumoured to be $5.50 per MMBTUs

Tom Kirkman said...

You're welcome Ross K.

By the way, today (Monday) is a holiday in Malaysia, so no press release from Petronas until at least Tuesday.

A couple relevant comments here:

Note this from Fitch:

"We expect Petronas to go *free-cash-flow negative* this financial year and next after meeting their capex and dividend requirements," said Fitch senior director Sajal Kishore.

RossK said...

Thanks Tom K re: Holiday today.

Regarding the piece by Charlie Smith in the GStraight, I know it well.


Based on their cash flow situation, what do you think it would take for Petronas to sell off a significant chunk of PNWLNG?


Tom Kirkman said...

(Part 2)

Some background info... Petronas was unable to get a loan for USD $7 billion for the Pengerang project in its own back yard in Johor, Malaysia. Petronas. So a nonth or so ago, Petronas riped in financial assistance from Saudi Aramco.

Bear in mind, this Pengerang project was originally supposed to be financed by Petronas cash, and *not* by Petronas taking a loan.

So... If Petronas is currently unable to secure a USD $7 billion lian by itself for an O&G project in its own country, can someone please explain how Petronas expects to secure more than double that anount of loans for a project in Canada?

Tom Kirkman said...

(Part 3)

So, Petronas is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They have already unvested heavily in acquiring O&G assets in Canada for this project.

But they are having a cash crunch. I've been commented for around a year that I don't see oil prices recovering until around 2019, and LNG prices recovering until around 2022. Both due to overproduction.

Petronas can't realistically sell its LNG assets in Canada. Depressed market for the forseeable future. Petronas *definitely* will insist on "saving face" as well.

The only realistic outcome I can see right now is for Petronas to defer this B.C. LNG project for a few years, while it "studies" the 190 conditions attached to the Canadian aporoval.

(Please excuse any typos, I'm just writing this on the fly on my smartphone, and don't know how to edit comments on this forum.)

Tom Kirkman said...

(Part 4)

Since Part 1 of my comment is gone, here is a recap of my thumbnail of Petronas cash reserves:

Aug 2015 : RM 126 billion

Jan 2016 : RM 88 billion

Mar 2016 : RM 62 billion

Here it is again, in rough USD conversion

Aug 2015 : USD 31 billion

Jan 2016 : USD 22 billion

Mar 2016 : USD 15 billion

Also note that Petronas and Saudi Aramco are currently in the process of obtaining a USD 7 billion loan for the Pengerang project in Malaysia.

Tom Kirkman said...

Oh, and I see Grant G of *The Straight Goods* comments here. I've used his site before to track down dox.

As I mentioned earlier, I'm impressed with the fact checking by commenters in this thread. Reminds me of the old Usenet days, and the (sadly retired credo) by Anons of "Dox or GTFO".

RossK said...

Thanks very much Tom--

Lots to consider there.

The thing that many of us are most focussed on here is the short term situation given that we have a provincial election coming up in 2017.

Thus, we believe that was the motivation for the rapid response from prov gov't to the Reuters story.

(and I agree with you about this particular thread)

As for me, I have to shut down for a bit now...Day job work week prep calls...


Tom Kirkman said...

Ross K, the 190 conditions added to the "approval" gives the perfect face-saving opportunity to Petronas, to delay the project. While Canadians may be stuck with the political shenanigans and soap boxing due to your upcoming 2017 elections, Petronas can easily wait this out, as Canadian politicians dither.

I've been saying for about a year, that I don't see global LNG prices recovering until around 2022. Ongoing global overproduction, and new LNG projects still due to finally come on line by 2020.

Simple economics. Global LNG production is increasing roughly 40% in a 3 year time span. I don't see global LNG demand catching up to global LNG supply until after 2020, and a rough equalization of supply and demand around 2022.

After being forced to wait 3 years for Canadian "approval" (with 190 conditions) Petronas should be in no rush to move ahead right now.

Kim said...

Does anyone else see this whole project as shuffling paper? Like a Futures Market scam? Is it a backdoor to a China FTA? China buys the project and then changes the whole thing to get their "tidewater"?

Tom Kirkman said...

Nope. Petronas has already invested billions of dollars into this, acquiring Canadian O&G assets. This B.C. LNG project has been a high priority by Petronas for a few years.

A year or so ago, Malaysia was the world's third largest exporter of LNG. This B.C. project was meant to cement Petronas' global status. Shortly, Malaysia will be bumped down to the world's *fifth* largest exporter of LNG.

A few years ago, when LNG prices were skyrocketing, Petronas saw this B.C. project as a long term goose that lays golden eggs.

Now, with LNG prices depressed for the next half decade or so, and with Malaysian government and Petronas cash crunch, the game plan will most likely get delayed.

Willy said...

It's really simple - JOB CREATION!

Grant G said...

It appears Petronas can make statements...

Grant G said...

Petronas ..their Bintulu LNG terminal, train 9 up n running.

30 million tons per annum will now come from Bintulu LNG.

Petronas seems rather chatty today...

Nothing, no statement on PNW LNG

Don F. said...

May be of some interest……

Tom Kirkman said...

Grant G and Ross K, you might be interested in this blog posting:

The "Oilman" article was mine, and picked up by others.

Tom Kirkman said...

Grant G, don't hold your breath waiting for a press release from Petronas about a decision regarding PNW LNG.

Bear in mind while Canada has elections in 2017, Malaysia may call for early elections around Q2 2017. Expect soapboxing by politicians in Malaysia as well, as Petronas is a key economic driver in Malaysia.

RossK said...

Thanks for the updates everyone!