Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
    That's actually more a response to yesterday's Gazprom/Shell post, but still. Compare the two passages from FT article referred yesterday by Jerome:

The price paid by Gazprom for its control - 50 per cent plus one share - was much higher than many analysts expected. "It is a fair price and it should reduce the shouting about expropriation [of assets]," said Al Breach, chief strategist at UBS Russia.
    In return for gaining control in Sakhalin, Russia approved an increased budget for the project and effectively dropped a series of environmental complaints against it, suggesting these had been little more than an negotiating tactic.

and IHT:

The price Gazprom paid was "below market rate," Alex Kormshchikov, an oil and gas industry analyst at UralSib, said by telephone Thursday.

Analysts said the price valued Sakhalin 2 reserves at less than $4 a barrel of oil equivalent, a benchmark in valuing oil and gas deals, compared to an average of $4.90 a barrel at large Russian oil companies like Lukoil or Rosneft.

Still, Shell's chief executive, Jeroen van der Veer, said he welcomed the stability that an agreement implied, after a turbulent few months when a Russian regulator threatened to halt work on the pipeline, claiming illegal logging and damage to salmon streams.

So, FT emphasizes risk reduction, while IHT found an analyst looking at price only. Tell me more about selectivity in reporting!

by Sargon on Sat Dec 23rd, 2006 at 09:32:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:


Top Diaries

Winning Diplomacy

by Frank Schnittger - Jul 10

Epilogue Chris Steele

by Oui - Jul 12
1 comment

Brexiteers and Buccaneers

by Oui - Jul 7

Municipal elections in France

by eurogreen - Jun 28

Occasional Series