PTT board chairman Dr Parnpri Phahitthanukorn resigns

[Soutpeel]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Maybe you need to tell Total, and believe British gas this then

At one time not so long ago they both held quite significant interests in both PTT and PTTEP and think they still do

[Trembly]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Maybe you need to tell Total, and believe British gas this then

At one time not so long ago they both held quite significant interests in both PTT and PTTEP and think they still do

And they shouldn't. The Thai politicians who crowbarred the laws to allow this should be in jail.

[Soutpeel]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Maybe you need to tell Total, and believe British gas this then

At one time not so long ago they both held quite significant interests in both PTT and PTTEP and think they still do

And they shouldn't. The Thai politicians who crowbarred the laws to allow this should be in jail.

Well if I understand the minerals act correct, the person who shall remain nameless on TV signed off on that one.

[Thai at Heart]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Of course they do. I am not sure what percent is held by foreigners but I presume it can go up to 49%

[Trembly]

Maybe you need to tell Total, and believe British gas this then

At one time not so long ago they both held quite significant interests in both PTT and PTTEP and think they still do

And they shouldn't. The Thai politicians who crowbarred the laws to allow this should be in jail.

Well if I understand the minerals act correct, the person who shall remain nameless on TV signed off on that one.

That was 47 years ago when things were very different. That person has also signed off every act since. He more or less has to most of the time... it's part of 'the arrangement' (C.... M....)

Better to look to the people who draft things for him to sign :

http://www.globalresearch.ca/thailand-protesters-want-oil-back-for-thai-people/5359814

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/23/business/international-business-thai-oil-stock-offering-is-much-in-demand.html

Edited June 18, 2014 by Trembly

[Trembly]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Of course they do. I am not sure what percent is held by foreigners but I presume it can go up to 49%

Wrong. Try again Heart.

[samran]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

I've got no problem with foreign ownership of PTT. I think the whole thing should be sold off.

Governments should build schools roads, provide medical care and help the poor. Not be major shareholders in oil firms.

Add to that the disposition of every Thai government to use SOE's as play things and rewards, even less reason for a government to own PTT.

A more efficiently run PTT would pay more into government coffers.

If the government is concerned about negative impacts - it has a regulator who should be beefed up to protect national interests. In my opinion, it is a more effective way of protecting national interests than holding shares.

[Trembly]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

I've got no problem with foreign ownership of PTT. I think the whole thing should be sold off.

Governments should build schools roads, provide medical care and help the poor. Not be major shareholders in oil firms.

Add to that the disposition of every Thai government to use SOE's as play things and rewards, even less reason for a government to own PTT.

A more efficiently run PTT would pay more into government coffers.

If the government is concerned about negative impacts - it has a regulator who should be beefed up to protect national interests. In my opinion, it is a more effective way of protecting national interests than holding shares.

Oil and gas is a matter of national security. Thailand has nothing of Russia's strength, they're playing with fire if they think that letting the likes of Chevron (hello Bildeberg, CFR et al) in is going to ultimately serve national interest like Russia did when they allowed BP in for a while.

In the future . . . maybe, hypothetically yes. Anything can happen I suppose... But now? No way.

Other videos of John Perkins on YouTube : Confessions of an Economic Hitman

For those who don't already know, CFR stands for . . .

Edited June 18, 2014 by Trembly

[samran]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

I've got no problem with foreign ownership of PTT. I think the whole thing should be sold off.

Governments should build schools roads, provide medical care and help the poor. Not be major shareholders in oil firms.

Add to that the disposition of every Thai government to use SOE's as play things and rewards, even less reason for a government to own PTT.

A more efficiently run PTT would pay more into government coffers.

If the government is concerned about negative impacts - it has a regulator who should be beefed up to protect national interests. In my opinion, it is a more effective way of protecting national interests than holding shares.

Oil and gas is a matter of national security. Thailand has nothing of Russia's strength, they're playing with fire if they think that letting the likes of Chevron (hello Bildeberg, CFR et al) in is going to ultimately serve national interest like Russia did when they allowed BP in for a while.

In the future . . . maybe, hypothetically yes. Anything can happen I suppose... But now? No way.

I take your point but Thailand is already at the mercy of global pricing and this will only increase with increased relaiance on imported LNG.

It has little choice not to, and neither does PTT, otherwise you end up with a moribund industry like in Venuzela or even with the Indoneisa oil and gas industry struggling under state control and massive subsidies.

[Thai at Heart]

Not good for Thailand's biggest public company to apparently so vulnerable to politics.

This is a big deal for foreign investors.

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

Of course they do. I am not sure what percent is held by foreigners but I presume it can go up to 49%

Wrong. Try again Heart.

Have you ever actually looked at the shareholder listing for PTT?

You think it is 100% Thai owned? If so, you are sadly deluded.

http://ptt.listedcompany.com/shareholdings.html

[Trembly]

Double post.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Trembly

[Trembly]

Have you ever actually looked at the shareholder listing for PTT?

You think it is 100% Thai owned? If so, you are sadly deluded.

http://ptt.listedcompany.com/shareholdings.html

No, silly boy. read my last few posts. If you have done your homework you would know that the 49% rule doesn't apply to PTT.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Trembly

[Trembly]

Double post.

[Thai at Heart]

Have you ever actually looked at the shareholder listing for PTT?

You think it is 100% Thai owned? If so, you are sadly deluded.

http://ptt.listedcompany.com/shareholdings.html

No, silly boy. read my last few posts. If you have done your homework you would know that the 49% rule doesn't apply to PTT.

51% of it belongs to the finance ministry anyway. I stated ppresumably only 49%.

Why would PTT be exempt from that rule? Are foreign entities allowed to own 100% of an oil business in thailand? Not sure about that one, but for example Dow has a partnership with scg, and shell has a partnership with various Thai investors.

[Trembly]

http://ptt.listedcompany.com/shareholdings.html

You think it is 100% Thai owned? If so, you are sadly deluded.

No, silly boy. read my last few posts. If you have done your homework you would know that the 49% rule doesn't apply to PTT.

51% of it belongs to the finance ministry anyway. I stated ppresumably only 49%.

Why would PTT be exempt from that rule? Are foreign entities allowed to own 100% of an oil business in thailand? Not sure about that one, but for example Dow has a partnership with scg, and shell has a partnership with various Thai investors.

You are assuming that the exemption should be in favour of the foreign investor. The sale of shares in PTT, even after privatisation, is subject to all kinds of scrutiny and executive / government vetos that are not normally found in a common or garden listed company.

The ghost of 2006 is coming back to haunt them in the appeals court now.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Trembly

[Thai at Heart]

http://ptt.listedcompany.com/shareholdings.html

You think it is 100% Thai owned? If so, you are sadly deluded.

No, silly boy. read my last few posts. If you have done your homework you would know that the 49% rule doesn't apply to PTT.

51% of it belongs to the finance ministry anyway. I stated ppresumably only 49%.

Why would PTT be exempt from that rule? Are foreign entities allowed to own 100% of an oil business in thailand? Not sure about that one, but for example Dow has a partnership with scg, and shell has a partnership with various Thai investors.

You are assuming that the exemption should be in favour of the foreign investor. The sale of shares in PTT, even after privatisation, is subject to all kinds of scrutiny and executive / government vetos that are not normally found in a common or garden listed company.

The ghost of 2006 is coming back to haunt them in the appeals court now.

So u beleive to foreigners aren't allowed to own these shares at all?

Not sure where you get that from. The govt still owns 51% of it anyway.

[Trembly]

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

I've got no problem with foreign ownership of PTT. I think the whole thing should be sold off.

Governments should build schools roads, provide medical care and help the poor. Not be major shareholders in oil firms.

Add to that the disposition of every Thai government to use SOE's as play things and rewards, even less reason for a government to own PTT.

A more efficiently run PTT would pay more into government coffers.

If the government is concerned about negative impacts - it has a regulator who should be beefed up to protect national interests. In my opinion, it is a more effective way of protecting national interests than holding shares.

Oil and gas is a matter of national security. Thailand has nothing of Russia's strength, they're playing with fire if they think that letting the likes of Chevron (hello Bildeberg, CFR et al) in is going to ultimately serve national interest like Russia did when they allowed BP in for a while.

In the future . . . maybe, hypothetically yes. Anything can happen I suppose... But now? No way.

I take your point but Thailand is already at the mercy of global pricing and this will only increase with increased relaiance on imported LNG.

It has little choice not to, and neither does PTT, otherwise you end up with a moribund industry like in Venuzela or even with the Indoneisa oil and gas industry struggling under state control and massive subsidies.

Indeed, but foreign ownership is not a panacea.

I have no personal experience with O&G but from what I can see, the management of PTT is as 'Thai' as ever despite the involvement of Chevron, Hess and the foreign banks . . . foreign banks? . . . If the rationale is investment of human capital, know-how and hard cash then the oil companies have that in spades. Why bring in the banks? Maybe it's because these are doing such a fine job holding shares in Intouch Plc for Thaksin.

Anyway, back to PTT. Why couldn't they follow the model of the airlines such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Qatar instead? Or instead of selling shares of a national oil company off to foreign investors and hoping for the best they might be better off learning from Norway's Statoil.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Trembly

[Trembly]

No, silly boy. read my last few posts. If you have done your homework you would know that the 49% rule doesn't apply to PTT.

51% of it belongs to the finance ministry anyway. I stated ppresumably only 49%.

Why would PTT be exempt from that rule? Are foreign entities allowed to own 100% of an oil business in thailand? Not sure about that one, but for example Dow has a partnership with scg, and shell has a partnership with various Thai investors.

You are assuming that the exemption should be in favour of the foreign investor. The sale of shares in PTT, even after privatisation, is subject to all kinds of scrutiny and executive / government vetos that are not normally found in a common or garden listed company.

The ghost of 2006 is coming back to haunt them in the appeals court now.

So u beleive to foreigners aren't allowed to own these shares at all?

Not sure where you get that from. The govt still owns 51% of it anyway.

You are having a major failure in English comprehension.

That foreigners own shares is QED.

[Thai at Heart]

The foreign investors have no business holding shares in Thailand's national oil company.

I've got no problem with foreign ownership of PTT. I think the whole thing should be sold off.

Governments should build schools roads, provide medical care and help the poor. Not be major shareholders in oil firms.

Add to that the disposition of every Thai government to use SOE's as play things and rewards, even less reason for a government to own PTT.

A more efficiently run PTT would pay more into government coffers.

If the government is concerned about negative impacts - it has a regulator who should be beefed up to protect national interests. In my opinion, it is a more effective way of protecting national interests than holding shares.

Oil and gas is a matter of national security. Thailand has nothing of Russia's strength, they're playing with fire if they think that letting the likes of Chevron (hello Bildeberg, CFR et al) in is going to ultimately serve national interest like Russia did when they allowed BP in for a while.

In the future . . . maybe, hypothetically yes. Anything can happen I suppose... But now? No way.

I take your point but Thailand is already at the mercy of global pricing and this will only increase with increased relaiance on imported LNG.

It has little choice not to, and neither does PTT, otherwise you end up with a moribund industry like in Venuzela or even with the Indoneisa oil and gas industry struggling under state control and massive subsidies.

Indeed, but foreign ownership is not a panacea.

I have no personal experience with O&G but from what I can see, the management of PTT is as 'Thai' as ever despite the involvement of Chevron, Hess and the foreign banks . . . foreign banks? . . . If the rationale is investment of human capital, know-how and hard cash then the oil companies have that in spades. Why bring in the banks? Maybe it's because these are doing such a fine job holding shares in Intouch Plc for Thaksin.

Anyway, back to PTT. Why couldn't they follow the model of the airlines such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Qatar instead? Or instead of selling shares of a national oil company off to foreign investors and hoping for the best they might be better off learning from Norway's Statoil.

From what I can see from the share ownership, there are no oil company names in the shareholder lists. Certainly foreign ownership of PTT is not large on a percentage basis.

They do however grant exploration rights and drilling rights to foreign companies but this had little to do with PTT.

[Thai at Heart]

Indeed, but foreign ownership is not a panacea.

I have no personal experience with O&G but from what I can see, the management of PTT is as 'Thai' as ever despite the involvement of Chevron, Hess and the foreign banks . . . foreign banks? . . . If the rationale is investment of human capital, know-how and hard cash then the oil companies have that in spades. Why bring in the banks? Maybe it's because these are doing such a fine job holding shares in Intouch Plc for Thaksin.

Anyway, back to PTT. Why couldn't they follow the model of the airlines such as Singapore, Hong Kong, Qatar instead? Or instead of selling shares of a national oil company off to foreign investors and hoping for the best they might be better off learning from Norway's Statoil.

Statoil is in a completely different position, because it has its own massive oilfields. PTT is in a position of having to import in order to refine.