U.S. oil company Unocal Corp., voiced dismay on Wednesday over what he called "overreaction" from Washington by those portraying the deal as a threat to fair trade and U.S. national security.
Posted on 07/06/2005 6:44:02 PM PDT by crushelits
BEIJING, July 6 -- The chairman of CNOOC Ltd., the Chinese energy firm embroiled in a thorny campaign to purchase the
U.S. oil company Unocal Corp., voiced dismay on Wednesday over what he called "overreaction" from Washington by those portraying the deal as a threat to fair trade and U.S. national security.
In an interview with The Washington Post at CNOOC's headquarters in Beijing, Chairman Fu Chengyu said critics of his company's bid for Unocal were guilty of viewing China through an outdated lens by failing to appreciate how economic reforms have forced Chinese companies to adopt market principles and focus on profitability.
"They don't understand what has happened in China in the last 20 years," said Fu, speaking fluent if halting English. "Most of the concerns are related to politics and not the commercial side. I didn't expect that so many people would be so sensitive to this. We are following a system that was set up by Western leading companies, especially the United States. We are walking along a path that they paved, so we thought, 'This is natural.' " But Fu expressed confidence that CNOOC would eventually convince critics that its acquisition poses no menace.
"Our board has made the decision that we have to win this bid," he said.
As CNOOC continues its pursuit of Unocal, the conflict has become symbolic of the struggle by the United States to adjust to the implications of China's growing force in the global economy. Since CNOOC stunned markets last month with its unsolicited offer for Unocal, seeking to trump a lower bid from the U.S. oil giant Chevron Corp., a vocal segment of Congress has assailed the deal as a provocation in an already tense trade relationship between China and the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I don't think so. CNOOC was late into this game and that's going to cause problems for them. I predict Chevron will sweeten its offer for Unocal to move very close to the CNOOC offer early next month. This will not leave CNOOC enough time to make a decision on a counter offer and to have this counter offer fully evaluated by Unocal shareholders before they vote on Chevron's offer on August 10. Unocal shareholders will not want to wait for the lengthy regulatory review of CNOOC's offer, and a majority of them will vote to accept Chevron's offer. Patriotism and anti-communist sentiment will play a significant unspoken role in this vote. Game, set, and match to Chevron.
Institutions own about 84% of Unocal's stock, and most of those money managers want this deal to happen in 2005 so they can lock in big gains on their Unocal stock and improve their 2005 performance bonus, (although you won't hear them say that.) If CNOOC buys Unocal, the regulatory and national security review may not be completed until next year, and those money managers don't want to wait until next year to lock in their capital gains. If a CNOOC deal runs into regulatory trouble, Unocal's stock price could start slipping and sliding and none of the current owners want to see that happen.
We are surrounded - COSCO (China Ocean Shipping Co) which is partly owned by the Chinese Military has facilities - thanks to the Clintons at the time of ChinaGate - at the Port of Los Angeles, Long Beach, CA, Seattle and somewhere on the east coast!
Right on and well put. (Boy it sucks to be honest)
So make Unocal divest those mines as condition of sale.
Yeah, I think CNOOC was way too late into this game and Chevron is doing a masterful job of generating uncertainty in the minds of Unocal's shareholders about the CNOOC deal. I'd expect Chevron to increase their offer just before the 8/10 vote and that should get the majority of shares voted for their offer despite any counter-moves by CNOOC. As far as I know, it only takes a simple majority to approve the Chevron deal and that should happen on 8/10. CNOOC's offer was too late and they don't have time to clear up all the uncertainties about regulatory approval. That's the way business works in the US--you snooze, you lose.
Bingo, if necessary divestiture of mines required to clear our national security review. No big deal, and fortunately they can't put the mines on ships and take them to China during the next (let's hope not) corrupt Dem administration.
THE YELLOW MENACE WILL OVERCOME US ALL.(scroll, scroll, scroll)
... especially since the rice eaters already control the Panama Canal
The silence is deafening. The hypocrisy though, that's quite another thing ....
Isn't the Panama Canal relatively useless now because it's too small to handle large commerical ships and big Navy ships, such as aircraft carriers? If I recall correctly, our carriers can't pass through the Panama canal and neither can most large oil tankers.
If I recall correctly, we base half of our aircraft carriers on the west coast and half on the east coast and they never go through the Panama Canal because the canal is too small for ships of that size. Very larg crude carriers (VLCC's) also are based on the two coasts or the gulf coast and they can't fit through the Panama Canal either. I believe there's a study underway about building a new Panama Canal that doesn't use any locks and could handle much bigger ships. It would be an incredibly expensive project, however, and it's not going to start any time soon.
carl in alaska, you asked another Freeper what was meant by his reply about carriers.
I'm betting he was referring to China's growing navy with emphasis on destroying U.S. aircraft carriers. Here is a short excerpt from an old Bill Gertz column. Russia is fully involved helping the PLA.
"'The SS-N-22 is the most dangerous anti-ship missile in the Russian, and now the Chinese, fleet,' said Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican. 'Our Navy admittedly has scant ability to defend against this 200-kiloton nuclear-capable weapon.'
"The missile has a range of 65 miles and can deliver nuclear or conventional warheads. Chinese military writings have indicated that Beijing is working on weapons to defeat U.S. carrier battle groups." [End quote]
I'm glad to be reminded that shareholders can stop this sale. I became a news junky in 1950 with the news bulletin that South Korea had been invaded and we were at war again.
I have zero reasons to trust the Chi-coms.
Heard anything about China owning 40% of US mortgages?
That glib-talking prognosticator of earth changes was on the Art Bell Show again for the 50th time last night and he was going so fast I could only catch a few things [I should be asleep at that time but this guy was keeping me semiconscious]. He also said that either K- or Wal-Mart, I forget which, owned most of the prisoner bonds in the US. One thing I got from all that is that most of us don't have a clue what is really going on in the world as far as business is concerned, and it seems to be stranger than even most amateur conspiracists think.
Doesn't sound like a aboard interested in creating shareholder value.
Bad news for Chevron shareholders. No way Unocal is worth 18.5 billion.
That's going to change if Unocal gets nationalized by China. Do you really want a foreign government to run a great American company into the ground?
Governmnet ownership of commercial enterprises is socalism, whether it's by your own government or by someone else's.
I checked Citigroup's latest proxy statement. No investor owns more than 5%, so you can feel a little better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.