RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:No mention of migrations You were correct ferret_ca. It does mention migration near the beginning and also at the end when the lawyer who responded to the president of the commission who asked what is the legal standing of the commission in regards to the cancellation of the auction mentioned the same idea that by not holding the auction the companies would not have the rights to partner with Pemex and not be able to eventually migrate to an independent ownership of the properties.
The first use of the word by the Director of Auctions Ernastina Hernandez was more complex. She said that Pemex had given up the right to migration thereby clearing the way for the commission to terminate the auction for these seven properties.
I believe that misunderstanding this statement has led to the confusion we have all felt for the last few days and perhaps led some to make money losing decisions.
The most important thing we must be clear on is that all this discussion is in regard to seven areas that were going to be auctioned off but the auction was postponed and now cancelled so no companies were affected. The areas were mentioned by name and it was stated that Pemex has the resources to develop these properties.
The commissioner who spoke against the cancellation but then voted for it expressed “ How are going to encourage investment in our oil industry if we change the rules half way through the game.” (loose paraphrase)
Well this will be my last comment on this subject. Make your own decisions.
And good luck to everybody.
will