Approach CGD Bidding with a Portfolio Players' Mindset Rather than an Overcommitted Aggressive Winner - Unfolding the (Cards) Hands Played By CGD Portfolio Winners

From those on the fence to the ones who have been there, done that would most likely agree to disagree about the merit of the PNGRB bidding mechanism or the veracity of the winning bids. Experts may continue to question PNGRB’s continued attempts on fool proofing the bidding criteria itself rather than doing further more to facilitate the development of an integrated natural gas sector across viable and not-so-viable jurisdictions alike. The reality of the situation is that any entity aspiring to become a future CGD player or having a mandate to grow its existing CGD consumer base has to put forward a winning bid – Quote the lowest, if a lowness is desired and the highest, if a highness is desired.

In a scenario, where putting a winning bid is synonymous with an overcommitted aggressive bid, an informed and self-aware CGD bidder will put together a strategic goal that goes beyond a given PNGRB bidding round or lapping the most lucrative geographical area in that bidding round. With more than a decade of witnessing CGD bidding rounds, seasoned and fresh bidders can investigate:

• Whether bidders must only focus on GAs that presumably offer a promising gas demand

potential?

• Whether fierce bidding for a presumably prospective GA is better than realistic bidding for an

average GA?

• Why certain GAs could be won with realistic bidding whereas others were fiercely acquired?
• Who were these winners and most importantly what was their outlook towards CGD industry?

The report, ‘CGD bidders’ guide to a goal based PNGRB CGD bidding - Unfolding the cards played by winners with a Game Plan’ offers fact-based insights and strategic blueprint to put together a winning business case and not simply a winning bid.