@milken,vvs; Now that you are in agreement as per @milken's statement and I quote "However, common sense disagrees with KPC's ullage allocation to Triton.", let us have a break on this. Meanwhile demand 436,400 against supply 593,500 and price down to 9.75. If I had kwacha I would buy more.

BTW, I am learning from this exchange. Thanks. In addition, I do have a non-KK Oil Marketer who answers some of my queries. Seems he prefers a TRANSPARENT entity as a middleman i.e. the space/ullage allocation by KPC should be independently verified.

The unfortunate casualty from Triton's collapse was the abandoned storage tanks they were building. It's a pity a trader/speculator like Vitol won the auction vs a Kenyan OMC consortium.

Finally, am I biased? Maybe... I own 1/40,000,000 of KPC but probably 100x that of KK.

Who is picking up KK? A couple of a million-share trades

Just been following the discussion and coupling with my little knowledge about the oil industry, I would like to (agree with @milken) and say that it would not have been logical for KPC to guarantee KK exclusive use of the facilities...simply because it is a multi-user facility (ie any oil company has a right to use the facility). The question then that remains is the validdity of the Transport and storage agreement clause purporting to give KK a right which in itself was not possible to assign. On this point the charge acgainst KPC should have failed as you can not purport to give something that from the start you cant(it was not set up to do).

There has been lots of claims about preference to some other company. The counter argument which I think is proveable is that the other company that got more ullage allocation was having industry material ie was not allocated ullage as the company for own use/sale but to hold the industry material as it waits for the industry players to pay up and take 'delivery' of their share. It is the inability of KPC to demonstrate this clearly coupled with a misguided report by one audit firm that is leading to the perpetuation of this incorrect position.

On issues of loss of financial goodwill, marketing costs etc. these are largely difficult to quantify, especially if the financials( profit, sales) are not directly attributed to the event.

To summarise, KK's case against KPC should not have stood. But it will stand simply because the KPC never wins cases (based on history and other factors).

Now....please dont kill the messenger!

KK did not want (or have) 'exclusive use' but under the Ullage Agreement/s all OMCs are given an 'allocation' based on Market Share.
There are rules about evacuation as well therefore, KPC should have availed that percentage to KK.
What probably happened is that Triton bribed some KPC chaps who allowed Triton to use KPC/KOSF tanks as STORAGE [above their ullage allocation] exceeding 30 days thus denying others the chance to use it to offload fuel.