Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
And I always thought that to be the operator one had to have the technical expertise and equipment to do so.
Wow HUGE bullshit. How do you do this day in and day out? Again WOW
Section 4.1 of the ERHC/Total Assignment Agreement reads...
4.1 Condition Precedent
Completion is subject to the fulfilment (or, where permitted, waiver) of the following conditions (“Conditions”):
(a) receipt of all requisite written approvals and consents from the Competent Authority of the Deed of Assignment;
(b) notification by Assignee that it has obtained the authorisation of Total SA (I) on the transfer of the Transferred Interests under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and (ii) to become a party to the PSC for Block 4; and
(c) execution and entry into full force and effect of a PSC in respect of Block 4 either:
(i) between (i) Assignor (or Assignee in cased Assignor has assigned and transferred remaining rights and interests in Block 4 to Assignee pursuant to Clause 4.7), (ii) Assignee and (iii) DRSTP represented by ANP-STP; or
(ii) in the case of the Farm-In Alternative between (I) Assignor and (ii) DRSPT represented by ANP-STP.
In the event that a Condition precedent is not satisfied or waived by the Longstop Date, any Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement in accordance with Clause 4.8 at any time by written notice to the other Party. By mutual agreement of the Parties in writing the Longstop Date may be extended for another period to be agreed by the Parties.
Discussion:
Condition (a): something confirming that this condition was met would likely only be included as part of a SEC filing, as Kosmos did with Block 11 (see below). As we know, ERHC is not filing and Total has filed nothing related to EEZ Block 4. Additionally, there is no evidence that any interest in Block 4 has ever been transferred to Total. Conclusion: condition (a) has not been met.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1509991/000155837016005628/kos-20160331ex101065573.htm
Condition (b): a document of this nature would likely not be made available for public viewing. Conclusion: neutral.
Condition (c): the only official mention of a PSC for Block 4 is the ANP-STP invitation to Shell to negotiate such a PSC. If ERHC/Total/STP had executed a full force and effect PSC for Block 4 then STP would have had no reason to run their bid process on Block 4. Conclusion: condition (c) has not been met.
So, with two out of three conditions being unmet (although it would only take one), it is my conclusion that the Assignment Agreement has not been completed.
I welcome any evidence to the contrary.
.
Nigerian, Malaysian, Indian, South African, etc....
Doesn't matter where, nobody believes that a ticker that has been delisted to the "grey" markets from a company set up in Nigeria where they can't even verify information, that this is at any point legitimate.
They don't believe YOU most of all because you're just a blowing wind up everyone's butts. The price is still .0001 and it's not going anywhere. The scam is burnt.
Oranto did not declare themselves the operator on the block, they were designated as the Operator in a contractual agreement between themselves and STP. And they were a perfectly capable operator in getting Phase I accomplished. And I could be wrong about their reasons for going to xrimlinger. Maybe they feel they could be the technical operator but they just want to share the financial risk of drilling a deep water well.
Why didn't ERHC think of that? Maybe they did. After all, they were designated as the Operator on the Block 11 PSC (see below). Maybe ERHC wanted to enter into a PSC for Block 4 but STP refused until they paid their taxes due on Block 11.
28.1
ERHC ENERGY EEZ, LDA is hereby designated as the Operator under this Contract to execute, for and on behalf of the Contractor, all Petroleum Operations in the Contract Area pursuant to and in accordance with this Contract and the Petroleum Law.
https://www.resourcecontracts.org/contract/ocds-591adf-3122094392/view#/search/operator
As to the conditions to completion of the ERHC/Total Assignment Agreement. I will try to address them if I get time later today.
.
I read what you wrote but I discounted that anyone could convince ERHC to do anything.
What have you convinced ERHC to do in all the years you have been here?
Did someone convince ERHC to dilute this into a nothing sp?
Did someone convince ERHC to balloon this to 2.5 billion shares?
Did someone convince ERHC into the reverse split?
Did someone convince ERHC to quit having communications with investors? Or to quit publishing financials?
Does anyone even answer the phone at ERHC?
Badog
The demented, delusional bullshit never ends. Now you are going to convince erhc to time the announcements. If only there was announcement to time lmao. Just another twisting, squirming pivot away from your ridiculous Shell bidding war and erhc dividend bullshit. And your ridiculous post with the claim of a Total deal "any day now" from last August, another example of how wrong dickran has been for the last decade. So nice of someone to keep it as a sticky post just to remind everyone.
Here's a link to that sticky post, always good for another laugh courtesy of erhc's largest stuck shareholder and proven liar:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=172556959
I'm not going to get others to wait for a second announcement.
I think the smarter way is to convince erhc to time the announcements together.
You should read more carefully what I wrote.
Short sellers accused erhc management of being "Nigerian scammers" for many years. This shall not be forgotten in the strategy to inflict maximum financial pain on the shorts and end the practice of naked short selling out of Canada. A higher purpose must be served here not just making investors into billionaires.
Krombacher
Krom...
Again....I own shares so I hope there is a short squeeze....but I doubt there are many shorts...if any... so I don't know how that will happen.
It appears that you believe your short squeeze story and have a lot of shares that will be for sale so trying to get others to wait while you are dumping is probably a good strategy.
If you can prove there are any shorts then maybe your theories would have merit.
Badog
The "anything is better than nothing" attitude is exactly what the short sellers want.
I pray that ERHC withholds any information on a Shell deal until they also can announce their Total deal, because people like you will bail to short sellers prematurely on a Shell announcement.... and not wait for a subsequent total announcement.
I can't give you more courage but maybe management could time the announcements to your benefit after all.
Krombacher
So just so we get this straight.
You're saying Oranto is the operator but doesn't have the know how and skills and money to be the operator and so it advertised on xrimlinger.com so that it can partner with someone who does have those skills and capital, who would then ultimately become the operator. But because it claimed to be the operator in the PSC, it's CLEARLY the operator.
Why didn't ERHC think of that? But, you don't address the fact that Oranto didn't get its extension until last November and not when the PSC was signed.
CLEARLY, if ANYONE can simply declare themselves as operator in a PSC, even if they're not qualified as an operator, then the requirement to be "in production" cannot be simply met with a PSC in order to get an extension because declaring yourself an operator when you're not can't be taken seriously.
You have not proven that the conditions weren't met so you cannot claim that the assignment agreement is incomplete.
Thank you,
Krombacher
I just hope before Erhc and offor lose everything in eez and jdz, they cut a deal and get something for shareholders.. anything is better than nothing.. especially after all these yrs..
Nd9
You actually said: "I'm pretty sure longs have won this thing". With the stock at $.0001 and stuck near zero for over 6 years? Your greed and hubris driven deceit truly knows no bounds. But always good for a laugh - like your Shell bidding war and erhc dividend nonsense. It never ends. lmao
CLEARLY, unless you can show otherwise, Oranto is the Operator per the PSC. The purpose in their going to xrimlinger was to help them secure a partner that has the technical and financial wherewithal to help them complete Phase II of the PSC (drilling a well) because they cannot do this on there own. If and when they do find such a partner then the PSC will likely be modified to name said partner as the Operator on the block.
As to your second request, the ERHC/Total portion of the 400 page document is not able to be copy and pasted, or I would have done so. But you can easily go and read the conditions and if you would like to prove they have been met, feel free.
.
Dude,
CLEARLY Oranto was not the operator because xrimlinger.com. please work harder to use your logic on this. What is the logical purpose of listing the properties on xrimlinger.com, if not to locate an operator?
Please list all the conditions that "completion is subject to" and provide links that prove that completion was not achieved and name the terms that were not met for the contract to be deemed complete.
If you cannot do this, then you cannot claim that there was lack of completeness in my opinion.
Thanks
Krombacher
By "not completed", I mean not completed. See page 213 of the 400 pages (page 10 of the ERHC/Total agreement), Clause 4.1, Conditions Precedent, where it begins by saying, "Completion is subject to...".
As to Block 3, as I mentioned previously, the PSC establishes the Operator on the block, and from the Oranto PSC we see that Oranto is named as Operator on Block 3.
28.1 ORANTO PETROLEUM-STP, Limited is hereby designated as Operator under this Contract to sign, for and on behalf of the Contractor, all Petroleum Operations in the Contract Area under and in accordance with this Contract and the Petroleum Law.
.
Lets be truthful. ALL of your posts are a waste of time. Another attempt at a correlation that make no sense on your part. Again.
Meh.
Krombacher
P.S. see? I can actually waste one of my three daily posts with a simple "meh", that's how confident I am that the shorts lost this game.
What do you mean by "not completed"? The assignment agreement was signed by both parties and both parties initialed every page. Looks complete to me.
If Oranto has a PSC then who's the operator in that PSC?.The fact that they were advertising the block on xrimlinger.com tells me that they were seeking an operator, because they didn't have one.
So I think your assumption that a PSC is needed to extend the block is wrong. The correct assumption is that an operator is needed. I think Oranto got its operator back in November when they got an extension and that's why block 4 is no longer on xrimlinger.com.
You need an operator not a PSC to get the extension, or else Oranto would've gotten the extension back when they had the PSC and not back in November.
Your assumptions are simply not as logical as my assumptions, in my opinion.
Erhc had an operator with the assignment agreement with Total and therefore got its extension on the block. It may be that Total could've decided to back away, but the extension was already in place and Sao Tome couldn't do anything about it. They couldn't even wait until the end of Sept to get the block on expiration of the license, because the license was already extended.
They invited Shell when they realized that ERHC wasn't giving up the block with the international carat emptor and after their bidding process failed due to the international caveat emptor.
Shell will now do a deal with Erhc.
The above is my opinion.
Krombacher
You are certainly free to assume what you want but the problem with your assumtion is that, while Total would certainly be a qualified operator, the Assignment Agreement does not make Total the operator of the block. Heck, it's not even a "completed" Assignment Agreement so it doesn't even make Total an official participant in the block.
And, although the STP/ERHC agreement does not specifically call for a PSC, a PSC would be an agreement between ERHC and Sao Tome and, hopefully, someone else that would designate the Operator as well as the working interest percentages in the block.
But, there is a silver lining to my assumption. If a PSC starts "production" then ERHC should not lose JDZ Block 2 on October 1 because they are a party to a PSC on that block.
As for Oranto, again, yes they do have a PSC on Block 3. For a long time now.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174003361
.
,
https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/
Whose going to sue???? You???? You have no legal standing.
Just more of your bullshit.
As much as dickran hates them, the facts show that the claims about ssc posting erhc was going bankrupt over and over, 60 times, for years are completely false. So embarrassing to be called out yet again and unable to provide even 5 examples to support those claims.
And how about those dates I provided that proved dickran was lying again? So pathetic. As always, ihub history, unlike proven liar dickran, does not lie. So the twisting and squirming continue. First it was a problem with $12.99, now it's simple laziness. Embarrassing.
Regarding Offor, there you go with the big "If" and "then" dodge. Mix in more gag order bullshit. Over and over. And dickran allegations that erhc management conspired with Offor to issue toxic debt and allow him to acquire erhe shares at prices near zero, how do you try to squirm out of that one? Some serious accusations there against Ntephe, the board, and Offor. I have provided links to those allegations when you tried to squirm out of them in the past. Can you provide a link that shows I stated as fact that Offor was not a billionaire? Oh yeah, you're too lazy or you don't have $12.99, which is it? Or are you just making up another lie?
Meanwhile dickran says dollars/share, erhe says $.0001 - can't squirm out of that one.
If Offor was "violating" SEC disclosure requirements because he had to due to a gag order from a state judge who takes primacy over SEC regulations per the 10th amendment of the Constitution (I'm not a lawyer), then that's not actually an allegation, because it complies with the law.
I'm disappointed in your response. I was hoping you'd do the honorable thing and shoot yourself in the foot more than that. You didn't say you didn't "believe" that Offor was a billionaire. You stated it as a fact. Therefore, you were defamatory. Please reinstate that "fact" so that you may be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Can you try? Be honorable
By the way, the reason I'm not searching for your statements regarding a reverse split and bankruptcy is that I don't have to really do it, since I'm pretty sure longs have won this thing. I guess I'm lazy.
Krombacher
Seeing those actual dates sent yet another dickran falsehood to his/her debunked dung heap of baseless claims, false rumors and outright lies. I'll take your latest twisting, squirming pivot away from the facts as an acknowledgement that dickran and his mindless minion were lying when they falsely claimed SSC "posted that erhc was going bankrupt over and over for years". On sadder note, is it true dickran can't even afford the $12.99 for a 1 month ihub subscription? Karma at work again lmao.
Back when Offor couldn't/wouldn't come up with $5 or $10 million erhc needed for its part of the Kenya drilling effort, I may have said I didn't believe he was a billionaire. Seemed like a logical thing to question as his lack of financial support resulted in the toxic debt fiasco that wiped out erhe shareholders.
Even an eggplant can see that was not defaming anyone. It pales in comparison to your allegations that erhc management conspired with Offor to continue to issue convertible debt in order to crater the share price and allow Offor to accumulate as many as all the erhe shares at prices near zero. Or your allegations that Offor is intentionally violating SEC ownership disclosure requirements. Now those are serious accusations and guerguerian dickran made them not as opinions or questions, but as actual allegations As far as I know, dickran continues to promote those claims so the statute of limitations clock hasn't even begun ticking.
Did you not say that Offor is not a billionaire?
I need you to reaffirm this before the statute of limitations on your defamation of Emeka Offor tolls.
If you keep ignoring the question, it's going to be harder to sue you for defamation if you're passed the statute of limitations.
So please stop ignoring the question so that we can extend the tolling.
Krombacher
Again, there's nothing in the original agreement between STP and ERHC that provides for the extension of ERHC's rights on the block in the case that ERHC were to sign a PSC either.
So why is it that you can take the liberty to assume that a PSC means the block is "in production", but I can't do the same with the Assignment Agreement with an operator who would do the producing?
Seems like a double standard that you're applying.
And how did Oranto get an extension in November on its block 3? Did they have a PSC? Back then?
Krombacher
Again-------you have debunked Nothing
The rest is nothing more than your regular lies and bullshit
He/she counters facts with more bullshit and lies to confuse people from actually reading what's true and what's not truth. It's a ploy that the clown squad uses over and over again.
Again, there is nothing in the original agreement between STP and ERHC that provides for the extension of ERHC's rights on the block in the case that ERHC were to sign an agreement to transfer interest in the block to another party. The only provision in the original agreement that addresses extension is the following:
6.3 On the expiration of the term of this Agreement, if ERHC have Working Interest in all or part of any Block in production, ERHC's corresponding rights in the said Blocks shall continue as long as those Blocks are in production.
So what is debatable is, does the signing of a PSC effectively place a block "in production"? I am now of the opinion that it does and so that would be ERHC's only hope of extending their rights on Block 4. Assuming they do still have those rights as of now, which is also debatable, IMO.
.
You really are challenged when it comes to facts. Let me lay it out in a way even an eggplant could understand:
On 1/31/2016, right after the reverse split, there were about 25 million outstanding shares.
On 7/30/2016, AFTER my post from 7/9/2016, 44 million o/s. The toxic debt had not been cranked up yet.
But by 12/31/2016, o/s jumped to 952 million. Toxic debt machine throttle wide open.
And on 1/31/2017 o/s exploded to 2.5 billion. The toxic debt machine cranked all the way up as I predicted.
Those are the sorry facts. All the squirming and twisting by dickran can't change them.
Regarding providing links to support the absolutely false claim that I posted that erhc would go bankrupt "over and over for years", I understand how owning 400 million shares of erhe all these years could be a financial strain, and coming up with the $12 for a month subscription might be out of reach. But ihub Happy Hour is every Friday and people can search all they want for free. Of course you already knew that. And everyone else already knows the reason you and your mindless minion are unable to provide even 5 links to support your claim is that they simply don't exist. It's just another embarrassing issue your out of control, demented, delusional, deceitful stories has gotten you into. Happy twisting and squirming.
I agree that we will see, everything is simply speculation. I tend to believe that people continue in paths they are comfortable with and everyone involved in this company has proven they are comfortable with using shareholders and not feeling any urge to allow shareholders to get anything in return barring what they may make buying low and selling high. That without anything from officers of the company to shed any light whatsoever that would make this anything but sheer speculation and manipulation of unknown "facts". At this point, there is nothing that can be considered a fact, excepting that a R/S hasn't happened again, yet.
Reread what I said about what happens at maturity. If the convertible note isn't converted into shares, because no more shares can be issued if the shares outstanding reaches the share authorized limit and the company refuses to do a reverse split so more shares can be printed, then the debt must either be paid off at maturity or the company simply defaults on the debt.
The convertible debt is not secured by collateral so there's nothing to repossess.
Upon default, the creditor can try to chase the debt in court or simply write off the debt as bad debt.
It's been so many years now since maturity that the issue has been resolved and the debt has been vaporized.
As for the expiration of ERHC's rights on the blocks, they're supposed to be expiring at the end of Sept for both the EEZ and the JDZ UNLESS the rights have been extended by the signing of the Total assignment agreement found redacted in the 400 page document. Whether you also need a PSC to extend the license is debatable.
So for all we know, the licenses have already been extended. This makes sense to me because Sao Tome wouldn't have started a bidding process on block 4 and risk confrontation by an international carat emptor. Instead, they would've waited until the end of Sept to pick up the expired licenses and start the bidding process at that time. I think they didn't do that because the license was already previously extended by Total.
In any event, we should know at the end of September if all of ERHC's assets have expired or not.
But it also makes sense that now that Shell has shown interest in Block 4, by being invited to a PSC on the block and with source oil believed to be in that block, that we'll likely have some sort of deal with Shell preceding an expiration, if there even is an expiration.
Krombacher
I don't see the reason a "maturity date" necessarily means that the debt cannot still be exercised, just that it now CAN be exercised whenever the one who owns the debt decides to exercise it. Meaning that the conditions are such that they can make some money by doing so. A maturity date is not necessarily an expiration date, such as the rights expiration date soon upcoming for ERHE having any rights whatsoever to play with. IMO
You just made my point.
If the reverse split was in January 2016, then your past came after that in July 2016.
So you predicted bankruptcy OR another round of toxic debt, which your prediction came after the first debt issued, after the reverse split and after the second debt issuance... and your prediction never came true
But it doesn't matter because you've predicted a second reverse split many times and you were wrong, but I have no desire to hunt for those posts of yours.. it'll cost me another monthly subscription to do that search. You're also dodging the fact that you said Offor is not a billionaire.
I haven't seen the gag order so it may or may not preclude an annual meeting. But if it does, then that's the reason we haven't had one.
Krombacher
Unlike you, I'll gladly provide links to back up what I say. But based on your indisputable and well deserved reputation for being a liar, once you see the link you will respond with just another twisted squirming, deceitful, doomed to fail narrative. But here's the link just in case anyone might still question what I post:
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=123771901
Before you lie again and say my post was before the reverse split, everyone knows the 1:100 r/s that wiped out everyone including Offor and erhc insiders was effective in January 2016. Here's a preemptive link to save the time of debunking any new false claims you may spew out about that:
https://www.erhc.com/news/erhc-energy-inc-reverse-stock-split-becomes-effective/
So sad that dickran's urges to lie have become uncontrollable. Here's yet another recent example:
Without a link, your quote could have come after the first issuance of convertible debt.... and knowing you, that's the reason you didn't provide one.
But so far, you attack only the character and don't have much of a logical argument on anything.
I've rebutted and debunked all the nonsense regarding the issuance of more convertible debt or convertible debt still on the balance sheet. Maturity dates and the lack of a subsequent reverse split debunks it.
Shorts really want a reverse split, dilution, and a dumping of shares in the market so they can exit and escape their fate, but that's wishful thinking on the part of the shorts.
Shorts are simply screwed. That's all it is.
Krombacher
No greater truth has been spoken on this board.
CRYSTAL clear. 👏👏👏👏👏
The difference between you and me is crystal clear. For example, I said I thought there would be another reverse split years ago. I was wrong about that and I freely admit it. I don't continue to claim I was right, I don't draw a sketch representing a reverse split and claim it really happened, I don't say it hasn't happened yet because erhc operates on "African time", I don't claim a gag order is preventing erhc from disclosing a reverse split took place, I don't say someone at a women's oil conference told me the reverse split actually happened.
You on the other hand make one lie after another and then lie about having made those lies. Cease and desist order, libel suit, fake SPV, signed contracts not to sell, African Queen buyer, Offor owning all the erhe shares, more than a billion erhe shares held in short positions, etc., etc. On top of that, you have been saying erhe would be worth dollars/share for a decade and you simply don't have the character and courage to admit you were wrong.
By the way, I am still waiting for you or your mindless minion to provide some links to the posts where I "lied about erhc going bankrupt over and over for years". Of course you can't because this is just another thing you lied about. Here's one example from a post I made after the reverse split where I mentioned erhc going bankrupt. Is this what you consider lying:
I didn't say the convertible debt had expiration dates, I said they had maturity dates, although I can see why you might be confused.
The maturity dates are known from the financials and have long since matured for several years now. There is no new convertible debt since the last financials because they would have to do a reverse split first in order to issue new debt and they haven't done that.
You're also wrong about the "annual" shareholders meeting. A careful reading of the bylaws and articles stated that an "annual" Shareholders meeting is only held if it is called, but there's no obligatory language requiring the company to call one. So the "annual" Shareholders meeting is not really annual but only initiated if called.
So all is in order. Besides, you can't call a shareholders meeting under a gag order anyway.
Krombacher
I never said the covid PPP was an ongoing revenue stream, but they had to demonstrate revenue for two years running in order to get PPP funds two years in a row. To get the amount they got, I estimate that they had to prove they had annual revenues of $1.6 million for each of the two years. I also speculate that if they made $1.6 m in each of the two years to qualify for the PPP covid funds, then it's very likely they've been making this revenue in non covid years as well.
You don't seem to know how to read your own quote.
The quote doesn't say "if ERHC actually finds a partner, working capital will be needed"
It says, "Erhc's ability to exploit existing and prospective opportunities will depend on its ability to raise the requisite financing to meet its working capital needs" which it can only do by finding a partner.
I don't lie, you just don't understand what constitutes a lie because you yourself lie so much. For example, you claimed Offor is not a billionaire and you claimed there would be a second reverse split. None of this was true.
Krombacher
Nope you sure arent pretending. LOL
You keep referencing no existent shorts which renders the rest of your post moot---IOW its bullshit.
This a non starter. None of this is going on.
Instead of the twisting, squirming dickran double talk, I prefer facts. Like this one from a recent erhc 8-K:
What's the price again?
Monster trade for ERHE
1608 shares , price .0001
.1608 cents
stupid
jmho
And, for one who thinks that expiration dates matter, which we don't know what the dates are for the debt.....or if they exist. We know that an expiration date exists and is shortly upcoming for any rights ERHC may still have, despite not paying any amounts due for a very long time.
Followers
|
746
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
7
|
Posts (Total)
|
361364
|
Created
|
08/07/03
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderators Tamtam ssc Homebrew BearRickPunch |
ERHC's common stock is traded on the OTC Grey Sheets (No Bid/Ask) under the symbol "ERHE."
ERHC Energy Inc. is a Houston-based independent oil and gas company focused on exploration of its working interests in the Gulf of Guinea, off the coast of central West Africa. We are proud of our heritage of visionary leadership that was responsible for ERHC being among the first to identify the possibility of significant oil reserves in what was once an undeveloped oil region of the world. We continue to build upon that heritage by continuing to be willing to take chances and having the commitment to do the hard work necessary to realize the value of our assets.
Today, ERHC has interests in Blocks 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 9 in the offshore Joint Development Zone (JDZ) of Nigeria and the island nation of Sao Tome and Principe. The National Petroleum Agency of São Tomé & Príncipe (ANP-STP) on behalf of the Government of São Tomé and Principe has awarded ERHC Energy 100 percent working interests in Blocks 4 and 11 of the São Tomé & Príncipe Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). In addition to the two Blocks already awarded, ERHC has rights to acquire up to a 15 percent paid working interest in two additional blocks of its choice in the EEZ.
The Company has signed participation agreements with subsidiaries of Addax Petroleum Inc. and Sinopec Corp. The operators of JDZ Blocks 2 (Sinopec), 3 (Anadarko) and 4 (Addax) have secured approval from the Joint Development Authority for drilling locations. Additionally, ERHC continues to pursue other potential oil and gas acquisitions, where feasible.
JDZ Block 2: 22.0%
JDZ Block 3: 10.0%
JDZ Block 4: 19.5%
JDZ Block 5: 15.0%
JDZ Block 6: 15.0%
JDZ Block 9: 20.0%
ERHC will be responsible for its proportionate share of exploration and exploitation costs in the EEZ blocks.
The São Tomé & Príncipe EEZ encompasses an area of approximately 160,000 square kilometers south and east of the Nigeria/São Tomé & Príncipe Joint Development Zone and surrounding the volcanic islands of Príncipe and São Tomé. Block 4 is situated directly east of the island of Principe. Block 11 is directly east of the island of Sao Tome.
Ocean water depths around the two islands exceed 5,000 feet, depths that have only become feasible for oil production over the past few years; however, oil and gas are produced in the neighboring countries of Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Congo.
The African coast is less than 400 nautical miles offshore, which means the exclusive economic zones of the concerned countries overlap.
Operations in JDZ Block 2
ERHC's consortium partner Sinopec Corp. is the operator in JDZ Block 2. In August 2009, Sinopec commenced exploratory drilling of the Bomu-1 well, which was completed in early October 2009. The NSAI report estimated ERHC's unrisked prospective resources in JDZ Block 2 totaled 77 million barrels of oil and 93.9 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50). The NSAI report estimated ERHC risked prospective resources in JDZ Block 2 totaled 38.3 million barrels of oil and 47.9 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50).
Operations in JDZ Block 3
The NSAI report estimated ERHC's unrisked prospective resources in JDZ Block 3 totaled 27.3 million barrels of oil and 32.9 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50). The NSAI report estimated ERHC risked prospective resources in JDZ Block 3 totaled 8.7 million barrels of oil and 10.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50). The operator, Addax Petroleum, began drilling the Lemba-1 well in October 2009 and completed drilling in November 2009.
Operations in JDZ Block 4
ERHC's consortium partner Addax Petroleum is the operator of JDZ Block 4. In August 2009, Addax took possession of the Deepwater Pathfinder deepwater drill ship and started drilling the Kina prospect. The NSAI report estimated ERHC's unrisked prospective resources in JDZ Block 4 totaled 231.6 million barrels of oil and 245 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50). The NSAI report estimated ERHC risked prospective resources in JDZ Block 4 totaled 88.4 million barrels of oil and 86.2 billion cubic feet of natural gas (P50). In 2009, Addax Petroleum drilled the Kina, Malanza-1 and Oki East wells.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 (from 10Q)
Weighted average number of shares of common shares outstanding | 738,933,854 |
Authorized shares: 950,000,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ERHC Energy Milestones
In May 1997, ERHC entered into an exclusive joint venture with São Tomé & Príncipe. ERHC sought that agreement because it identified the possibility of significant reserves offshore of Sao Tome & Principe years before anyone else did and was willing to undertake the hard work necessary to realize the value of these assets.
All of the proceeds from these sales were received by the Company during the quarter ending March 31, 2006.
Block 11A encompasses 11,950.06 square kilometers or 2.95 million acres (click on map to enlarge). The Block is situated on Kenya's border with South Sudan to the north, Block 11B and Lake Turkana to the east and near Kenya's border with Uganda to the west.
-Link to the June 2009 Sao Tome and Principe AAPG (American Association of Petroleum Geologists) Conference slide presentation in Denver. It shows EEZ Block delineations and much more: http://www.internationalpavilion.com/ip_2005/Denver09_Talks/Presentation%20Sao%20Tome%20&%20Principe%20AAPGv3%20(2)_files/frame.htm
-The National Petroleum Agency of São Tomé & Príncipe (ANP-STP) on behalf of the Government of São Tomé and Principe has awarded ERHC Energy 100 percent working interests in Blocks 4 and 11 of the São Tomé & Príncipe Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). The ANP-STP has indicated that it expects to invite ERHC to negotiate Production Sharing Contracts (PSCs) on the two Blocks in due course. In addition to the two Blocks already awarded, ERHC has rights to acquire up to a 15 percent paid working interest in two additional blocks of its choice in the EEZ. The ANP-STP has informed the Company that selection of these other blocks will take place at a later date to be determined.
-Another great post on the EEZ can be found here: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36450859
-Possible pre-salt oil deposits in the EEZ: http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36565661 http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36570193 http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36596746 http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=36450859 http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=43260765
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operators/ partners for Blocks 2,3 and 4
http://www.addaxpetroleum.com/home (Block 4)
http://www.addaxpetroleum.com/home(Block 3)
http://english.sinopec.com/ (Block 2)
Deepwater rigs
http://www.pacificdrilling.com/
http://www.fredolsen-energy.no/?aid=9048927
http://www.seadrill.com/
http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/default.asp
http://www.saipem.eni.it/index.asp
http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Sedco-702-92C77.html?LayoutID=17
http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/nl/shipdetails.aspx?MMSI=636014746
Deepwater rigs video's and animations
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ii2zOZh41eA
http://www.deepwater.com/fw/main/Discoverer-Clear-Leader-Begins-Operations-410C1.html?LayoutID=6
Presentations
Growth Company Investor Show 2008 in London
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgXCHO-Ot4E part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQm6SwY5ceo part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaam9Tyh4DE Q&A part
ERHC Web TV presentation to RedChip Conference
http://www.modavox.com/events/redchip/0608/room1.html
CEO Peter Ntephe Interview - on RedChip TV
http://www.modavox.com/events/redchip/0608/ceo_interviews.html
DD web sites
Facts about ERHC/ERHE: http://www.erhc.com/en/cms/?60
FAQ about ERHC/ERHE: http://www.erhc.com/en/cms/?56
http://www.anp-stp.gov.st/eng/
http://www.enercominc.com/
Track drillships marinetraffic.com/ais/default.aspx
http://www.erhc.com
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=erhe.ob
http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000799235
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/Info_Center.asp
http://www.nigeriasaotomejda.com/
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=5721853
http://www.equatorialoil.com/pages/TechReview.html
http://www.nigeria-oil-gas.com/
http://www.sao-tome.com/englisch/index.htm
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/nigeria.html
www.ods-petrodata.com/odsp/day_rate_index.php
Industry News
http://www.rigzone.com/news/
http://www.oil.com/
http://www.platts.com/
Articles
The New Yorker, 10/07/2002, OUR NEW BEST FRIEND, by JON LEE ANDERSON,post #3510
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=6512250
DAILY INDEPENDANT, Tuesday May 24th, 2005, The long wait for JDZ deal POST #3035
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=6479732
Area News & Newspapers
http://www.allAfrica.com
http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com/paperfrmes.html
http://www.nigeriamasterweb.com/newsfrmes.html
http://www.independentng.com
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/
http://www.newswatchngr.com/
http://www.punchng.com
http://www.thisdayonline.com/
http://www.vanguardngr.com/
http://www.jornal.st/index.php
http://www.tekoilandgas.com/technology/glossary-of-terms
AKPO information
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=48439213
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=48446472
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ERHE 8K 4-24-2017
http://archive.fast-edgar.com//20170424/AI22B22CZC228JGU22222Z32GOMFIC22Z292/
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/ETBI/overview
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |