Energytec (fka EYCTQ)

[Stock]

12(j) Registration Revoked by SEC**

http://otcbb.com/asp/dailylist_detail.asp?d=12/03/2010&mkt_ctg=ALL

13:02 EYTCQ Energytec, Inc Common Stock 12/6/2010 100 12(j) Registration Revoked by SEC**

[911GT3RS]

Zero volume though. ;)

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0016!

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0014!

[AOuvier]

Took me a couple hours on Friday....and though it was only for 350,000 shares it filled 4x different times.

[BDEZ]

AOuvier how long did it take to fill?

[AOuvier]

Well finally my order filled phew....now lets run :)

[911GT3RS]

Could see a lot more with some volume imo

[Tigerchen69]

The Next 1000 % Q-Play - Its just the start here [img][/img]

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0013!

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0008!

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0005!

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .004!

[JC$]

Looks like a low floater.

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .003!

[LivinThaDream]

Does anybody know, or has anybody contacted this company to find out what the current status of its bankrupt filing back in may is??

[Estrella]

EYTCQ @ .0015!

[Arnold25764]

Cheap price!

[MWM]

Keeping a close eye on this one...

[MWM]

Field Locations
http://www.newenergytec.com/operations.html

VP of Operations
Cary Dukes
Hutt Field, Luling, and Rockdale
Jim Johnson
Kilgore
Les Leaton
Quitman
Chris Dukes
Redwater
Ben Hunley
Talco
Jesse Watts

Well and Lease Data

The information relative to the well and lease data is provided as of a specific date. The status of wells and leases is subject to change without notice and any projection of the information provided to a date that is either before or after the date identified may result in errors and inaccuracies. You should not assume that any well listed with production as of the date of the report was either producing before or after that date.

Hutt Field
Kilgore
Luling
Milam
Quitman
Redwater
Sulphur Bluff
Talco
Program 1
Program 2
Program 3
Program 4-5
Program 6
Program 7
Program 8-9
Program 10-14
Program 15-16
Program 17
Program 18
Program 19
Program 20
Program 21&24
Program 22
Program 23
Program 24&21
Program 25

Program 26
Program 27
Program 28-30
Program 31-34
Program 35-43&48
Program 44-47
Program 48&35-43
Program 49-53
Program 54
Program 55-62
Program 63-67
Program 69-69
Program 70
Program 71
Program 72-73
Program 74
Program 75-83
Program 84
Program 88-89&91-93
Program 90
Program 91-93&88-89
Program 94-95
Program 96-99
Program 100
Program 101-103 Program 104-111
Program 112-120
Program 121-130
Program 131-132
Program 133-135
Program 136-137
Program 138
Program 139-140
Program 141-143
Program 144
Program 145-148
Program 149-160
Program 161-165
Program 166-170
Program 171-172
Program 173
Program 174-177
Program 178
Program 179
Program 180-181
Program 182-185
Program 186-188
Program 189
Program 190
Program 191-210

[MWM]

Wow they have a ton of leases on the website...

[MWM]

http://www.newenergytec.com/?disclaimer=yes

[MWM]

ETYC 5 year chart

[MWM]

Maybe we are getting some good news coming on this lawsuit...

On October 31, 2006, Energytec was served with the above-referenced complaint filed by a New York limited liability company of which John J. Petito is the managing member. Mr. Petito is involved in other legal proceedings with Energytec as described herein. The complaint alleges that in June 2005, Redwaterpet and Energytec entered into a purchase agreement under which Redwaterpet agreed to purchase for $8,000,000 a 100% working interest less a 35% net profits overriding royalty interest in certain oil and gas properties in Energytec’s Sulphur Bluff and Redwater properties in Texas. Redwaterpet claims Energytec breached the agreement by failing to complete assignment of the interests acquired, failing to complete drilling and development work, and failing to account to Redwaterpet for the operation of the properties. Redwaterpet seeks specific performance of the agreement with respect to assignment of the interests allegedly acquired and development of the properties, compensation for lost contractual profits, and an accounting for



23



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents
revenues and expenses for the properties. In December 2006, Energytec filed an answer denying the allegations of the complaint. In March 2007, Energytec filed an amended answer and counterclaim against Redwaterpet asserting in the alternative that the original purchase contract was modified and Energytec has complied with its obligations, the alleged contract is impossible to perform as demanded by Redwaterpet, Energytec is not obligated to provide further performance on the alleged contract because of illegal commissions and payments received by John J. Petito and another individual, because Frank W Cole and other parties are responsible for any damages allegedly suffered by Redwaterpet, and because Redwaterpet is obligated as the working interest owner to pay drilling and development costs to Energytec. At the time Energytec filed the amended answer, it also filed a third party complaint against Frank W Cole (individually and d/b/a/ Frank W Cole Engineering) and John J. Petito alleging that Cole and Petito conspired in a scheme to package and unlawfully sell certain interests in the Sulphur Bluff and Redwater properties to the members of Redwaterpet and that these persons are liable for any costs or damages that Energytec may suffer as a result of the Redwaterpet transaction. Mr. Cole has answered the third-party complaint denying the allegations. Mr. Petito filed a motion challenging the jurisdiction of the Texas court over him, which is still pending. Redwaterpet has since filed a second amended complaint. In September 2007, the plaintiff and Energytec held a mediation in Dallas, Texas, which did not result in a resolution of the matter. A new trial date has been set for May 19, 2008. We cannot predict when this matter may be resolved or what the potential outcome may be.

[MWM]

Month in 2007
Oil (Bbl) Gas (Mcf)
Gross Net Gross Net
January
18,229 6,399 23,129 3,038
February
13,505 5,392 13,193 2,307
March
14,402 4,886 17,763 3,824
April
11,916 3,915 13,989 2,622
May
11,348 3,783 18,909 2,615
June
10,401 3,770 12,369 2,294
July
7,828 3,790 13,816 2,538
August
7,829 4,231 15,460 2,773
September
8,104 3,673 11,011 2,451

[MWM]

Operating Plan and Oil and Gas Properties

During June 2007, district managers met with the Company’s operations manager and field supervisor to develop a plan to restore production on various wells. Four fields were identified for potential improvements with a relatively small capital requirement and an acceptable return on investment. Management determined to set aside funds from a tax refund that was received in June 2007, totaling approximately $500,000 for the completion of recommended work in Texas and $300,000 for the completion of recommended work in Wyoming.


Talco/Trix-Liz – It was determined that approximately $90,000 could be spent on sixteen wells resulting in a potential increase in revenue of approximately $195,000 per month. The work includes the perforation and completion of three wells. Two were completed resulting in increased production of approximately 18 bbls per day. The Company determined that gas lock-proof packers were needed on six wells. Packers were purchased and installed on two wells, but the work was unsuccessful because the tubing in these wells is old and the condition of the tubing damages the pliable material of which the packers are made. The additional cost to rework these wells to restore production is estimated at approximately $30,000 per well. Production needs to be restored in legally permitted zones on five wells and production needs to be established from a deeper zone on one well. Tank maintenance on one well was completed, but the well is producing water. Due to electrical problems the well has not been able to produce consistently. The Company is resolving the electrical issues in order to establish consistent production and determine if the water production will decline and the well will produce oil. Due to these issues, the Company has determined that the monthly increase in revenues is more likely approximately $100,000.


Redwater – The Redwater Field poses substantial safety risks due to the hazardous noxious chemical content in the oil and gas. Safety is the highest priority and safety equipment must be maintained and replaced regularly. Approximately $11,000 was spent in the third quarter of 2007 to replace fresh air packs, escape packs and personal monitors. Additionally, approximately $170,000 of repairs on eight wells were identified which could potentially increase revenue by approximately $275,000 per month. Work on five of the eight wells was prioritized for completion, subject to availability of capital at an approximate cost of $100,000 with a one month return on investment. Wireline work on two wells and hot oiling the flow line was attempted but the result was too much water containing H2S. In order to resolve this problem additional work to drain the water below the perforations will be necessary at a cost of approximately $30,000 per well. Additional tanks are needed for one well.

Additionally, water disposal needs to be addressed on one well and a wireline cleanout and chemicals are needed for a water injection well. Two of the remaining three wells need gas lift systems and the third will require a workover to re-establish production. Due to higher costs to complete this work, management wants to evaluate the potential return on investment more thoroughly on these three wells, before proceeding.


Sulphur Bluff – Six wells were identified for work costing approximately $25,000. Hot oil treatment has been completed on two wells as well as the workover of one additional well. The Company still needs to workover two wells and the purchase a packer on one. Rods and tubing and a pump need to be pulled on the final two wells. Upon the completion of the hot oil treatment and workover, a disposal well went down which limited the production available. Repairs on the disposal well are estimated to cost an additional $20,000. The field is currently producing approximately 18 to 20 bbls per day. Once the disposal well is repaired, the production should increase to approximately 100 bbls per day. The timing of repairs on the disposal well is dependent upon availability of capital. The Company believes the Sulphur Bluff property can become a significant source of revenue after this work is performed.




13



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents
Como – Management prioritized nine wells in the Como Fields for repairs and workovers totaling approximately $66,000. Two of three pumping units and an electric motor have been repaired. One additional pumping unit still requires maintenance. A rod job was completed on one well but new rods or rod jobs are needed on two additional wells and one well requires the replacement of a tail bearing. Coated tubing on an additional well was completed. Since this work was completed production has increased an average of 50 bbls per day to approximately 200 bbls per day. However, as work has been completed additional areas have been identified that requires additional capital beyond the ability of the Company at this time. Energytec has entered into a non-binding letter of intent with an unrelated third party to serve as the basis for selling its interest in the Como oil field as described under Property Divestitures below.


Wyoming – In July 2007, Energytec paid $76,778 for lease rentals on 39,030 acres in Wyoming. The Company set aside $125,000 to plug back, re-perforate, and recomplete the Cinnamon Bear 2-4 utilizing a surfactant and new technology known as sonication. The chemical has been successfully tested at the Rocky Mounting Oil Field Testing Center in Wyoming. The sonic treatment concept is to apply high intensity sound waves to help dissolve and break-up scale that forms at the perforations or the sand face, as well as reduce viscosity, and thereby improve fluid flow. Sonication has successfully been used in heavy oil production in California. Management believes that the combination of sonication and surfactant will result in a greater potential for non-thermally induced production. In addition, the Company has engaged a regulatory consultant to unitize certain of its private and federal leases. Management believes that unitization of some of the federal leases will result in obtaining a two year extension of certain leases otherwise due to expire July 31, 2008.


In June 2007, the Company also agreed to plug the Cole Federal in compliance with an order issued by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM.) Further, the Company is obligated to remediate the site to the satisfaction of the BLM. Remediation work was concluded by the end of August 2007 in compliance with the plugging order.

However, in light of the new operational plan for additional work on the Cinnamon Bear 2-4, the Company has retained the right to reenter the Cole Federal at a later date. The Company expended $50,000 in July 2007 to accomplish the plugging operations. As a result of compliance with the BLM’s plugging order, the Company has the right to receive up to $77,000 in refunds of cash bonds established for the reclamation. During the three months ended September 30, 2007, the Company identified and recognized impairment charges to earnings of $1,191,558, relating the Cole Federal

[MWM]

Somebody has been loading here...

[MWM]

69,487,909 shares of common stock as of November 19, 2007.

[ron944]

I just hope it goes up ,everyone is making money on oil,but us

[johnsnorlax]

does anyone have any news , thanks , john

[thecybertrader]

Press Release Source: Energytec, Inc.


Energytec Creates New Projects Division; Hires Managing Director
Monday March 12, 8:30 am ET


DALLAS, March 12 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Energytec, Inc. (Pink Sheets: EYTC - News) today announced that it had created and staffed a New Projects Division to be managed by Dr. Anton Prodanovic. The new division will have primary responsibilities in the areas of new acquisitions, prospect generation, evaluation of new research and development opportunities and data base acquisition.
ADVERTISEMENT


Dr. Prodanovic worked for Exxon Corporation from 1976 until 1984 and then Mobil Corporation from 1984 until 2000. Upon his retirement, he was engaged in a broad consulting practice involving international oil and gas exploration and development, alternative fuels research and project evaluation (both domestic and international).

Dr. Prodanovic holds a PhD (Rice University), an MA in International Business (University of Texas at Dallas) and a BS in Civil Engineering (University of Sarajevo). He has had a prolific publications career and was a Fulbright Scholar. He has been a senior executive as well as a project manager, engineering manager and research scientist. He is fluent in seven languages and has numerous research collaborations internationally.

Energytec President and CEO Don Lambert said, "We are very fortunate to attract and retain a person of Anton's skills and experience. As we endeavor to build Energytec from here forward, we are focused on the '5 P's" namely, profitability due to people, place, position, and proprietary technology. Considering the acute shortage of technical personnel in the oil and gas business today, we are committed to engaging persons of vast experience like Dr. Prodanovic who can contribute mightily now and also pass on their knowledge and skill to younger staff in training. He will be invaluable as we evaluate new drilling alliances, new prospects, new acquisitions and many technologies we have identified for heavy oil development, enhanced oil recovery, bio-remediation, and downhole molecular alteration of oil, among others."

ABOUT ENERGYTEC

Energytec, Inc. is an independent oil and gas company based in Plano, Texas, principally engaged in acquisition and development of mature fields. Its operations are focused primarily in four areas of Texas (Northeast, East, Central and South Central) and secondarily in Wyoming in the Big Horn Oil Field. For further information, call Energytec at 972-985-6715 or email the Company at [e-mail]. The Company also maintains a website, www.newenergytec.com, which contains, among other items, pertinent corporate information and links to filings with the SEC.

The statements included in this document concerning Management's plans and objectives, including statements related to the future of Energytec, the evaluation of new drilling alliances, prospects, and acquisitions constitute forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Factors which could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited, to factors detailed in the Company's annual and quarterly filings with the Securities Exchange Commission; down-turns in the Company's primary markets; disruption to the Company's operations from acts of God or extended maintenance; inability to obtain sufficient capital to consummate new drilling alliances, prospects, and acquisitions; and production and transportation difficulties. Accordingly no assurance can be given that events or results mentioned in any such forward- looking statements will in fact occur.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Energytec, Inc.

[joyceful59]

Has anyone heard any rumors of frank tendering an offer to buy back the company?

[thecybertrader]

December 29, 2006 11:38 AM ET Energytec, Inc. (OTC Pink Sheets: EYTC) announced today that the closing process is under way for completion of the sale of its Wyoming Thermal Recovery Project. As of the close of business on Wednesday, December 27, 2006, Energytec was prepared to tender 97.13% of the working interests and 8.625% of the overriding royalty. Accordingly, on December 28, 2006, conveyances for both the working interests and overriding royalties were submitted to Big Horn Oil, LLC, the purchaser, for verification and filing, after which the sale proceeds will be distributed. A subsequent closing on Wednesday, January 3, 2007, will tender any additional working interests and overriding royalty interests sent in by December 29, 2006.

Any interest holder who wishes to participate in the transaction and has not tendered his or her Affirmation and Release Agreement must send it in to Big Horn Oil by mail or overnight delivery no later than December 29, 2006. Agreements sent by mail must be post-marked December 29, 2006, and Agreements sent by overnight delivery service must be accepted and entered for tracking by the delivery service on December 29, 2006.

If you are a working interest holder and elect not to participate in the sale by sending in your Affirmation and Release Agreement on December 29, 2006, Big Horn Oil may, but has no obligation to, purchase your interest at a later date and you will continue as a working interest owner, which means you are entitled to participate in future net revenue from the Wyoming Project, if any, and you are obligated to pay your share of all exploration and development costs for the project.

Energytec, Inc. submitted its 44% working interest as part of the 97.13% of the working interests to initiate the closing process. Energytec owns no overriding royalty interests but will receive up to $20,000,000 for its substantial technical data, files and records based upon the final total of working interests tendered. Energytec expects to be paid in full by Big Horn Oil, LLC upon completion of the verification and filing process on or about January 15, 2007. All conveyances made in the closing process are subject to full and complete payment upon the acceptance of the tendered interests by Big Horn Oil, LLC.

The sale involved over 42,000 acres on more than three dozen leases, federal and private. Holders of any non-tendered working interests and overriding royalty interests who elect not to participate in the transaction will be contacted by Big Horn Oil, LLC with further information regarding those interests. All conveyances of working interests and overriding royalties involving federal leases must also be submitted to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for approval as part of the closing process.

ABOUT ENERGYTEC

Energytec, Inc. is an independent oil and gas company based in Dallas, Texas principally engaged in acquisition and development of mature fields. Its operations are focused primarily in four areas of Texas (Northeast, East, Central and South Central) and secondarily in Wyoming in the Big Horn Oil Field. For further information, call Energytec at 972-789-5136 or email the Company at [e-mail] . The Company also maintains a website, http://www.newenergytec.com , which contains, among other items, pertinent corporate information and links to filings with the SEC.

The statements included in this document concerning Management's plans and objectives, including those related to the completion of the closing process, verification and filing of conveyances and distribution of proceeds constitute forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Factors which could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, the ability of the purchaser to verify and file conveyances, unexpected developments in the verification and filing of such conveyances, the ability of the purchaser to prepare and disburse proceeds on or before January 15, 2007, total conveyance of working interest affecting the final calculation of the $20,000,000 to be received for the purchase of technical data, files and records, and the prerogative of the buyer to contact holders of non-tendered working interests and overriding royalty interests who elect not to participate in the transaction. Accordingly no assurance can be given that events or results mentioned in any such forward-looking statements will in fact occur.

SOURCE Energytec, Inc.

Energytec, Inc., [phone], or [e-mail]
http://www.newenergytec.com

[thecybertrader]

Energytec Announces Closing Process Under Way for Wyoming Thermal Project Sale
Friday December 29, 11:38 am ET


DALLAS, Dec. 29 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Energytec, Inc. (OTC Pink Sheets: EYTC - News) announced today that the closing process is under way for completion of the sale of its Wyoming Thermal Recovery Project. As of the close of business on Wednesday, December 27, 2006, Energytec was prepared to tender 97.13% of the working interests and 8.625% of the overriding royalty. Accordingly, on December 28, 2006, conveyances for both the working interests and overriding royalties were submitted to Big Horn Oil, LLC, the purchaser, for verification and filing, after which the sale proceeds will be distributed. A subsequent closing on Wednesday, January 3, 2007, will tender any additional working interests and overriding royalty interests sent in by December 29, 2006.
ADVERTISEMENT


Any interest holder who wishes to participate in the transaction and has not tendered his or her Affirmation and Release Agreement must send it in to Big Horn Oil by mail or overnight delivery no later than December 29, 2006. Agreements sent by mail must be post-marked December 29, 2006, and Agreements sent by overnight delivery service must be accepted and entered for tracking by the delivery service on December 29, 2006.

If you are a working interest holder and elect not to participate in the sale by sending in your Affirmation and Release Agreement on December 29, 2006, Big Horn Oil may, but has no obligation to, purchase your interest at a later date and you will continue as a working interest owner, which means you are entitled to participate in future net revenue from the Wyoming Project, if any, and you are obligated to pay your share of all exploration and development costs for the project.

Energytec, Inc. submitted its 44% working interest as part of the 97.13% of the working interests to initiate the closing process. Energytec owns no overriding royalty interests but will receive up to $20,000,000 for its substantial technical data, files and records based upon the final total of working interests tendered. Energytec expects to be paid in full by Big Horn Oil, LLC upon completion of the verification and filing process on or about January 15, 2007. All conveyances made in the closing process are subject to full and complete payment upon the acceptance of the tendered interests by Big Horn Oil, LLC.

The sale involved over 42,000 acres on more than three dozen leases, federal and private. Holders of any non-tendered working interests and overriding royalty interests who elect not to participate in the transaction will be contacted by Big Horn Oil, LLC with further information regarding those interests. All conveyances of working interests and overriding royalties involving federal leases must also be submitted to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for approval as part of the closing process.

ABOUT ENERGYTEC

Energytec, Inc. is an independent oil and gas company based in Dallas, Texas principally engaged in acquisition and development of mature fields. Its operations are focused primarily in four areas of Texas (Northeast, East, Central and South Central) and secondarily in Wyoming in the Big Horn Oil Field. For further information, call Energytec at 972-789-5136 or email the Company at [e-mail] . The Company also maintains a website, http://www.newenergytec.com , which contains, among other items, pertinent corporate information and links to filings with the SEC.

The statements included in this document concerning Management's plans and objectives, including those related to the completion of the closing process, verification and filing of conveyances and distribution of proceeds constitute forward-looking statements pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Factors which could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, the ability of the purchaser to verify and file conveyances, unexpected developments in the verification and filing of such conveyances, the ability of the purchaser to prepare and disburse proceeds on or before January 15, 2007, total conveyance of working interest affecting the final calculation of the $20,000,000 to be received for the purchase of technical data, files and records, and the prerogative of the buyer to contact holders of non-tendered working interests and overriding royalty interests who elect not to participate in the transaction. Accordingly no assurance can be given that events or results mentioned in any such forward-looking statements will in fact occur.

[thecybertrader]

This was posted on RagingBull... I hope the poster doesn't mind me "cutting and pasting" it, but it was a post in response to one of my questions, so maybe that makes it ok??? Not sure what the chat board "code of ethics" would state in this case? Oh well... Here it is....

By: oilamateur
22 Nov 2006, 07:42 AM EST
Msg. 7597 of 7598
(This msg. is a reply to 7593 by thecybertrader.)
Jump to msg. #
Buyer's Impressed

I have a friend who spoke to Mr. Lambert recently and he said that Don said that the buyers were "very impressed" with the FAXs from the WI owners and that he's very confident that the deal will happen on the 29th.


SURE HOPE HE IS CORRECT!!!!!

Take care all!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
The above is my opinion, or my cut and paste job, or my question, or my etc..., nothing more....

HAPPY THANKSGIVING!!!!

[thecybertrader]

I'm going to post this over here also because apparently I'm too much of a "whack job" to respond to over at Raging Bull? I guess that's what I get for actually wanting to discuss EYTC without ripping on other posters in the process? So be it...

To anybody,

I totally agree that there doesn't seem to be ANY logical reason to oppose the Wyoming deal! Do we have any knowledge, other than a lack of negative posts from the naysayers here on ragingbull, that the fax, email and phone call campaign worked? I have heard from more than one WI owner that said when they spoke with EYTC they were told that there was close to 90% in favor and supporting the deal??!! My question is will this actually allow EYTC to proceed with the deal? I guess I just don't understand if the recent "movement" was initiated by the company, or was it WI holders and shareholders deciding "enough was enough" and it was time to speak up and show support for the deal AND Mr. Lambert and his team!!?? Did the company say that if a "vote" was done and the majority were in favor of the deal it could proceed sooner, rather than later?

Either way, THANK YOU to everybody who did fax, email and/or call to show support of EYTC and their efforts!! Of course we sent in our support, but our positions are probably not even a "bleap" on the company's radar, so again, thank you from the "little guy" to you all that are LARGE investors!!

I guess I'm just wondering how much the company has officially said "on the record"? Can anybody shed some light on this? Has anybody chatted with an EYTC official in the last day or two on these matters?

I know this is a lot of questions, I'm just trying to understand where EXACTLY things stand at the moment...

Thanks to anybody in advance for your help!!!

Also, I want to take a second and wish each and every one of you a VERY HAPPY Thanksgiving!! I hope each of you is blessed to get to spend your holiday with your friends, family and loved ones!! Finally, to any of the families making the ultimate sacrifice this season with a family member somewhere around the world fighting for our country's freedom and way of life, thank you so very much and may God keep your family safe!!!

Take care everybody and God bless you all this Thanksgiving!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
As always, "some" of the above is just my opinion, but the stuff about brave family members defending our country's safety this Thanksgiving, that's PURE FACT!!!!!

[thecybertrader]

Hey John, good to hear from you!! I too have read where folks have said we got close to 90%, I was just curious if we knew if that was "good enough"??? Was the company even behind the "movement" to send in the faxes and emails, or was it just shareholders and WI holders hoping it would make a difference? Like you said, nothing from the company other than what folks have been told over the phone. WOuld be nice to know if all the support made a difference or not?

Some larger volume today, but hard to really tell what side of the market caught the most pressure, buyers or the sellers? Regardless, it was nice to get back to even by the close of the market though...

Anyway, best of luck to us all and happy Thanksgiving to everybody!!! Take care!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
As always, the above just my opinion, nothing more...

[johnsnorlax]

hello, I sent flo, my fax, and email midday on the 14th, she emailed back thanking me and she wrote that we were up to 76% at that point , I have read other posts saying we received
90% approval, but nothing offical from energytec, please let me know if you hear of any progress, thanks, john

[thecybertrader]

Question for you Joyce and/or others????

First off, thanks to everyone for organizing and showing support for the Wyoming deal, which is also in my opinion giving support to Mr. Lambert and his team for the hard work they are doing on behalf of us all!! So again, MANY thanks to everyone!!!

My question is this, do we know if all of the faxes, calls and emails actually did what they were intended to do? Did the good folks at EYTC tell anyone that if enough support was shown the deal could go through? I'm just curious?

I actually had been in contact with Flo for completely different reasons and we are suppose to talk again sometime this week, if and when I talk with her, I will ask her for an update and will report back here if there is any new info!!!

I hope you are all doing well and best of luck to us all!!

Happy Thanksgiving!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
As always, just my opinion, nothing more....

[joyceful59]

john


I heard it was over 90%. Have a good Thanksgiving, I know I will.

Good luck to all, Joyce

[johnsnorlax]

anyone know if we reached 80% , some good news might make some of us feel better over the holiday weekend, thanks, john

[joyceful59]

I couldn't resist copying

from the RB board:
By: investoil06
15 Nov 2006, 02:49 AM EST
Msg. 7494 of 7507
Jump to msg. #
Food for Thought

The more I think about this sale and the more belated due diligence I do, the more the whole situation bothers me. It seems, despite unanimous claims on this board that everyone wants this sale to go through; there are people who seemed determined to stop it. I hope, I really hope, I am completely wrong.

As I said before the only reason I can think of is that anyone would want to stop the sale is to try to force Energytec into bankruptcy. Either they are so vindictive that they are willing to see all the investors in WI, ORR and shares lose all their investment just to get revenge on current management – or they believe that Energytec going into bankruptcy will stop lawsuits in which they are defendants. The latter makes more sense to me.

If the defendants are confident they are innocent, or at least have acted ethically then they shouldn’t be so worried about the lawsuits that they try to bankrupt Energytec to avoid them.

I was in the court house again today and stopped by the clerk’s office. What I found disturbed me.

As of this afternoon there have been 25 assignments sent in by 16 individuals or entities. Most have been officially accepted except two who were short funds and I believe the county clerk has contacted them to fix the problems. When they are accepted and stamped with the document number they are legal. The actual recording process will take much longer as it takes the clerk who does the recording more than a day for each assignment and the clerk has other duties. This isn’t the Dallas court house. That delay is because they have to enter about 130 detailed handwritten entries in the abstract books for each assignment.

This is what I found disturbing. Of the 13 individuals who are NOT defendants in the Energytec lawsuits the working interests ranged from 0.0625% to 0.3125% totaling 1.74% WI. The defendants who have sent assignments for recording had a total of --- well read for yourself. I will not use individual names but will use the correct company names - one downside of recording is it becomes public record (I also found out how much money my neighbor had to borrow for his new irrigation system).

Mr SM – 0.359% WI
Mr MS – 0.300% ORRI
Mr MS – 1.417% WI
Mr MS – 0.75% WI
Mr JS – 0.25% WI (Mr JS is not a defendant but has the same last name as Mr MS)
WYO-BIG OIL WE DIG LLC (formerly known as Petito Dynasty Enterprises Group) – 0.2083% WI
WYO-BIG OIL WE DIG LLC (formerly known as Petito Dynasty Enterprises Group) – 0.2083% WI (2nd assignment)
Petito Dynasty Enterprises Group – 0.833% WI

And yes, WYO-BIG OIL WE DIG LLC is spelled in all caps.

The assignments do not state the price paid. Did these people pony up the same bucks as other investors for their share? Hope so.

Obviously there are a lot more WI still out there so maybe this isn’t as appalling as it seems. Or maybe Energtec can vouch they paid their full share. Incidentally, there are about 6.5% to 7.0% of ORRI that predate Energytec’s involvement. These were issued to the people who put together the leases before Energytec bought them, probably as part of the purchase price.

A note on the Sales Agreement and the subsequent 8-K

The original Sales Agreement signed Oct 31 contains Schedule 3.1A – Escrow Agreement. So there always was an escrow agreement although I don’t know the details. Nothing in the 8-K indicates any change to the Escrow Agreement, in fact it states;

“The agreement provides for the purchase price for the property to be placed in escrow and the proceeds to be distributed directly to the third party interest owners on the basis of their respective interest and to Energytec. In other words, Energytec will not receive any funds due to any third party who holds an interest. Those parties will be paid directly out of the escrow account.”

So claims that the agreement has been changed under pressure do not fit with the facts as we know them. An escrow is standard operating procedure for this type sale and would almost certainly be required by the purchaser even if Energytec hadn't put it in.

Also an 8-K has to be attested to by corporate officers. This is similar in consequence as giving testimony under oath. So when the 8-K states;

“…..Energytec is advised that the proposed purchaser of the Wyoming Project has received communications from certain third party interest owners threatening to disrupt the closing or take other unfavorable action….”

I take it as PROOF that Energytec was so informed by the purchaser.

Also while I was at the court house today I ran into an acquaintance who is a lawyer and part time county judge. A few years ago he got a mineral right in lieu of legal fees which coincidently happens to be partially under Energytec’s leases, as is mine. I was filling him in on the ongoing saga, what I had found and mentioned the “brigade” and the Nevada meeting that have been discussed on this board. We were kidding about the whole thing when he suddenly had a thought and said he had never had the chance to go after some one on a RICO statute.

So I went home and looked up some RICO information that I thought I would share.

Under RICO, a person or group who commits any two of 35 specific crimes and which in the opinion of the US Attorney bringing the case, has committed those crimes with similar purpose or results can be charged with racketeering. Some of those crimes include mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, extortion (such as the “brigade” demanding the company fire certain individuals before they will sign), and my personal favorite;

“RICO could be alleged if it can be shown that lawyers and/or their clients conspired and collaborated to concoct fictitious legal complaints solely in retribution and retaliation for themselves having been brought before the courts.”

I don’t think slavery applies but obscenity might. [That’s sarcasm for those of you who might take that literally].

Those found guilty of racketeering can be fined up to $25,000 and/or sentenced to 20 years in prison. In addition, the racketeer must forfeit all ill-gotten gains and interest in any business gained through a pattern of "racketeering activity."

And the crown jewel:

The act also contains a civil component - Section 1964(c) - that allows plaintiffs to sue and automatically receive judgment in the amount of three times their actual damages plus their costs and attorneys' fees if they are successful. The provision for private parties to sue says; a "person damaged in his business or property" can sue one or more "racketeers." This lawsuit, like all Federal civil lawsuits, can take place in either Federal or State court.

When the U.S. Attorney decides to indict someone under RICO, he has the option of seeking a pre-trial restraining order or injunction to prevent the transfer of potentially forfeitable property. I don’t know if this applies to a civil suit under RICO.

I like the part about treble damages although I doubt the conspirators, even with the millions they may have gotten from “commissions” and possible giveaways or discounts of WI and ORR, will have $300,000,000. Proving damages is the easy part if the “brigade” is successful at stopping the sale, actually proving they did it maliciously is harder.

The holding of secret or closed meetings, intimidation of participants in the transaction, filing frivolous lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, etc all fit perfectly into the RICO statute. The interstate nature of the transaction, meetings, etc. opens it up for federal jurisdiction. But as normal, trying to get Justice Department involvement is a protracted affair. Filing a private suit under RICO (or other) laws can be done swiftly. I am not saying any of these allegations have actually taken place but certainly comments on this board, such as post 7166, and the information in the latest 8-K would indicate the possibility.

Obviously the best solution for ALL parties is that the sale goes through. The WI and ORR holders get their money, the stock holders gain stock appreciation, the Texas WI holders, put and private placement stock owners have a chance at compensation or at least a negotiated settlement and Energtec has the chance to be an oil company instead of funding the retirement accounts of a bunch of attorneys. The “brigade” doesn’t compound their legal problems and I don’t have to spend a bunch of time with lawyers. The alternative increasingly looks like everyone comes up with a big fat zero.

[joyceful59]

John

We should get there tomorro! I have everything crossed.
Luck to us all, Joyce

[johnsnorlax]

sent fax in approving sale its only .3333 percent hope we add up to 36 % together good luck to all of us

[joyceful59]

Yes, I want my money back. I think we will!

[thecybertrader]

Hey Joyce,

We've already pledged our shares to support Mr. Lambert via fax yesterday!! As usual, over on RagingBull ragepotato, or whatever his id is, felt he needed to take control of things and told shareholders NOT to send faxes in at the moment so to keep it free for WI holders. You know what, that's just crap!! I sent a 1 page fax with about a paragraph worth of typing and from start to finish the process was probably less than 3 minutes!! I'm quite sure the fax machine will NOT "jam" up! So, I would simply say for shareholders to send in their report WHENEVER you want to!! I'm not sure why ragepotato feels it his job to dictate what folks should and should not do, I mean last time I checked, we still live in America!!

Fax the support letters ANYTIME you feel like doing it folks, just keep it reasonably short, but I have to think the good folks at EYTC won't mind some cheers for their support! These are going to be one fax I'm quite sure they will LOVE to receive!! Joyce, thanks for getting the ball rolling, it needed to be done!!

Luck to us all!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
Yes, all of the above is just my opinion, nothing more...

[mom9947]

Like I said over there,
WOULD YOU BE HAPPY WITH YOUR MONEY BACK????
I sure would. Not 3 to 6 times, just my money back. That'll never happen'
Take care now, Ya hear?

[joyceful59]

Gotta call from a friend. He has faxed in his
approval.

If you want to make your intentions known,

Fax this information to EYTC at [phone].

Percentage working interest you own,
Address you want your packet sent to,
Phone number of the address where the packet will be
sent,
State the fact that you approve of the sale of the
Wyoming thermal project by EYTC,
Sign and date the letter.

Do it now!
Luck to you all, Joyce

[thecybertrader]

Hey Joyce, old & others,

I can only imagine how frustrating this has been for Don!! First, he has people ripping on him for not doing enough (heck, even I was getting a bit frustrated about the lack of communication), then when he finds what appeared to me to be one sweetheart of a deal for Wyoming, a property that was very "unproven", and it gets blocked!!

The thing that REALLY hacks me off, but nobody wanted to talk about it over on RB when I brought it up, is I have to believe there are FAR more folks in favor of this deal than oppose it!! Yet a small group of folks, because they got organized, were able to squash the deal! I just REALLY think we shareholders AND WI holders who are in favor of the Wyoming sale need to band together, show our support for the deal by faxing or mailing letters to EYTC stating we support the deal AND, this is important, in those letters request "copies" be forwarded on to whoever the potential buyer was/is!! They need to see that there is MUCH support for the deal!! I may be wrong, but if we could prove to EYTC and the potential buyers that 80%, 85% or even 90% of those involved ARE in favor of the deal, they MIGHT get over their "cold feet" and we could MAYBE still get Wyoming done??!!

Folks, I absolutely HATE what this small group has done, I think it's disgusting!! Unless they can prove there are other offer(s), there is ONLY one reason to block this current deal, in my opinion that is!! But again, as much as I can't stand what they did, the few behind this mess have shown they are organized and unless the rest of us can do the same, start working together as oppose to what goes on over at RB, the small group of bullies will simply continue with their actions!!

Joyce, I am so sorry to hear about the financial difficulties you are facing at the moment, it's just not right!! You are VERY correct when you say we need to get Frank off the board and then we need to show support for the ONLY Wyoming deal on the table to BOTH, EYTC and the buyer!!

Yes Joyce, I think you should try to get those folks over here, but somebody has to get this "support rally" of ours organized!! I promise I would be 100% behind it, but it would have to be somebody like Shooter, or even you, to bring it to the RB posters (which as much as I don't like it over there, we WOULD need to get some of those folks on board with this) as pretty much anything from me gets squashed over there! I did notice that last night Shooter brought up "trying to get something rolling" and even thought it was pretty much exactly what I had said, folks took it much better from him, that is why I say he may be the person that "most" folks would trust and/or listen to?

So anyway, the silent majority needs to "man up" (or WOMAN up) & "step up" to show our support of Don and EYTC, I don't think we can afford to be passive any longer!! Most of us are nice, decent folks who have been sitting back hoping some good would come, it did, but then it was yanked away! We can't afford to be "nice" anymore, again, in my opinion!!

One last thing, I don't know what the "break up" value of EYTC is, but I can say that USUALLY bankruptcy is a HORRIBLE option for shareholders, who are almost ALWAYS completely wiped out!! As I mentioned in a post last night, I have seen a couple companies declare banruptcy and the shareholders "survive" (Covad Communications is probably the most known), but I just don't know if EYTC could do something so current shareholders would not lose everything "if" they had to file for bankruptcy protection!! But again, it is usually HORRIBLE for shareholders, so I REALLY think we don't want to let that happen!!!

We got to band together folks!!

So, there it is, can we get anything going???

I wish us ALL better days ahead and that this fiasco will one day soon come to a POSITIVE ending!! Take care!!

Stay healthy,

~Cyber
As always, the above is my opinion, nothing more...

[joyceful59]

You guys,

I have 50K of private offering at $2.20. They/we must get Frank off the board. As long as he is there and privy to all communication with buyers, he will and has done everything in his power to upset the deal. My broker says he has spoken to Don on several occasions (cell phone), he is very optomistic but discouraged by the antics of a few of the Frankites who constantly deride him. When all is done, I think he would welcome a new CEO. No one should have to endure the lambasting he has. I will talk to the two Peters and Steve about coming over here. Hopefully the (rages) won't follow!

Good luck, Joyce