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.
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.
Time for some one who shall remain nameless (LOL) to dump a few million more shares on us at the close?
"is there anybody, anyway to trust any stock in the friggen world or what? "
That is the real question, as I see no reason to trust the short writer either. In fact his point that the SAIC document can be faked, makes me wonder about the authenticity of any of the short writers posted SAIC documents!!!! In other words, I think he shot himself in the foot shorting Harbin, and admitting it, while trying to post versions of SAIC reports, and asking which one is the fake? How do we know he did not fake them?
We are all frustrated, but some things take more time than others, and the Lafarge MVTG pilot plant is one of those. Most people do not realize how much design work (and time) goes into designing a pilot chemical plant. While the MVTG reactor design itself is complete and has been tested, and the reactor capacity can be scaled up by adding duplicate modules in parallel, the infrastructure design at Lafarge to capture, purify and feed CO2 at LaFarge to the MVTG reactor, pilot plant utility supply design, etc., is/was not ready.
The first pilot plant always seems to take forever (I am speaking from experience). This one is, will be no exception. In this case they also had to deal with funding the pilot plant costs and day to day expenses, and the design work for the support systems (CO2 capture....) which also creates a chicken or egg syndrome issue as well.
So it really seems like it IS taking forever. But Rome was not built in day. While I might wish Larry passed out more frequent PR updates, there is little we can do about it, but wait, and in the past most of the fluff PRs, have had little effect on the stock price or volume.
So, in the current case I think you have it backwards, the last 4 months or so they have been "no talk", and all action (but it has been behind the scenes action), versus "all talk and no action".
But until we have a PR, or PR's from MVTG directly all we can do is wait, or pack our bags and move on.
I choose to wait!
Sorry to hear that. Some things are just taking longer to do than we all expected. This never really was one for day trading or short term gains. It has always been a long term play. Nothing other than the wait time has changed here. The low volume is because most people that buy this one never sell. That also makes for huge spread in a news vacuum.
But if you have not sold yet, I would suggest waiting just a little longer.
Not too many wells around at 22,000 feet to compare this one to that I know of?
Will the real "liars" please step forward!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/289550-harbin-electric-who-allegedly-doctored-saic-reports?source=email_global_markets
This article should affect us all, even SCEI! Put on your rally caps!
Will the real "liars" please step forward!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/289550-harbin-electric-who-allegedly-doctored-saic-reports?source=email_global_markets
This article should affect us all, even JGBO!
Will the real "liars" please step forward!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/289550-harbin-electric-who-allegedly-doctored-saic-reports?source=email_global_markets
This article should affect us all, even CRTP! Put on your rally caps!
Will the real "liars" please step forward!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/289550-harbin-electric-who-allegedly-doctored-saic-reports?source=email_global_markets
This article should affect us all, even CCME! Put on your rally caps!
Will the real "liars" please step forward!
http://seekingalpha.com/article/289550-harbin-electric-who-allegedly-doctored-saic-reports?source=email_global_markets
This article should affect us all, even ABAT! Put on your rally caps!
I already got a reply to my email!
Marc says it has already "been handled"..."just takes a few weeks for their system to update the status".
Gerry told me about 6 months ago that this well is mostly dry NG, little if any CO2 (or said another way, not going to have a CO2 problem, or acidic gas problem as far as they can tell so far), and no problems with HS gases based on the current data (pre frac). That is of course all pre-frac data. But so far they bought hardware assuming there would be problems with acid gas corrosion just be safe, which is one of the reasons the well was so costly, as it was the first one, and an unknown. Future wells would be a lot cheaper.
My sources tell me that MNLU can make good money on this well at $4 and can survive on NG prices as low as $3.
Add to that the fact that they have been in the product development mode for about 11 years, and have only issued about 50 millions shares in that time, as they have kept expenses way down, and now they have issued patents even in China, and multiple license deals under way on the detonation cycle engines with huge firms in the east, China and Japan (one in China is owned by Mitsubishi in Japan IIRC), and now the hydrogen generator marketing deal, all of which are real hardware, not smoke and mirrors, and not vapor ware or perpetual motions BS, this is a great price and time to buy. IIRC the price has never fallen under .10/share in 11 years! It was up at 70 cents about 18 months ago!!!
Only reason we are on sale so cheap here is the market wide fear (as you mentioned), and the lack of any actual revenue so far, and a 6 month slow news cycle we just emerged from with TTEG. But I have seen similar firms command a market cap of 3-10 times this one's in similar situations.
I spent well over an hour on the phone with Marc about 6 weeks ago. So you can drop the no response act. I am emailing him now.
????? Why post that here? Why not email Mark directly?
They have proven reserves (assets) in Louisiana that are valued at about 10 times the current debt, so unlike DUNR which has huge massive debts and interest payments, this one is not going under, or walking away. The BP well will get fracked and connected. The only unanswered question is what will the financing cost.
If we get just a little bit lower, like .15/share, I will be selling the ranch and loading the second boat here!
Eco is not selling!!!!
I doubt that very seriously. In fact I doubt it will fall past .15, if it even gets that low. At .20/share it is already down to a market cap of only 16 million dollars. Some of the Lousianna properties are valued at about about 43 million dollars alone according to a valuation study they had done about 12 months ago.
Post away, I am still waiting for my orders at .005 to fill!!!
LOL, note that I am trying to be optimistic, LOL.
While it could still drift lower, this is a pretty good bargain here. I hope you all have been buying here and not selling here, as this price puts a market cap on MNLU of about 16 million dollars, which is nearly what they spent on drilling the one BP #1 well this year, much less all the other value the company holds in leases.
I really don't know if I can BEAR this any longer!!!!!
It is getting un-BEARable,
LOL
LOL, and yesterday you were pissed at me!!!
LOL
I think it is time we sent him on a hunting trip with Dick Cheney. Buy him a one way ticket.
Actually I am the one that crashed it, by not buying shares until they dropped under .01!
ROFLMA
You need to go back and read the last 30 months of PRs, they have major deals already in place, several in China (for small motorcycle, medium sized truck, and huge mining operation engines, like 5000 HP) and one in Japan. They also have a pending (but delayed) merger deal with a China parts OEM company that is already profitable.
I would rather buy here at .22 than in a few weeks at .3 or .4/share. Does that answer the question?
Or they plan to ram rod the merger finally to enable funding? It has occurred to me that some funding offers may want to see the merger agreed to by stock holders of both companies before they fund a JV? Either way, it sounds bullish right now.
The first thing he needs to do is hire an accountant or learn how to do real accounting. The EGOH financial statements he submitted are absolute BS. The last 2 quarterlies don't even look like the same outfit, and there is no path information as to how they got from one to the other. I can't even tell what all the liabilities are, or what liabilities were added or eliminated. That last quarterly is a joke! I don't see how any credible organization could do business with an outfit like this?
From my email inbox late today (see the quote below) This reminds me that Gerry and I chatted about our shared opinion that the shallow wells, ones close to drinking water, and near municipal operations that are being drilled my MNLU NG Shale competitors are likely to have some obstacles thrown in their path (see the details below), while the BV field and well is so deep Over 4 miles IIRC), is not going to be a horizontal frac, and is so remote, that no one will bother us. Their loss, could be our gain!!!!!
Fulbright Litigation Briefing - Shale and Hydraulic Fracturing Task Force
West Virginia Issues New Gas Fracking Rules
Visit Practice Site • Learn About the Task Force • Read Article Online • Subscribe • Contact Us • Unsubscribe
On August 22, 2011, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (“WVDEP”)—pursuant to Governor Ray Tomblin’s Executive Order 4-11, issued July 12, 2011— promulgated emergency rules related to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (see July 29, 2011, Fulbright Litigation Briefing “West Virginia Executive Order Regulates Drilling in the Marcellus Shale”).
The new emergency rules concern permitting requirements and operational procedures of horizontal wells, requiring operators to provide extensive information and follow new regulations for those wells. Some of the information required by and regulations to be enforced under the new rules relate to erosion and sediment control, site construction and safety, well construction and casing, and water management in certain circumstances. The new rules also require operators to follow certain operational rules to protect water quality and quantity and to provide public notice before drilling a first horizontal Marcellus Shale well on any pad located within a municipality, as that term is defined by statute. According to news reports, the West Virginia Secretary of State still must approve the rules before they become effective, after which they will remain in effect for 15 months.
More, specifically, the new WVDEP rule:
* Requires certified and detailed erosion and sediment control plans to be submitted with applications for well work permits involving well sites that disturb three acres or more, which plans will be considered conditions of the permit and, therefore, enforceable;
* Requires well work permit applications for sites that disturb three or more acres to be accompanied by a detailed site construction plan certified by a registered professional engineer, which plan will be considered conditions of the permit and, therefore, enforceable;
* Requires applications for well work permits to estimate the volume of water that will be used (in the drilling, fracturing, or stimulation phases), and if in excess of 210,000 gallons during any month, file a detailed water management plan, which must include a list of the anticipated additives for the fracing/stimulation process, and a list of the actual additives used must be submitted with the completion report required by statute (the rules specifically state that their requirements do not abrogate the statutory requirements that apply to water withdrawals in excess of 750,000 gallons per month);
* Requires applications for well work permits for sites that disturb three or more acres to include a detailed well-site safety plan for the protection of those on the site, as well as the general public and the environment, which must be provided to local emergency planning committees at least seven days before earth disturbance;
o The well-site safety plan must include, among other things, an evacuation plan for personnel and residents in the area surrounding the well site who have the potential to be affected by an emergency;
o The well-site safety plan also requires that the Operator list all schools and public facilities, including telephone numbers, within a one-mile radius of the proposed well;
o The rules also require, as part of the safety plan section, that an Operator conduct weekly on-site safety meetings where all personnel must check-in and out, and logs of those meetings must be maintained on-site;
* Requires operators to comply with various prescribed operational and reporting rules related to quantity, location, methodology, identification, record-keeping, transportation, drill cuttings, and casing standards to protect the quantity and quality of water in surface and groundwater systems during and after drilling operations and during production and reclamation; and
* Requires well operators to comply with prescribed public notice procedures for certain wells within municipalities, as that term is statutorily defined.
The WVDEP emergency rule is a timely one. On August 12, 2011, Monongalia County Circuit Court Judge Susan Tucker invalidated Morgantown, West Virginia’s ban on Marcellus shale gas drilling in the city and its environs on the grounds that the ordinance was preempted by the state’s comprehensive regulatory scheme (see August 16, 2011, Fulbright Litigation Briefing “Morgantown City Ban On Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling Overturned”).
Review the rules on the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection website.
View Fulbright's Briefing online.
This article was prepared by Jeremy A. Mercer (jmercer@fulbright.com or 724 416 0440) and Cecil C. Kuhne III (ckuhne@fulbright.com or 214 855 8122) from Fulbright's Litigation Department.
Learn more about Fulbright’s Shale and Hydraulic Fracturing Task Force at www.fulbright.com/shale.
That report, and the numbers look nothing like the prior one. Something smells rank and vial here.
I find it very interesting, and possibly telling that the time extension for the merger with AEXP announced today, was only a two month extension this time, not 3,4 or 6 months. I probably would not have done that unless I was nearly ready to mail out the proxy's?
I got the impression that we would not get any major PR news real soon. That does not mean we wont get an update on the merger extension. Hard to put a target date on anything, but Gerry did say he still had hopes of having the BP well online producing gas and cash flow by year end this year, if that helps. He also said that they already had a fracing crew and equipment already on call for a moments notice to start work once a financing deal was completed. So recent posts here that there is, or will be a 6 month waiting list to get a fracing crew and equipment, after financing are BS according to Gerry.
Actually it should put more pressure on a move to switch from Nuclear power to Natural gas, so for us it may help move investment in MNLU!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/24/quake-usa-nuclear-dominion-idUSN1E77M1N320110824
HOUSTON/NEW YORK, Aug 23 (Reuters) - The largest earthquake to hit the East Coast of the United States in 67 years raised concerns on Tuesday about the safety of the country's nuclear power plants.
The 5.8 magnitude quake's epicenter was just a few miles from the two-reactor North Anna nuclear power plant operated by Dominion Resources (D.N) in Mineral, Virginia, 80 miles southwest of Washington.
The plant lost power and automatically halted operations after the quake. While a Dominion spokesman reported no "major" damage to the facility, three diesel generators were required to kick in and keep the reactors' radioactive cores cool. A fourth diesel unit failed.
While nuclear power plants can operate safely on back-up power, failure of generators was a key reason for the disaster at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant after a 9.0 magnitude quake and tsunami in March.
"Nuclear power plants lose a significant margin of safety when they're forced to rely on these emergency back-up systems," said Paul Gunter, director of reactor oversight at Beyond Nuclear, an anti-nuclear lobby group.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) said North Anna's shutdown was safe and posed no risk to the public. It wasn't clear when off-site power could be restored or when the 1806-megawatt plant, which remained on alert, could restart.
Dominion spokesman Jim Norvelle said the plant was designed to withstand an earthquake of up to 6.2 in magnitude.
But some experts expressed concern about the narrow margin between the design metrics and the quake's size.
"It was uncomfortably close to design basis," said Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists, which has pushed for stronger nuclear regulations.
"If Fukushima wasn't a wake-up call, this really needs to be to get the NRC and industry moving to do seismic reviews of all the nuclear power plants in the country."
Tuesday's quake, which was felt along the East Coast as far north as Canada, was the region's largest since a 5.9 quake hit New York State in 1944.
North Anna's reactors are among 27 east of the Rockies that the NRC highlighted during a seismic review last year as presenting a potential hazard, due to the amount of ground-shaking they were designed to withstand.
Twelve other nuclear plants along the Eastern Seaboard declared an "unusual event" following the quake, the lowest of the NRC's emergency classification ratings. North Anna's "alert" status is one step further up on a four-step U.S. emergency scale.
READY OR NOT?
Many nuclear experts say plants in the United States were designed with big margins of error built in, but last year's NRC survey found that the risks posed by earthquakes were higher than previously thought.
And Victor Gilinsky, who was an NRC commissioner at the time of the Three Mile Island nuclear disaster in Pennsylvania in 1979, said that he was concerned that safety at plants like North Anna were not being reviewed as understanding of earthquakes increases.
"It is important to review the seismic design of the plant in terms of current knowledge," he said "Instead, the NRC has been relicensing plants without any real safety review - they do not question any of the original licensing conditions, they only check to see whether the plant has a program to deal with old equipment. It's an irresponsible approach."
Even a pig should never say never!
Stock will never see .40 again
Gold is down nearly $100 from the high this week! That is probably why mining is down. Today is a lesson in diversification my young Jedi!
They are still shaking the bushes so to speak.
I got the impression a JV was currently the most likely path, all considered, but I think they are juggling multiple options, including multiple JV deal options. One thing was cleared up for me, and that was Guggenheim. Seems they will (or at least they will consider) a further JV deal (with a line of credit, loans, like last time) but only once the current well is in production, thus converting the reserves status to "PROVEN" reserves.
Seems they only loan money (like they did before) against proven (I think that was the key word?) reserves, the BP #1 well is not yet proven, not until it has actually produced in such a way to establish a proven reserve, which is what they need some of the current funding for, to finish this well.
Chicken or egg problem, the which came first deal. So I got the impression Guggenheim might JV or loan money, or both(?) for additional wells, expansion, once the first well is proven.
I suspect an outright bank loan is not possible at this time for obvious reasons. Needs to be an investment bank, VC, JV deal or the like near as I can tell at this time.
Just a reminder, that there was PR about 10 months ago that MNLU was worth a good 50 cents/share (liquidated) based just on proven reserves in Louisiana, and that was at old oil and gas prices from about 12 months ago. So current prices are a steal here.
Par for the course, typical with this stock. I have been in this one for a good 2 years, maybe a little longer now. It takes a while to buy cheap, and a while to sell higher (not much good for day trading), but I am accumulating for the long haul on this one. I am not selling at anything under .30/share, as they have too many irons in the fire, and it is way over sold here.