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.
Well you already know but I don't know if they made those 70 to 80 Mil revenenues they stated are going to make...GLTY
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sen-williams-leadership-on-advancing-lower-cost-domestically-produced-fuel-network-lauded-2012-01-24?sf3008414=1
This is not going to move anyway till they release the 10Q and 10K..GLTY
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2012/01/gm-general-motors-president-barack-obama-at38t-natural-gas-vans-chevrolet/1?sf3059820=1
That's the strategy they should be working on...Yet to know but with that CC everything will be clear...HOPE...GLTY
Of course R/S isn't the only way to Up-List UBRG beside Ali stated in the PR very CLEAR this......
We're very excited about providing our shareholders with an update on our progress and our plans for the future growth of the Company. When we say we are trying to increase shareholder value, we're not merely giving that lip service. We truly are making plans to increase the value of the Company, our stock price and maximize the wealth of our shareholders, says Universal's Senior Vice President Solomon Ali.
The conference call will focus on plans to up-list to NASDAQ, strategies to increase the Company's stock price to qualify for NASDAQ, improving the Company's capital structure, increasing its market value, a secondary public offering, raising additional capital and other benefits to shareholders.
Using Nat Gas to power more Public Transportation will increase in demand in the future ahead and UBRG will benefit from that Big time in many states are switching Gas and Oil into Nat Gas Trucks and Buses plus more Electric Utilities companies meanning Nat gas will become the first Energy Source in the near Future...Wacht this report from Motley Fool....GLTA
http://www.fool.com/fool/free-report/18/sa-fuelrevolution-audio98-125411.aspx?source=isaspodft0000030
I instsist I don't thing so...There many ways to do that...Not always R/S works That's why they are talking also about a second Public offer...Any way as soon we get into that CC we will know..This interview with Pickens is interesting about nat Gas today in CNBC....
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000069817
Ok but at this stage I don't think they are going to break their promises and when they are trying hardly to move this stock to NASDAQ...Do you image breaking more the investors confidence that's attent aginst the Company growth...Let's put our feet on the ground...I don't really know how they will proceed with the uplisting but I'm sure they will do the best way possible without damaging the investors and the Company..There are many way to increase the value without affecting the share holders and the trust...Have you ever see an stock going from 0.02 to 4.00 or 5.00 or higher bcz i did...That's depend in what type of startegy they will implement and beside they stated in that PR....
Strategic meetings to assist the company in its growth and expansion. The meetings with the investment banks focused on them to provide advisory and consulting services to the Company for potentially up-listing to NASDAQ, strategies to increase their stock price to $4.00 or above to qualify for NASDAQ, improving their capital structure, increase the market value and a secondary public offering to raise $50 million in capital for expansion and acquisitions
I think is a big difference but you said you are not going to get involved in that CC..Maybe all your questions and doubts are clear already but I will bcz i'm involved and long with UBRG and I do care...We can speculate from now on without having a real picture where UBRG stand on...There is many ways UBRG can increase the share value without R/S and CBIS did that back in December2010 without affecting their shareholders.We should listen first what they proposed and then we'll take actions (Buy or Sell)
Could be but at least for more than a year they didn't give us this oportunity i don't know how is gona be but for sure they will tell us when they release the date and time.GLTY
Krysti are you playing in both games bcz is that the case i wouldn't investing in both when you claim these are scams.I think isn't wise to put money in both knowing you are going to lose money right?..GLTY
BofA Continues To Fall In U.S. Mortgage Lender Rankings
Jan 26 (Reuters) - Bank of America Corp was the fourth-biggest U.S. mortgage lender in the fourth quarter of 2011, continuing its descent in the rankings after it stopped buying loans made by smaller banks.
The second-largest U.S. bank in 2008 became the biggest mortgage originator after buying Countrywide Financial, but it has been gradually paring back the business as it copes with losses from the disastrous acquisition.
Citigroup Inc moved ahead of Bank of America in the fourth quarter, with about $23 billion in mortgage loans, slightly ahead of Bank of America's $22.4 billion in loans, according to data released Thursday by industry publication Inside Mortgage Finance.
Wells Fargo & Co remained the largest mortgage originator by far, making $120 billion in loans. That meant it made 30 percent of al loans in the quarter, up from about 27 percent in the third quarter.
JPMorgan Chase & Co was the second-biggest lender in the quarter, with about $42 billion in loans.
In October, Bank of America said it was exiting correspondent lending by year's end, stripping out about half of its production as it focused on making loans directly to its own customers. The bank now has about 6 percent market share, less than the 7.8 percent it held in 2007 before buying Countrywide.
That acquisition, which brought to the banks loads of bad loans and related lawsuits, has not worked out on two fronts for Bank of America, said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance.
"Not only are they looking to abandon the servicing side of the business, they're looking to abandon the origination platform," he said.
While the bank is missing out on newer loans made under stricter underwriting standards, decreasing its profile in the mortgage business is likely good for its stock price, he said. "It will be welcomed by shareholders and analysts," Cecala said.
After falling 58 percent in 2011, Bank of America's shares are up more than 30 percent this year. (Reporting By Rick Rothacker; Editing by Maureen Bavdek)
Public Citizen, Other Groups Call For U.S. To Break Up Bank Of America
* Public Citizen, academics say BofA poses "grave threat"
* Ask regulators to proactively reform Bank of America
* Petition's impact unclear; Fed, Treasury decline comment
By Rick Rothacker
Jan 25 (Reuters) - A group of consumer advocates, academics and economists want to end "too-big-to-fail" banks, starting with Bank of America Corp.
The group, led by onsumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, plans to file a petition with the Federal Reserve Board and other regulators on Wednesday asking them to carve the bank into simpler, safer pieces.
The Fed and the coalition of regulators known as the Financial Stability Oversight Council have the authority to take such action under the Dodd-Frank financial reform law passed in 2010, the group said.
Nearly two dozen professors and groups have joined the effort.
It's not clear how much effect the petition will have, and some community groups have declined to sign on.
However, the petition is a dramatic criticism of regulators who have so far done little to shrink giant banks after the 2007-2009 financial crisis.
"Bank of America currently poses a grave threat to U.S. financial stability by any reasonable definition of that phrase," the 24-page petition said.
It said Bank of America, the nation's second-largest bank, is too large and complex, and that its financial condition could deteriorate rapidly at any moment, potentially causing the market to lose confidence in the bank.
"An ensuing run on the bank could cause a devastating financial crisis," the petition said.
David Arkush, director of Public Citizen's Congress Watch division, said a lot of the group's concerns apply to other large banks, but that Bank of America is the institution most exposed to the housing crisis.
"Regulators need to get ahead of this and act proactively to reform Bank of America," Arkush said.
Bank of America has had a tough time emerging from the financial crisis, particularly because of mortgage losses tied to its 2008 Countrywide Financial purchase.
The bank's stock slid 58 percent last year as investors expressed disappointment with the speed of a turnaround and fear about the bank's ability to comply with new capital rules.
Bank of America has fared better this year. It reported improved capital levels in its fourth-quarter earnings report last week, and its stock has risen 31 percent since the start of the year.
Arkush said he doesn't expect regulators to immediately act on the group's petition.
Dodd-Frank includes mechanisms for regulators to break up large financial firms, but it includes high hurdles for such action.
Bank of America, the Fed and the Treasury declined to comment on the planned petition.
Some community groups decided to pass on signing the entreaty. Janis Bowdler, an official with the National Council of La Raza, said the letter was distributed on a list-serve for a coalition called Americans for Financial Reform, but her group decided not to join up.
"I don't want to downplay the concerns that were raised," said Bowdler, "but for now, a strong housing market and cleaning up Countrywide is the priority for us."
NCLR is a national Hispanic civil rights organization. It receives financial support from Bank of America.
The Center for Responsible Lending, which has been critical of banks for mortgage lending practices, has also declined to participate. CRL president Mike Calhoun declined comment.
Bank of America was one of the large banks that received a government bailout during the financial crisis. It paid back the $45 billion in 2009, but analysts say it still needs more capital to absorb mortgage-related losses and to meet new international standards. (Reporting By Rick Rothacker; Additional reporting by Dave Clarke in Washington and David Henry in New York; Editing by Phil Berlowitz)
Good Point and you will get involved too in that conference call right?...We need people like you with a well knowledge of this matter...GLTY
I hope Joro will get into that conference call too.I don't want to hear excuses bcz this is what we all had been asking for...GLTA
Why you aren't?..This is the chance for everybody to ask questions and clarify all our doubts..GLTY
Are the rest of the states going to do the same thing(smart move)....GLTA
http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/12/0125/2252/?sf3015319=1
Do you know when 10Q for the 4th Quarter and the 10K will be out by any chance?...GLTY
Hey Joro Why you don't give UBRG a litlle break?..We should wait and give them a vote of trust at least till 10K comes out..I think....ok...GLTY
Let me tell you in Walgreen Drug store close to my house in Florida they are selling the BLUE ecigarrete and another I don't remember now bzc i never heard that one is something like Fantasy or fantastic i think so...GLTY
I was doing some DD and I found this info and I would like to look foward to get close in how much UBRG made from the 2.5 Billion BCF sale...
Based on the August 29, 2011 NYMEX price of, $3.81 per mcf, the 1,500,000 to 2,500,000 mcf of natural gas would have an estimated value of $5.71 to $9.52 million.
My question is...What price they sold the 2.5Bil?...Could be over 3.81 or under?...Are they selling at 2011 lock price or at today's price?...That's make a big diff in their revenues bcz the huge amount they claimed was sold today..Today's price is around $2.72....Any Thought?...GLTA
Yeah but they stated in the pr that will take up to 90 days to clear ubrg from dtc..But if they move the stock to Nasdaq maybe the could rescind that chill..GLTY
This maybe will answer our question...If they Lock the price with this huge amount sold UBRG will be in a right position...Think about it...Any thought?....GLTY
The Company had indicated in several news releases its projected sales forecasts for 2011 could be in the $75 – $100 million range. When we made those forecasts last August, the NYMEX futures price of natural gas was around $4.20 per mcf or MMBtu, currently it’s around $3.00, or a decline of 29%. That means if you sold one million mcf of gas at $4.20 that would result in revenues of $4.2 million, however at $3.00 that would result in revenues of $3.0 million. Fortunately, most of our prices were locked in earlier in the year. When our annual report is filed for 2011, we still believe we should be close to the lower end of that projected target range due to the continued strong increases in our sales volumes of natural gas. We are still bullish on natural gas and feel we are prepared to adapt to the changes in the market for our long term success.
This is a great news and the question will be How much money they make with this huge sell?...GLTA
UBRG.QB..http://www.marketwatch.com/story/universal-bioenergy-announces-sales-of-253-billion-cubic-feet-of-natural-gas-in-january-2012-01-25
This info is important to know about the chill...
http://www.sec.gov/news/otherwebcasts/2011/microcaproundtable101711.shtml
Ok thanks i'm not allow for private msg..
Yeah but that will take several month to be completed..I hope they could reach any decision between April and May due May is the best month for the stock to spike...Although i don't like the idea of the S/P...They stated in the PR the revenue for 2011 from 70 to 80 mil.I think they are around 75 mil not to bad for a choppy year ...Your thought?...GLTY
I forgot to paste...It's done in my previous post...You can edit in the main page now right?...
I will wait till this go down to 0.001 to buy some bcz UBRG is becoming a worthless junk stock...No news from the NYC meeting that is bad news...Ali and Guest I think you are done...Bye Bye Baby...
Why this selloff is UBRG going to bankrupt or Ali and Guest are selling their shares...Any thought guys
THIS IS WHY I INSIST COAL IS NOT A GOOD INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE....
Cornell vs. Cornell: Turns out shale gas emissions really are lower than coal
A Cornell University study came out last spring with what many thought was an unbelievable finding that lifecycle emissions from shale gas could be higher than those of coal.
A subsequent Cornell University study has shown that finding really was unbelievable.
This subsequent study, recently published by Professor Lawrence Cathles and his colleagues at Cornell, criticizes the methodology and findings of last year’s study by Cornell Professor Robert Howarth and his colleagues.
In the journal Climatic Change (where the first study by Howarth was published), Cathles lays out several fundamental errors that led Howarth to unreliable conclusions about the emissions from shale gas production:
“[Howarth et al.’s] analysis is seriously flawed in that they significantly overestimate the fugitive emissions associated with unconventional gas extraction, undervalue the contribution of “green technologies” to reducing those emissions to a level approaching that of conventional gas, base their comparison between gas and coal on heat rather than electricity generation (almost the sole use of coal), and assume a time interval over which to compute the relative climate impact of gas compared to coal that does not capture the contrast between the long residence time of CO2 and the short residence time of methane in the atmosphere.”
By “using more reasonable” data, Cathles and his colleagues confirm that “gas has less than half and perhaps a third the greenhouse impact as coal. Since gas also possesses other important emission advantages such as no particulates, SO2, NO2, or ash, it is clearly the ‘cleaner’ option in comparison to coal.”
Researchers at Carnegie Mellon came to a similar conclusion back in August in their study on the emissions from Marcellus Shale production. Their study found that preproduction emissions “are not substantial contributors to the life cycle estimates” – making Marcellus Shale gas essentially the same as conventional natural gas, which emits about 50 percent fewer emissions than coal when used for power generation.
Clearly, Howarth’s flawed findings about shale gas emissions were the anomaly. But you wouldn’t have known it from the media coverage. Howarth’s study received an avalanche of coverage, including articles in the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal. Their stories fueled critics of hydraulic fracturing throughout the summer.
Meanwhile, the major news outlets that covered the Howarth study largely ignored Carnegie Mellon’s, which only garnered the attention of local outlets like the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and West Virginia Gazette.
We weren’t the only ones who noticed this glaring disparity in how the media covered the two studies. Surveying U.S. media coverage on hydraulic fracturing, George Mason University professor Robert Lichter found that, by a ratio of 12 to 1, major media outlets reported on the negative Cornell study while ignoring Carnegie Mellon’s.
We’ve called out some of the deficiencies in coverage of shale gas issues by some media outlets before. Even the public editor of the New York Times said one of the Times’ stories about shale gas was “out on a limb” with questionable sourcing and little context.
Just last week, however, the Cathles research showing lower emissions for shale gas did receive some attention – but mainly because Howarth issued a response saying he stands by his findings.
Cathles isn’t the only one who has refuted Howarth’s findings. Check out this report from the experts at IHS CERA for analysis of the flaws in Howarth’s approach, plus more details about how natural gas wells are drilled. Take a look at the Carnegie Mellon study as well.
And by all means read the research by Professor Cathles at Cornell. His findings are the latest in the mounting evidence that Howarth’s “seriously flawed” study was the exception, not the rule.
WHITE HOUSE RECOGNIZES NATURAL GAS AS ECONOMIC ENGINE
It's a real motivator in our push toward a clean energy future when others recognize the benefits of natural gas and endorse the opportunities it provides. And there may be no greater endorsement in this country than when it comes directly from the White House.
To that end, the Obama administration released a 16-page report, "Investing in America: Building an Economy That Lasts," on how this nation can build an economy "that lasts." And in doing so the White House makes a stirring endorsement of natural gas.
"The surge in domestic natural gas production can lower energy costs, reduce pollution and drive investment in the industries that supply equipment to the natural gas sector and those that use natural gas as an input to production," the report says.
The administration has seized on the discovery of new natural gas resources and the development of hydraulic fracturing techniques since the last decade as factors that have "led to rapidly growing domestic production and relatively low domestic prices for households and downstream industrial users."
And the White House sees the environmental benefits as well, labeling natural gas as "the cleanest and least carbon-intensive for electric power generation."
The natural gas community shares the Obama administration's stated desire to ensure that natural gas continues to be produced in a safe and responsible way. That is a central commitment of our companies. Thanks to the many benefits of responsible natural gas production, our nation does not have to choose between economic growth and environmental stewardship.
We "must make investments that will equip our workers to compete effectively in the global economy, today and tomorrow," the report says. And indeed it is true that the kind of recovery the White House is talking about can start with natural gas.
When Ali or Guest are going to release any news in regards of NYC meeting...With who they meet with?...Any agreement with new Financial Institution or Private Investors?...Any result of the intention to be listed in NYSE or NASDAQ stocks?..When the 10Q for the 4th Quarter and the 10K for 2011 will be released?...GLTA
This is from Post 10093..
Let me confirm what i told you early why i don't like Coal...GLTY
New Gas Generation
Declining power prices may also make it unprofitable for utilities to install pollution controls on older coal-fired plants, adding to the wave of plant closures that are expected to result from new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rules over the next two to three years, Pruitt said.
As much as 90 gigawatts of new generation, enough capacity to light 72 million homes and businesses, will be needed by 2015 to replace retiring coal plants and meet electricity demand, according to a November 30 research report by Hugh Wynne, an analyst at investment bank Sanford C. Bernstein.
Cheap gas makes it difficult for rival forms of fuel to compete, said Sam Brothwell, a senior utility analyst with Bloomberg Industries, in a telephone interview. Historically, gas-fired generators have been the least expensive to build, offset by a higher fuel cost, Brothwell said. With gas falling below $3, "it makes all other forms of producing electricity look less competitive by comparison," he said.
Joro maybe you didn't read this news and Cheasepeake is the second Nat Gas supply company in the USA..meaning the price will spike soon (Today's closed at 2.58)for two reason...read these articles...what's your tought?...GLTY
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-23/chesapeake-energy-to-cut-rig-count-to-24-new-wells-for-2012.html
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46101106
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-tout-natural-gas-benefits-004015735.html
I think this is good for UBRG too...Nat Gas in spotlight tomorrow...GLTY
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama-tout-natural-gas-benefits-004015735.html
I'm sorry but i desagree with you my friend...Nat Gas price is at 10 years low and many Electric utilities switch from Oil to Nat Gas beside in the West Coast are building heavy Duty Equipments like Trucks,Buses wich run with Nat Gas (From Pickens Website and NGVA Sites... http://www.ngvc.org/ .Even in the Thirth World they already are using Nat Gas in their cars with some kind of modification like in Dominican Republic.With the slow demand for Coal in the near future i don't think UBRG will make any profit or Big Revenues from that.I do beleive they should diversify the source That's why I think LNG/CNG are going to drive the Company to make profits in the near term...This is my thought...GLTY
I'm a feeling that this agreement for UBRG is nothing than diversify the energy source but with Congrees pushing for more cleanning energy to be use instead Coal I will prefer investing in LNG bcz in the near future Europe and Asia will need more Nat Gas and UBRG could be in the position to sale at higher price and make profits..Otherwise UBRG is betting on Luck..China want to increase their imports of Nat Gas to get rid of those Coal Electric Company to reduce the contamination of CO2..China is the worse contaminated Country in the world.I hope Sr.Ali and Sr.Guest think about it instead of wasting money in and near obsolete Energy...Any though?...GLTA
I'm waiting for a PR in wich they release any news in regards those meeting in NYC...W'll see...GLTY