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.
So it looks like Signal Hire gets it’s info from LinkedIn but it is not updated in real time.
Sorry, RKT, but I do not recall anything about Kosmos being awarded a differnt block in the EEZ as a result of the arbitration. Do you have a link?
Thanks.
.
OK, I see that your source is the latest ERHC 8K, but that is part of the problem. That 8K only addresses the ERHC v. Total arbitration but says nothing of the ERHC v. Kosmos arbitration.
Yes, on August 15, 2018, it was decided in the ERHC v. Total arbitration that ERHC was the 100% owner of Block 4 as of October 17, 2017, but in July of 2019 another arbitration proceeding ruled that ERHC had given Kosmos the right to purchase Block 4 prior to that date. And so we still have no clarity as to just what will become of Block 4 and what ERHC's position with respect to the block will be.
.
I’ve noticed LinkedIn profiles appear differently depending on the device you are using. On my phone it only shows her experience thru 2015 but in my laptop it shows everything. Except TriCascade.
Interesting. If we are trusting LinkedIn profiles, then Cher Henton is gone but Sonny Wang is back and/or never left?
https://www.linkedin.com/in/bizgetter/
.
As others have mentioned, the DS-10 drill ship is still on location at the Graff-1 well in Namibia, so drilling in the EEZ is unlikely to begin this week.
Could you post a link to where the Kosmos attorney called Block 4 "the jewel of the EEZ"? I don't recall seeing that and would like to read that bit of encouraging news.
I did find this article about attorney Daniel Charest, which I believe has been posted on this board before, where it says that Kosmos won the arbitration, as was also reported by AEI. What is the source of your information that says differently?
Among other significant victories, in July 2019 Charest worked on a litigation team that obtained an international arbitration ruling in favor of the firm's client, Dallas-based Kosmos Energy. The January 2019 arbitration in London secured deep-water drilling rights off the coast of Africa and resulted in a multimillion-dollar award. In addition to the London arbitration, Charest led related litigation involving subsidiaries in Houston.
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/daniel-charest-named-attorney-of-the-year-by-texas-lawyer-301134016.html
.
You are correct, Opus. PN has been advocating for Africa's governments to update their PSC terms for many years.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/low-oil-prices-highfalutin-pscs-peter-ntephe/
.
PSC's are agreements between governments and oil companies and not between oil companies themselves. Changing PSC terms would require the governments to update their laws and if a PSC was signed, at the very least, it would be disclosed by the country involved.
.
The latest patent application has received a non-final rejection, with the examiner determining that it did not pass the "obviousness" test. As with the previous non-final rejection, TriCascade will have three months to file an appeal response.
#2. Concept Is Too Obvious
You’re not allowed to patent a process or machine that’s already easy for someone to figure out on their own. This determination is also an opinion of the USPTO. Your invention needs to be unique from prior art, as the more unique it is, the more likely it will be approved. A key test is how much the new product differs in features and functions from existing patents. If the examiner cannot cite prior art, then your invention should be considered non-obvious.
https://www.globalpatentsolutions.com/blog/2019/02/reasons-application-rejected/
.
PN shows up a couple of times in this recent publication (pages 42-45). Nothing to do with ERHC, specifically, but it is always interesting to see signs of life.
https://panafricanvisions.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/PAV.-Edition-40-vol-3-January-2022.pdf
.
From the last Q...
4. To strengthen our management we are very pleased to announce the appointment of Ms. Cher Henton as our new Vice President, Business Development. Ms. Henton will be based in Bellevue, Washington state to be within a few minutes of both T-Mobile USA and Microsoft. Ms. Henton is the owner of WiTest, Inc., a consulting firm specializing in innovative cellular product introduction and approvals within US Mobile Operators. and offers sales and business development strategy. She is an Expert Opinion writer and Certifying Engineer for FCC submissions and Cellular Network Performance Testing services. Ms Henton has a combined 11 years of engineering experience with TMobile and Agilent Technologies
She did have Tri Cascade listed in her profile, previously, so, yes, she is just another name to add to that list.
.
Well, it appears that Cher Henton did not stick around long...
https://www.linkedin.com/in/cherrowland/
.
The USPTO has updated the status of the patent application to “Abandoned” because TriCascade did not offer any response to the rejection notice.
Note, it is a published application not a published patent.
.
Is SRMX still involved here? The absence of the Halo/autonomous vehicle language from the June 30 highlights which were added between the 1-A and the 1-A/A (and -POS) is conspicuous.
.
TEN for the W; NYJ for the L. Thanks.
The LAM settlement and the Fang settlement are seperate actions. The creditors in the LAM settlement are companies that Max owed money to for product development. The Fang settlement relates to breach of contract related to loans he made to TriCascade.
The 400M could be another tranche of shares to LAM but, at current market prices, it would be way more shares than necessary to pay off the $95K that remained due per the last financials.
.
Don’t think it would be Max/Alan shares since they are unrestricted. But, yeah, they may be settlement shares.
400M shares added to the OS yesterday. Without the 1-A POS being qualified, is someone paying $0.001 for shares?
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/SRMX/security
.
What find in Namibia?
Maybe that’s why he has trouble getting/staying Pink Current since OTC disclosure requirements state that companies should report material events within 4 business days.
And if he is sitting on purchase order news, or any other news that would make the stock more attractive while he is trying to raise funds, then he really does have no clue how to run a public company.
.
Thanks, but not a subscriber. Does it give a resource estimate for Jaca-1?
Thanks for posting this, Krom, however, the article says nothing about a find. It only states what Shell hopes to find in the Graff-1 well based on geological studies.
It would be interesting to see a similar article about the potential size of the Jaca-1 play in Block 6.
.
Yes, I have done my own DD (!, lol) and am aware of that document. Funny, though, I don't see anywhere in it where Max says he, "will only reveal thinned when he’s good and ready". As a matter of fact, it says, "We will continue to report on the progress of our development projects and sales achievements in a general way...".
Most would consider a large PO to be a "sales achievement", I would think.
.
Link please to where Max said he "...will only reveal thinned [things?] when he’s good and ready...".
Thanks.
.
In any case, I believe any amendment needs to be qualified prior to commencement of sales thereunder.
Perhaps they filed the wrong form before. Maybe a 1-A/A should be used prior to Qualification while a 1-A POS (insert joke here?) is used for post-qualification amendments.
And no clue on the jurisdictions. The 1-A and 1-A/A also said Connecticut and New York. Prior 1-A's said Colorado and New York. Not sure if it really means anything.
.
My understanding is that any buyer of the 1-A (now AA) shares would just need to find a broker willing to take the certs so they could become tradable. So while that proved impossible for regular folk like Jon, I’m sure the major buyers like GPL Ventures or Tri-Bridge Ventures knew how to get that done.
.
I believe the 1-AA will need to be qualified before any shares can be sold under it.
Wayback Machine has the specific Avnet Guardian 100 device captured on the Microsoft site as far back as March 7, 2020, and a placeholder for an Avnet guardian device was captured back into 2019. Scroll down and click on "Guardian Devices"...
https://web.archive.org/web/20200307154529/https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/azure-sphere/#ecosystem
.
OK, I get the triangle and recall all of us waiting for the BC66 to show up on the T-Mobile site, just as we are all waiting on any TriCascade device to show up on the Microsoft site.
That is a connection between TriCascade and Avnet (as yet, unconfirmed), not between TriCascade and the Avnet device.
.
If you could show us a connection between TriCascade and that Avnet device, then you would be on to something. Besides both companies having products with the word “Guardian” and the number “100” in their names, of course.
.
SF for the W; HOU for the L. Thanks.
Pretty sure it did but, of course, the minimum was 10,000,000 shares ($10,000) at $0.001.
.
More likely a negative reaction to the repriced offering. With no apparent takers at $0.001, Max is going for a half price sale. Unforunately, if he doesn't have any good news quickly it is likely that the share price will fall to that level or below before this 1-A/A gets qualified and he will find himself in the same situation, with no one willing to pay the same or more than they can pay on the open market.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/841533/000119983521000783/srmx.htm
.
Apology accepted. LOL!
Thanks for pointing that out. Max still needs to get the i.VA trademark registered or stop breaking the law by implying that it has been by putting ® next to it.
.
PHI for the W; NYG for the L. Thanks.
ARI for the W; CAR for the L. Thanks.