0.001 divi would not attract investors - you can make MUCH more in a CD.

If a divi was issued ONLY to reduce the warrants and authorized only for the public common stock holders, then at the present it would only apply to 26M shares. If it were 0.25 percent per quarter, at a PPS of $2.5, that would amount to 0.6 cents per share x 26M shares = $ 156,000 per quarter. Divided into 93M current shares, that is an effect on EPS of $0.00167, which is negligible compared to $0.16 to $0.18 raw EPS (AROUND ONE PERCENT OF EPS).

So the argument that a divi would significantly reduce available cashflow is incorrect if the dividend is limited to 0.25 percent per quarter or 1 percent per year.

There would be two BIG advantages -- (1) it would alter the relative time value of money for warrant holders who otherwise have no incentive to keep them from waiting another 2 years to convert, and (2) a 1 percent annual divi looks sexy to attract more retail investors on the face of being one of very few china microcaps to offer any dividend at all.

Management should not object that they don't get this dividend because, all things considered, they already own huge stakes in LPH -- 70M shares amongst a handful of people -- and they also will have a double or triple in PPS appreciation after the warrants are gone, so that they actually stand to benefit orders of magnitude more than common stockholders in total gains by doing something that has a big effect on PPS.

The divi can can be initially rolled out over a trial period of 1 or 2 years and renewed if the company decides it is in their best interest to continue it. It should sound like it is permanent and not temporary, otherwise warrant holders may not take the bait.

0.01 divi for mgmt, 0.05 for public float:

Other companies have made dividends not applicable to management. How about combining this principle with giving management a smaller dividend:

As management owns so many million shares already, a penny dividend would triple many of their salaries. Meanwhile, a 5 cents dividend for common shareholders would not affect more than 26 percent of total shares so would not be a burden on finances, yet it would drive investors to CASH IN WARRANTS and take the better option of a dividend, and also the dividend would attract many new investors to drive the price up since this would be the best microcap dividend on the block.

haha, Mr. Bradford has already answered these suggestions in his BLOG today entitled, "If I was a China stock". Something tells me he's more than a little tired of all the backseat drivers on all the message boards. Not to say that dividends and share buybacks won't drive the price up, but I think the point is that price will eventually matchup with valuation, and small caps can put their money to better use by expanding and doing other things.

http://www.globalspeculation.com/

Pls.explain "make good" impact on EPS:

From the LPH 10Q March 31,2010, page 11:
"In conjunction with the October 2009 Financing, the Company also entered into a make good escrow agreement with the Investors..."

"...the Company’s majority shareholders initially placed 13,499,274 shares of Common Stock...into an escrow account. The Escrow Shares are being held as security for the achievement of $23,900 thousand in audited net income for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010..."

"If the Company achieves the 2010 Performance Threshold, the Escrow Shares will be released back to the majority shareholders..."

(Comment: 23.9M net income out of 92M shares = EPS of $0.22, which will undoubtedly be met.)

"...if and when the Escrow Shares are released back to the majority shareholders, an adjustment to stockholders’ equity equal to the amount of the fair value of the Company’s common stock as of June 30, 2010 will be recognized in the Company’s financial statements in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, “Compensation – Stock Compensation”."

"The Company does not expect the release of the shares held in escrow will result in any income or expense being recognized in the Company’s financial statements."

****QUESTION: DOES THIS MEAN there will be no effect on EPS from the June 30th release of shares in escrow?

IMHO, LPH should avoid further preferred discounts and stock warrants. While the preferreds were a one-time deal affected the 12/31/09 10Q, that still drags on the TTM EPS and TTM P/E for the next 4 quarters until it comes off the balance sheets. Patience everyone.

A longer term issue is the nagging effect of over 10M stock warrants that were issued in 2009, which GAAP methods handle by multiplying the PPS change from the previous to the next quarter times the number of unexercised outstanding warrants. Each time stock price goes up, the 10Q has a negative adjustment, or vice versa. That continues until the warrants expire or get exercised.

Running some hypothetical numbers with 0.15 to 0.16 raw EPS for each quarter, under various consecutive quarter-ending PPS assumptions, the adjustments for fair value of outstanding warrants are estimated to drag on EPS whenever PPS increases about 60 cents, which equates to an EPS adjustment of about negative 7 cents (relatively significant compared to any one Q's earnings in the range of 14 cents to 16 cents). BUT THE GOOD NEWS IS if PPS increases Q over Q by around 30 cents, then the negative effect of the adjusted fair value of warrants is minimal, only 3 cents or less.

Under these conditions, LPH's price could appreciate quite nicely over the next few quarters, even with all warrants unexercised, and still achieve a GAAP P/E of around 6.5, with consecutive quarterly PPS moving from 2.24 to 2.53 to 2.85 to 3.10 to 3.41.

As a simulation, I assumed raw EPS of $0.165 each new quarter, and no warrants were exercised, and predicted the quarterly impacts on EPS starting with Q ending June 30th = +$0.076 (positive impact since previous share price DROPPED from 03/31 PPS = $2.58 to $1.95 on June 30).

Q ending 09/30 = -$0.034 EPS adjustment (based on 06/30 PPS = $1.95 PPS increasing to an estimated $2.24 09/30/10 which would be a GAAP P/E=7.2);

Q 12/31/10 EPS adjustment of -$0.034 (PPS increase $2.24 to $2.53 which would be a GAAP P/E=4);

Q 03/31/11 EPS adjustment of -$0.038 (PPS change $2.53 to $2.85 which would be a GAAP P/E=4.6);

Q 06/30/11 EPS adjustment of -$0.029 (PPS change $2.85 to $3.10 which would be a GAAP P/E=5.9)

And if the release of the 10K on 09/30/11 showed these values, then the price might rise to a P/E of 6.5, which equals $3.41.

Lets hope LPH stays "in the zone" where PPS increases fast enough so investors make money but slow enough so that GAAP EPS is not skewed and the P/E starts to look bad for the stock screeners.

Actually I think it could be a positive deal for stockholders in about 3 years. Obviously LPH has the license in Shanxi right now and Yanchang is in another province. By the time Yanchang gets more refineries open and more gas stations open, which is their primary goal, then somewhere down the road they might consider other roles in the supply chain. So at that point, when their primary expansion of refineries and gas stations is partially complete (the article said around 5 years), then expanding their storage role might be in their interests. Buyouts even in China usually involve 25 to 30 percent premiums right off the bat, so it would be a win for shareholders. There was a china pharma small cap last winter that got bought - a well known OTC play - which brought an immediate 25 percent to shareholders the day the sale was announced.

Didn't say that. At this point in time you cannot make that assumption. However, I seriously doubt if Yanchang, oil firm owned by SHAANXI government, thinks it could expand by 500-1000 gas stations, without involving provinces all over the country, not just limited to their own province. So it would appear Yanchang doesn't think it will be too difficult to expand gas stations and refineries into other provinces, and if they can do that, why not storage facilities, too. I'm sure the refineries and gas stations also need some type of licensing/approval as do storage facillities. In any event, it certainly puts Yanchang on the radar as a firm with the financial resources to buyout smaller private firms. All speculation, true, but they do exist very nearby.

Correct. but if you look at the map SHAANXI and SHANXI share a common border. So if an oil firm owned by the SHAANXI province goverment is big enough to become number 3 after PTR and SNP, and plans to open up 500-1000 gas stations in addition to new refineries, they are both a potential upstream supplier to companies like LPH as well as a downstream customer to LPH, so it seems logical that with their huge cash expansion going on in the neighboring province, they would also be looking to be middlemen storage facilities as well? LPH would be a possible buyout target if Yangchang's expansion is as big as they anticipate. Especially since LPH's province is right next to Yanchang's province. Of course, any private company in China can always be a takeover target by the government due to the power they wield in a communist country, what else is new, right?

LPH threat from Yanchang Oil?

This article just in on EnergyChinaForum:

http://www.energychinaforum.com/news/40734.shtml

Yanchang Petroleum Group, an oil firm in central China owned by Shaanxi provincial government (province ADJACENT to LPH in SHANXI), will invest 350 billion yuan in building more than 50 projects during 2011-2015 period, as a move to build the company to be the world's top 500 enterprises.

Yanchang plans to run 1,000 gas stations throughout the country within 3-5 years. Also, by 2015, Yanchang's refining capacity is expected to be 20 million tonnes/ year and coal production would reach 40 million tonnes. It targets sales terminals the third largest in China after PetroChina and Sinopec.

Sounds like LPH as a middleman is going to have to compete against Yanchang which will operate both as an upstream supplier/refinery and a downstream gas station operator. Given the huge size of Yanchang's planned cash expansion (350 billion), LPH might be a takeover target at some point, hopefully AFTER not before PPS appreciates.

When does the 10K come out - any chance it is early, before the 30th?

Right, just more fodder to supply the shorts with more topics to throw around more libel and disinformation. Getting pretty tired of all the BS in the market.

Right now it seems that investing, which was inventing as a positive way to reward folks for helping a company grow, has now turned into some evil game of trying to bet on a company's demise and invent as many slanderous creative articles to scare investors into selling low. What a bunch of bottom feeding scum.

At one point I used to agree that shorting was a logical way to balance overexuberance in the marketplace or to protect against downside risks. After the nefarious behavior of shorts in 2010, I now am convinced shorting should be outlawed, period.

Latest announced was posted on many news sites in the last 48 hours. I receive about 2 dozen emails a day from various stock alerts and promoters and check another 15 websites. LPH's yesterday news was repeated in at least 8 places. Keep those announcements about cashflow coming out and we'll have tremendous exposure very soon.

Thanks for the replies. Too bad there isn't a check box underneath account options so the customer can tell their online brokerage to not lend out their holdings, but I guess if you want a margin account, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.

The preliminaries, if you want to trust them, don't look too shabby at all. If you factor out the change in valuation from warrants, the EPS for the 2 Qs can be adjusted by the ratio of (earnings - warrant adjustment)/(earnings with warrant adjustments). For both periods you get quarterly EPS of around 35 to 38 cents. Assuming when they resume trading the share price may adjust towards an expected P/E in this risk-adverse market of around P/E =6, you can mutliply the target P/E by the quarterly EPS times 4, to get an expected share price of $8.40 to $9.09 per share. So if investors can get over their fears from recent events involving restatements and accounting irregularities, then it looks like NEP's share price last winter of mid-8s to low-9s was actually fairly valued, and things may eventually correct to that point if the earnings continue in the same range.

Is it at all realistic to consider if shorts may be holding down LPH's price since uplisting. Someone with more knowledge than I should give an opinion.

Second question - Is it true that online brokers may lend out the shares held by customers without their knowledge or permission?

Third question - If this is true, then can putting in a sell order at a much higher price ensure that an individual investor's shares cannot be loaned for shorting because the clearinghouse must hang onto them?

Sorry for my ignorance, but I read about the last idea and it does seem like a good way for investors to collectively put a squeeze on shorting if they all have ridiculously high priced open sell orders.

If the short interest went down by 50 percent, then that doesn't explain why the number of bashers has gone WAY UP over on certain message boards. For the life of me I really don't believe market sentiment is altered by bashers to any meaningful extent, and I also don't believe there are that many pissed investors who bought high and sold low that they would keep posting months later. But then again human nature being as weird as it is, anything is possible.

I'm still long on LPH, and also happy that I can margin it now that it is on the big exchange. Although this might not be the best time to try and margin, given Mr. Market's current trend of sideways movements and dips.

As a shareholder, I would vote for an maximum authorized share count low enough to prevent more dilution. I would also vote to restrict any more insider financing with preferreds and warrants until the existing warrants are fully exercised.

LPHs cash flow should be high enough to expand without special financing, anyway.

OK, I'm gonna step out on a limb and instead of hoping for $2.25, I'm reaching for the low 2.40s, just so I can tell my friends I'm at break-even basis. Whatever happened to the 2.40s to 3.00 range that we were in twice - once between December and February, and a second time in March?

Oh, and yeah, I agree it's annoying to use "we" if you don't actually own LPH. Wouldn't that be a handy little function on the IHUB, Yahoo, and other stock message boards if you had to send them proof of ownership, just like with cereal boxes, before posting? It certainly would eliminate a lot of the riff-raff.

Reuters Research: Forward P/E = 3.29

According to the current Reuters Research Report (available on E*Trade), LPH has a forward P/E of 3.29. The forward EPS estimate for 6/30/2011 is $0.65. At 2 bucks a share this is the best Oil and Gas value play out there right now. The company's 15 year track record and facility expansion in 2009, combined with the number of large industrial customers they have lined up make LPH's continued revenue stream and growth a highly reliable proposition for investors. Get in now for maximum profits over the next 12 months. Each of the next 3 Qs will provide further proof of growing EPS and P/E that early investors can capitalize on right now.

Based on that, I'm headed off to Thailand for a 2.5 week vacation day after tomorrow, spending next years profits! Seriously.

Well, judging from that other message board on yoo who, the shorts are starting their negative cheerleading already. For a sleeper stock that hasn't gotten enough volume, in a twisted way it is actually a good sign that one-track bashers show up -- it means a stock is about to get some good visibility, or else they wouldn't be wasting their time.

I'm gonna be play devil's advocate since timing sometimes doesn't work to one's best advantage....I'll be flying around the world to Thailand Thursday am, so if uplist was announced Wed. after the bell, then it would probably trade on Amex Friday or Monday, right? I wonder just how long the shorts and traders would take until they zoom in to sell the news.

I just read the entire listing rules on AMEX. But what is doesn't state is anything regarding how many days the minimum share price has to be maintained above 2$.

In addition to some real photos (not date-stamped 2007 and not artist renditions), they should post 24-hour time-lapse videos taken of their old and new facilities spanning a couple typical workdays showing railcars loading up and tanker trucks loading up at both facilities so as to prove the sales volume, LOL...This would be a pre-emptive strike to keep the "wolves" in line - such as that infamous guy, "chinacompanyanalyst", who severely trashed Orient Paper (ONP) last month. Heads up to the new CEO, it's a cruel world full of shorts out there...

LPIH should easily be able to demostrate rough volume of sales as in my previous post:

"... calculations in trucks and railcars per day:

Based on the 10Q for Jan.-Mar., 96.9M USD sales.
Based on sales figures, 50% of daily revenue from diesel + fuel oil and 41% from gasoline, used for rough estimates.

Based on C1 Energy website, 4300 yuan/metric ton wholesale price of oil for gas turbines/industrial uses, and 7100 Yuan/mt wholesale gasoline price. Exchange rate of 0.147 USD/Yuan.

Assuming 94.4 metric tons of oil in a typical railcar (33,000 gal), and 25.7 metric tons gas in a gas tanker truck (9,000 gal).

LPIHs quarterly gas/oil sales convert to average daily sales 1,060,000 USD. Using the percentages of gas/oil from sales, this converts to the following number of delivery units:

8.9 railroad cars per day of diesel plus fuel oil,
plus
16 gas tanker trucks per day."

If I understand it correctly, aA reverse split will not change the number of authorized shares that the company is allowed to issue in the future, so this creates greater opportunities for the company to dilute further by way of preferreds and warrants, which then give away shareholder value to select investors at the expense of existing investors (like what has already happened).

A reverse split may produce a market psychology effect, so that investors may feel the stock has even farther to fall to be viewed as cheap if a reverse split places the stock price at a level about double the minimum required to uplist. I agree with the previous poster that a stock at a lower share price (e.g., $1.85) might gather momentum to easily double in a bull market, meanwhile a stock having undergone a reverse split to a price of $7.2 could have a more difficult time doubling even in a bull market, as investors tend to be subjectively influenced by absolute price when estimating the percent to which share prices may further increase.

While this is all subjective, this viewpoint is not uncommon: See the links to these types of objections:

AIG's reverse split:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-russnow/aig-proposed-reverse-stoc_b_221801.html

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_S/threadview?m=tm&bn=28285&tid=41245&mid=41245&tof=15&off=1

http://www.ehow.com/list_6559438_benefits-reverse-stock-splits_.html

Reverse splitting can carry a negative connotation because of association with the possibility that the stock has bad fundamentals and will not rise on it's own, and creates a subjective fear to investors that the stock may begin a trend of multiple reverse splits with shareholder value spiraling downwards.

The fact that the mathematics of company profits divided among shareholders does not change as a result of a reverse split is not the complete story. You can't deny that market sentiment is irrational at times -- the old adage, "the market is always right" applies here in regards to how investors may react to reverse splits.

Zester, you must be the biggest short on this board! ...You can read back over months and months of your posts and you relentlessly keep throwing cold water on anything and everything posted about LPIH. What I don't understand is that retail investors can't really short OTC stocks in the US, so what's the motivation behind all your negative energy?

No, I used the figures from LPIH SEC Filings and www.C1Energy.com.

However, I am starting to worry about that guy with the camcorder from my office whom I sent over to film tank cars being loaded up --- he is still not back from his field trip to China, LOL. Bail money was not factored into the project budget!

Cash machine calculations in trucks and railcars per day:

Based on the 10Q for Jan.-Mar., 96.9M USD sales.
Based on sales figures, 50% of daily revenue from diesel + fuel oil and 41% from gasoline, used for rough estimates.

Based on C1 Energy website, 4300 yuan/metric ton wholesale price of oil for gas turbines/industrial uses, and 7100 Yuan/mt wholesale gasoline price. Exchange rate of 0.147 USD/Yuan.

Assuming 94.4 metric tons of oil in a typical railcar (33,000 gal), and 25.7 metric tons gas in a gas tanker truck (9,000 gal).

LPIHs quarterly gas/oil sales convert to average daily sales 1,060,000 USD. Using the percentages of gas/oil from sales, this converts to the following number of delivery units:

8.9 railroad cars per day of diesel plus fuel oil,
plus
16 gas tanker trucks per day.

That is one heck of a cash machine for just a few delivery units!

Excuse my ignorance but I didn't find it in the recent filings. The auditors aren't the CFO or the board of directors, correct? ...Read SEC Filings going back to February but didn't see announcement of appointing independent auditors

8-K,Current report filing,06/25/10 (06/23/10)
8-A12B,06/24/10
8-K,06/23/10 (06/16/10)
3,06/16/10 (03/22/10)
10-Q,05/17/10 (03/31/10)
8-K,04/29/10 (04/27/10)
3,03/29/10 (03/22/10)
3,03/26/10 (03/22/10)
8-K,03/24/10 (03/23/10)
8-K,03/24/10 (03/22/10)
EFFECT,03/12/10
424B3,03/10/10
S-1/A,03/05/10
8-K,02/26/10 (02/23/10)

If I remember correctly, uplisting requires appointing independent auditors, correct? I don't recall reading anything in the recent SEC filings -- Did I miss something that announced what audit firm would be used for LPIH?

I do NOT think reverse split is a good idea for long term shareholders. My reasons are as follows:
(1) Investor psychology -- current share price of barely under the 2$ minimum to uplist looks like a "bargain", even during a bear market. If we go 1 for 2 then 4$ does not look like a bargain, being well above uplisting minimum, and similar to share price of the cheaper already-uplisted China microcaps.
(2) If we do uplist during a very volatile period with multiple bearish pullbacks in the overall market, then the price could drift pretty far down from 4$ ... perhaps down to the low 3's or high 2's, which for those who bought in the low- to mid- 2's, before the reverse split, would be a huge dip that might take a long time to recover. Might be better to just wait it out in the upper 1's to low 2's for a while, I think our money is safer in the long term.

Disagree/Agree?

On the IHUB Shorts Exposed Message Board - under market trends and strategies, the 6/25/10 daily short volume vs. total volume was listed as follows:
20100625|LPIH|148759|237249|O

From what I read, only market makers can short an OTC stock.
What does this mean for price movement? Do the market makers exert downward pressure on LPIH the same way other investors do by shorting? If so, is that somehow responsible for holding back the share price lately?

Sorry if I'm not well versed in how shorts operate in the OTC market. This might just be an ordinary situation, I wouldn't know.

In the Shorts Exposed Message Board, a sticky post at the top called Shorts DD, states that US citizens cannot short the OTC, only offshore hedge funds and market makers. The post goes on to state that a market maker responsible for a huge percent of OTC trading shorts an enormous volume of OTCs daily, which would be impossible by actually borrowing shares based on their manpower. Therefore, they conclude that this main OTC market maker is conducted gigantic volumes of naked shorting every day which is responsible for share price behavior of many OTCs.

Interesting stuff, just wondering how much of LPIHs downward pressure was related to this BS as opposed to actually selling of preferreds or actual retail investor sentiment.

Crane indeed did the most transparent job of clarifying stock warrants and preferreds and all the assumptions, which is one heck of a lot better than 90 percent of OTCs. That notwithstanding, there is a separate issue of to what extent did Crane encourage this form of derivative financing over conventional methods that would not have diluted P/E. It's a mute point with him being gone, I would hope that LPIH will not go after these instruments in the near future. Now that both facilities are roaring, there is plenty of cash flow and any future expansions may be able to be done with internally-generated funds. But for now, AMEX here we come.

Everyone who is long on this stock needs to remind themselves that their CFO was not irreplacable and Crane's leaving does not alter LPIH's strong cash earnings in any manner.

While the CFO reports financial results, changing of the guard does not mean there are accounting issues. Just be glad the surprise filing wasn't the SEC telling them their accounting was inaccurate such as the case recently with NEP. CFOs will come and go, but the oil flows on...

I doubt that a pyramid in 3D would be considered that original or unique of a trademark logo that two separate companies couldn't use variations on that theme; after all, the shading and coloration is different.

But as far as whether J Crane Company is indeed the same person as LPIH's CFO, clearly the J Crane Company website STATES that Crane IS the CFO of LPIH:

http://www.jcraneco.com/about/James-T-Crane.html

You really are on the inside track, Glen, getting emails from Crane about a "friend" who is looking for a company that needs a CFO. Send me a PM if you have his email -- I'd like to ask him a couple of polite questions, if he isn't prohibited from disclosures.

So it's back to promoting bullish sentiment and saying you're buying more LPIH?

Just a few weeks ago you were discouraged:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=49626719

You said LPIH was being held back by warrants and general market sentiment. Market sentiment is better, but LPIH's price is still in the same range as when market sentiment had gone down, yet other china microcaps have gone up.

So what has changed your mind?

I remember the discussion about the missing Form 3 in this forum back on April 14. The gist of the discussion was that 2 of the 3 directors already filed Form 3s and the 3rd was needed. However, it was pointed out that AMEX has allowed some companies to file their Form 3s after uplisting.

For a stock that has been sitting on impending uplisting for 2 months now and is predicting a 2011 EPS that would extract a P/E of 3, it really is out-of-character to see the price drop and not recovering the same way other china microcaps have recovered. For example, CBEH has gone up quite a bit and so has LLEN.

Between the current lack of market interest in this OTC oil-related china stock that is supposedly so close to uplisting, the large percent of warrant overhang shares compared to the number of common stock shares held by the public, and last-minute retraction of their Redchip presentation, all of this project a feeling of uncertainty and almost suspicion. In addition, one can never trust a message board for objectivity, since there are holders of special discount equity offerings and some who appear to promote at some times and disappear from view at all other times.

I wish there was at least a mild upward trend or some definitive news regarding status....

IHUB should offer a no-tools cheap subscription (like 1/4 of the cost of their current lowest-priced package -- just so are allowed to search all boards and send private messages. Don't want any of the rest of it - I already have other tools.

Agreed. Don't want uplist until market improves...Meanwhile I pretend I don't see the negative sign like it was 2 months ago.

Being so close to the cutoff number, bigger firms could theoretically short LPIH easily to keep it from uplisting temporarily.

Headed for a close < 2. So much for uplisting in the next few days.