I think you know how your wife will react. LOL!

midtieroil, I agree COMPLETELY. I don't think I have ever said that to you before, but you are absolutely correct on this IMO.

What are you talking about? How did the AIM "withhold it" when ERHC never applied? I've been watching the new applicants for AIM listing, ERHC never made that list.

Has it occured to you that the company is telling you the truth, that their advisors did what they were paid to do, and advised them that the time wasn't yet right?

It almost seems that ERHC withheld its AIM listing to avoid being in competition with Eland for IPO investors. If so, was it for the benefit of ERHC's listing success, or Elands? Probably both.

I understand your perspective. I am just a bit more optimistic.

It's a BIG bit though!

I'm not sure that I agree with this:

If you meant oil quantity-wise, then I agree, but onshore discoveries are worth significantly more than deepwater discoveries because they are vastly cheaper to develop. The proposed Chadian pipeline running along BDS2008 and the proposed Sudan pipeline running right through ERHC's Kenyan 11A block will both be key to the value of any discoveries.

We hoped for a billion barrels for ERHC in the JDZ, that hasn't panned out. If both of these piplines are built and ERHC has a short leg to each of them, a fraction of our original proven reserve expectations will result in the same share appreciation.

But those pipelines have to be in place... think "slow-play" ERHC's assets for now. That's what I see anyway.

A one-for-one would insure failure of the offering... change that, I don't see it "failing", but whoever the backstop is would take on the vast majority of the shares offered, IMO.

I don't know how many shares you own, but I know what I own... and "allowing" me to double my position, even at half this share price, isn't an option that could work. I think most shareholders are in that same boat. If they do smaller offerings every six months or so, we have a far, FAR greater chance of fully participating. It takes time to come up with cash in the retail world!

I sent that concern to Keeney back in August, perhaps they thought about it.

If it will give you some kind of pleasure I will say it, I was wrong. But let's get the statement I made all those years back correct, I said, "ERHC will be valued at $14 per share if their share of the discoveries equates to a billion barrels of oil". Based on the percentages they own of the JDZ and the 14B barrel estimates from the third party firms, my price target was fair, if not somewhat low. Guess what? The operators drilled and they *didn't* find oil in the quanties that were estimated, so let me ask you... do you really think it is fair to persecute my $14 target, which was based on a specified amount oil being found... the same amount estimated by two independent firms, when the drill bit came back and revealed that the estimates were off the mark?

If anything my estimate was low, based on the amount of oil clearly stated in the qualification that supported it. As evidence I will point to Addax, which sold for $10B (including debt) for 450M barrels of proven, so had ERHC ended up with double that amount of proven it would've commanded double that share price. At the time the company had 735M shares out... $20B / 735M = $27 per share, BUT... guess what? The estimates were wrong. That amount of oil was not discovered. So please quit the persecution of the $14 target by dropping the qualification that supported it.

Now, can we end this once and for all?

I agree and have taken it out repeatedly because I see it as a deterent. Introducing this stock with a red spinning *WARNING* message is not exactly a warm welcome. Unfortunately, it keeps coming back.

Sigh.

The total "potential" dilution is finite and known. If they float the total proposed authorization, which they have said is not the plan, and get absolutely nothing in return ie. they give them away, then the share price will be diluted from the current price to about 3.5 cents. Do you think they will give shares away for free when they are trying to raise capital for exploration? If so, run. The shares they float will be a paper change from increased shares completely offset by increased cash. If they blow the cash it is dilution. If they increase the value of the assets with it, it is not. I know you are smart, I am pretty sure you know what they are doing and why, and I think that is why you (and others) are here... you are all smart.



That's the same risk we all took on the JDZ (results still unknown until Sinopec makes them official), and that's why you can buy in the pennies. The irony is that if the nay-sayers on this board had the information they demand they couldn't afford to buy the shares! That would be poetic justice, IMO.

So what brought you back and keeps you here?

Ah, I see!

Any article that is negative is deemed accurate. Yet any article that is positive, like the JDA saying that "oil was found in expected quantities" in the JDZ is unsubstantiated hype and lies.

Got it. I understand now. Thanks.

As you have pointed out in the past...

As investors it was OUR fault that WE made the SAME bet! We lost the first round... I was bitter too, but I got over it. Be thankful for the Chadian and Kenyan properties and root FOR those properties and the STP-EEZ properties instead of living in a half-decade old world and dwelling on the past. Our success as investors will be based on the FUTURE, not on the events of the PAST.

There is no guarantee that it will be, that's why you can buy at such cheap prices. High risk. High reward.

I'd like to see any kind of proof that they've travelled first class. I'm not saying they didn't, just that you have no way of knowing... nobody does.

Yes, September 7th, 2012.

Check back on 9/7/2012. I got mine in an email from my broker at 2:48am. There may be an option on your brokers website to have proxies emailed to you. Check that option for future votes.

Here we go with the negative spin approaching outright lies...

Shareholders are not assembling to vote to triple the O/S to 3B shares. They are assembling to increase the *authorized* share to 3B to give the company flexibility in the future. The company has even gone on the record saying they may *never* actually FLOAT (that's the O/S amj23) the full authorization. Look at the last decade... the O/S has been 720M to 743M for all of that time and the AUTHORIZED was 950M... they never tapped it.

IMO, this is about a JV partner that wants a significant vote before they commit to any carry agreement(s).

Keeping spinning with misinformation and half-truths.

Excellent observation.

I want what it best for the long term success of the company. My reward will come with their success.

We can always wait and see how it plays out. It just makes no sense to wish for a lower share price so the company has a harder time raising the funds it needs and the dilution ends up higher than it needs to be. I am rooting FOR the company in the long term. I support what is in all of our best interest, and that's a higher share price prior to the offering.

I recognize that the share offering is meant to raise the capital the company needs... that's why they're doing it. The higher the share price, the more they raise and the fewer shares offered... that's less dilution, so yes, I definately want the share price higher. In fact, I would love to see some blockbuster news before the offering that drives the share price to 50 cents or more because that is in the best interest of the company and us shareholders in the long run. You seem to be looking at it from a standpoint of personal gain and greed. To each his own I guess.

That statement explains a lot. Thanks for being honest.

My guess would be 60 days.

With the many blocks ERHC has, drilling could occur well before that 2-3 year number... under promise, over deliver.

For something that isn't even worth selling (your words) there is an AWLFUL lot of time spent here freaking out... er, I mean "pointing things out".

ERHC was awarded 11A on July 9th, less than 2 months ago. That isn't very long. You are very good at pointing out the long timelines involved in the oil biz, you point it out all too often... well?

The fact that ERHC is choosing to issue equity vs. getting a farm-in partner suggests that Thuo's opinion of the block is quite high. If you had to select the most informed person on the entire planet concerning block 11A, Peter Thuo is that person.

How do you sleep at night with all those monsters under the bed?

LOL!

What I see is a company that will go out of business if they don't raise the funds. You may not like the dilution, but its better than the alternative. There is so much hand-wringing by a select few and we haven't even seen the numbers yet.

I'm betting the increased authorized will be used just as sparingly as the authorized have been used for over a decade. ERHC does NOT have a history of heavy dilution and have ALWAYS refrained from diluting unless absolutely necessary. There is NO evidence that that will change. The company has already said that it may never issue the full authorization, they will raise capital when needed and move forward.

If they raise $20M for seismic shoots by issuing 200M shares and those seismic show promising prospects, the resultant share price will be closer to 0.50 than 0.10 and the chances of securing a partner that will eliminate future dilution increase exponentially. That's less than 25% dilution to 5X the share price, and you always have the option to offset the dilution by increasing your position, just like every other company that uses equity to raise capital. Or they could just throw their hands up, do nothing, and close the doors, leaving us with nothing. Pick one; those are the only two options available.

Let's wait for the details before freaking out... and understand that these details will NOT come before the vote. They simply cannot announce detailed plans for shares that do not yet exist.

This opinion defies all logic.

If the raise in authorized is the catastrophic disaster that you say it is for shareholders, it would be a catastrophic disaster for SEO as well.

Of course SEO has a choice. We all do.

If you truely believe that wouldn't you be doing much more buying than complaining? Maybe you are, I don't know.

So your opinion is that Chrome and ERHC are working together to destroy the share price for Offers personal benefit down the road? I find that a bit hard to accept.

C'mon amj23, this ride has been every bit as fun as a ride on Cedar Point's Top Thrill Dragster... straight up, straight down, LOL!

Take a ride and experience the similarity...

Make sure your sound is on and make the video full screen... its JUST like owning ERHE!!!

LOL!

What are your thoughts on WHY Chrome would want to INCREASE its ownership of EHRC if the only thing you see is negative.

Middy and badog, feel free to chime in on this question. If all you guys can see is armaggeddon, why would Chrome want MORE of that? It makes no sense.

What makes sense is things look better than we know or Chrome wouldn't want MORE ownership. There is a missing link.

Don't you mean higher lows and higher highs, as in a uptrend?

The doom and gloom isn't working...

Maybe there was a "paper change" that didn't require reporting? Perhaps Addax has now been fully digested by Sinopec and the operator of blocks 2, 3 and 4 is no longer "Addax", but now "Sinopec"?

I have stumbled upon a wonderful little treehouse in the thick of the forest. LOL!

I lot is going to ride on the attached warrats (if offered). Being offered shares at a discount to market is fine and dandy, but being offered warrants at, lets say 20 cents, that don't expire for several years, now THAT'S golden!

We need that answer.