"It seems that most likely you live on the same street as Lou."

Wrong.

"So tell him that if he wants my vote to bring some sort of business plan to the meeting on the 16th along with resumes for Peter and Bob."

Tell him yourself. Look up older Cameraturret posts and find his phone number.

"Spunkynight, if your group has the largest position in the company I hope you're going to be at the shareholder meeting. "

We are the largest group of share holders holding LEGAL shares.

You realize that the whole share holder meeting is a ruse. Lanza will vote his illegal shares and out vote all of us no matter how we vote. But in a contestation of the shares, we will prevail because those shares will be found to be illegally issued.

The only thing stopping that action would be a lucrative deal for and IN THE BEST INTEREST OF the share holders. The new BOD through Lou has stated this. They will not fight against a fair deal. But why don't we have any details???

So far, I have seen the peanut gallery come out in force and try to discredit and pick a fight with us.

As Kenco herself stated, "One of the 1st and most important rules for investing, and business in general, is that you dont involve emotional and personal issues in the decision making process, it appears that you are either ignoring that rule, or you never learned it"

And that shills, is what I would say to you all right now. You are going to blow up the deal by alienating the largest group of share holders, who in turn are going to seek justice and kill your compensation packages.

You should have kept it civil and businesslike. But you weren't smart enough for that. And that just makes me more determined to stop you.

The vendetta is coming from the immature, purile, deceitful, thieving liars.

Vote however you want. Listen to the lies.

Where are the PR's?

Where are the details of this deal?

How do you feel about a group that is trying to validate DOUBLING the share count?

What kind of legitimate deal gets done with Lanza who already BLEW two other legitimate deals for you?

And now you are going to vote him a "blank check" under "OTHER BUSINESS" on your proxy?

GET REAL!

Check your facts on that. Who says the PR's are stopped? I've seen nothing but endless PR's from Lanza.

Notice how his tone suddenly changed and he doesn't want to talk about it anymore? LOL!!!

Hey, I'm for real, baby. You try to step on me and I will come back 3 times as hard.

I think LGL has a good suggestion. Basically, we want access to the process as a large group of share holders. There is absolutely no reason to keep us in the dark or act like we are the bad guys.

I've got nothing to hide. Bring on two independants plus reps from both sides, break it out in writing, put off the vote until we all see what we are dealing with, and you will have cooperation.

Again, I have nothing to lose, but LANZA DOES!

"Stop and examine all your own "motives" and think before you speak. Do not let greed get the better of you. The Summit deal could make this company worth $20.00 per share or better. Do you want a "big piece of something, or all of nothing"? "

I'll take that bet right now.

Go ahead and walk away. The new BOD has funding and everything else that Summit is offering right now. Except with the new BOD and its supporters, Lanza gets deposed and we don't have to dilute our shares and vote blindly on some "other business" on this proxy.

Talk about a snow job! What legitimate deal could possibly be brought like this by putting Lanza in the driver's seat?

I'm sorry but I just don't believe a word of it. Or there is something horrible lurking in the shadows of this deal.

The problem with the new BOD is that they seem to have underestimated communicating with the share holders. These share holders have been lied to over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. The new BOD should have acknowleged that and addressed the need to communicate. They failed to do that and it cost them some support.

However, believe you? No thanks.

Threaten share holders into silence with the hint of walking out? Go ahead! You will hurt Lanza much more with that than anyone else. What have I got to lose? A few pennies per share?

And the new BOD will still be here- whether they are voted in or out or whatever, they have the connections needed to put this company right.

And maybe some turncoats here don't want that to happen because they may or may not have compromised themselves in the meantime. I hope not.

Maybe this position isn't going to make me the most popular here. But I'm not trying to win a popularity contest. And I'm not in it just for the money. I've been screwed with by BDGR, and I will have my day. I still own all of my shares.

And if you represent Summit and you are going to threaten everyone here with this type of approach plus the nebulous nature of your deal, then I want no part of it.

"Yes they can, by buying it in the open market. Now that would be a beatiful thing. lol Again, just my wishful thinking."

EXACTLY which is why you should vote for the new BOD on the proxy so that Summit will have to come to you on the open market!

What proxy are you looking at? Mine gives me a choice of voting for a board of directors:

01. DIRECTOR(S):
Directors Recommend a vote FOR election of the following nominee(s):

(1) JOSEPH ANTHONY LANZA* (2) THOMAS NEELY* (3) NICK RONSHEIMER*
(4) LOU CHIGHISOLA** (5) PETER LAU** (6) ROBERT MCGUIRE**
For all nominees Withhold all nominees For all EXCEPT those selected below
JOSEPH ANTHONY LANZA*
THOMAS NEELY*
NICK RONSHEIMER*
LOU CHIGHISOLA**
PETER LAU**
ROBERT MCGUIRE**

02 . RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF SIGNATURE STOCK TRANSFER, INC. AS TRANSFER AGENT FOR THE COMPANY
Directors Recommend: FOR
For Against Abstain

03 . RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS BY DIRECTORS
Directors Recommend: FOR
For Against Abstain

04 . RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF FROHLING & ASSOCIATES, LLC AS GENERAL COUNSEL
Directors Recommend: FOR
For Against Abstain

05 . OTHER BUSINESS
Directors Recommend: FOR
For Against Abstain

Summit cannot possibly own 51% of the LEGAL shares currently.

And that is another thing- do want to give your company away to Summit or do you want them to buy YOUR shares to get 51% of the company? Do you see now why they may have wanted to go to Lanza and not the new BOD?

Which scenario do you think would be better for you as a share holder out there?

Does that sound like the actions of a nasty evil new BOD?

So now, vote them in and nullify the payoff shares and feed your wallet. Do your part to protect yourself as a share holder.

Ok, I can see the IQ level on this board is going down by the minute. But I expect, from all the shills and misinformation going around that I and others will just have to keep posting the facts:

You will have to vote in a board BEFORE any deal is closed. I can guarantee there will be an existing BDGR board BEFORE any takeover.

Now, open your wallet. See the money in your wallet? Do you want 1/2 of that money or TWICE the money? Once you have answered the question, read on:

The reason I know that this meeting and vote will take place is simple. Lanza wants you to vote him in so he can retro actively authorize his 130 million shares that he issued. That is because he knows darn well that he was not listed as a President, BOD member or anything else in Delaware BEFORE the new BOD took over.

This can be publically verified by anyone here who cares to check.

Hence, the insistance of the vote. Why? Again, to get it in in time to issue the shares before takeover.

Right now, those shares can be contested. No one but an idiot or a pumper would want those shares to go through. Because that will cut the value of what you hold in your hand by ONE HALF.

So, let's keep it simple:

If there is going to be a vote BEFORE the merger, then vote for the team (new BOD) that was brought by share holders to protect your interests. They will nullify those shares and then step aside. I don't see what they would gain by trying to stop this deal, but they can help us between now and then.

Post your facts/ documents/ discussions WITH Lou here. Because you are pumping Lanza with no facts. We know that's how he operates.

But you are proving how crooked the Lanza group is. Keep it up. You are making the case for why we ousted him in the first place.

Why would Lou be trying to squash this deal? But we know where you stand. And Kazax is another of the "family".

*** Correction Kazax was misquoted here. He simply asked another Lanza pumper when the Lanza pumper had heard that Lou was trying to squash the deal. Anyone can call Lou and ask them themselves.

Don't you see why they are so desperate? They want those shares ratified or no one gets "paid".

I want my existing shares to go up in value. The new BOD doesn't appear to be trying to squash anything. They want to make money on their shares as much as you do.

Squash the illegal shares! Vote for the new BOD.

New management will ultimately take over, you will double the value of your existing shares by stopping the newly issued shares.

It's a win for everyone except Lanza and his "family".

Vote the new board in January 16.

They will cut the illegally issued shares and double the value of your existing stock.

Vote with your wallet...

No.

That is the person that is working with the NEW BOD.

And this is what has me worried:

Why does Lanza want to be voted in so badly if, (as Whatnot proposed in his post) this deal goes through- what does it matter if the new entity gets rid of them?

Answer: To validate the 130 million shares he illegally put into place.

Read that again. 130 MILLION SHARES just got created weeks ago. That is approximately double the amount we had a few months back.

Lanza DOUBLED the amount of outstanding shares at this point in time. How in any way does that help share holders?

As Soso says all the time: "He is a convicted felon and stock scammer".

Is that who you want in place?

Why are we having this vote if it doesn't matter?

It this stock reaches a buck a share, then voting in the new BOD means it will be 2 bucks because those shares will not be authorized. If you want to vote with you wallets, why not vote sensibly?

I did not say I approved of this deal. I said the potential is there.

The sooner the liars, thieves, and shills are gone, the better I will feel about the whole thing.

And whether you value my opinion or not, others do. And it is to them that I am directing my comments.

Have another trip to Dallas and go shopping.

The following is what I have currently uncovered and is completely opinion about what I have found and should not be considered investment advice:

A preliminary investigation into this company and some other sources have shown what appears to be the following cornerstones of this whole situation:

The company Summit is for real and apparently trying to put together a deal with Black Dragon.

Lanza is apparently on his way out as he would not be even remotely qualified to head up such a large operation (or even a small one as we have seen).

The very high reserves we have been quoted are not reflecting Black Dragon assets. I can only surmise that this means that they maybe plan to aquire additional properties and put them into Black Dragon or roll BDGR into something else.

If this is really true and they don't plan to gut the company, take the leases and screw each and every one of us, then we could be looking at another RRC.

Since the year 2000, Range Resources went from pennies/share to over 50+ dollars\share through a series of consolidation and production.

So, a precedent exists here.

In addition, I believe that BDGR might be a good vehicle for the consolidation because it is a high volume stock compared to other penny stock oil companies yet the price is exceptionally low (due to mismanagement and possible misappropriation of funds). The problems of BDGR can be corrected with the removal of the current Lanza cartel. So in the end, you would have a company with stock, and the ability to be audited due to the removal of Lanza and his games.

And, of course, he will run off to CADD to play this game all over again.

But the potential upside here is enormous.

I will keep digging and report what I find.

Also, I would recommend voting for Lou, Peter Lau, and Bob McGuire if this share holder meeting actually takes place because you will be much better off with them in charge of such a hand over if indeed this all comes to pass.

Voting for Lanza means voting for dilution of your stock plus the ratification of a lot of other things that are not in your best interests.

"...he also told me that Lou was part of that meeting when it was called and voted for the meeting."

Was the Easter Bunny there as well? Because that is more probable than what you say Lanza told you about Lou. Which brings into question everything else he is telling share holders and how desperate he must be.

Could it be he desperately needs to be voted in to ratify his possible hot shares?

You might want to seriously rethink speaking for Lou and what he was or was not involved in.

Now you have just completely blown any shred of credibility you may have had.

Did it? You willing to bet on that?

Also, wasn't it yesterday you yourself said that at the very least, the new BOD galvanized Lanza into action?

That in and of itself is an acknowledgment of Lanza's history of, shall we say, failure and mismanagement of resources.

And now this deal is being vetted by the new BOD. So we will see what they have to say about it.

Hot hot hot!!!

I think I do understand what constitutes;

Stealing

Lying

Back stabbing

Cheating

Misrepresenting

Obfuscating

Interference

Dubious moral decision making process

Ineptitude

Negligence

Lack of fiduciary responsibility to share holders

Culture of corruption

Arrogance

Stupidity

Denial

Igonorance

and finally...

Justice

Well, not all share holders can read either.

And some share holders don't check the news wires.

And some might be blind or deaf too.

So by that "legal" definition, everything is potentially inside information to someone.

I'll tell you what.

I'll open my legal books when you learn how to use your PC and stop double posting everything here.

And by the way, who is "we"? Simmit?

So, I'm sorry, I just don't understand;

How is a board of directors recognized as the "legal BOD" when the members were NOT listed originally, much less before the contention?

By that logic, I could file an amendment in the state of Delaware and name myself anything I wanted for BDGR.

So all the legal matters must first resolve that issue, otherwise how could any accountability be apportioned?

Has anyone checked the records in Delaware, Factfinder?

Let me ask you a simple question:

Who is listed as the board of the directors of BDGR? And I am not talking about any amendments AFTER the new BOD took over.

Why don't you list the names?

Does Lanza even appear on any of those lists?

Because if the Lanza and co. names do not appear on the filings until after the new BOD took over, there is no legal basis for them to be the rightful BOD any more or less than the new BOD. And as such, they would have no right to issue stock or release any PR's or make any deals any more than they claim the new BOD can.

Because "Corporate Council" recognizes the old BOD? Corporate Council being the Emperor?

The way I see it, "Corporate Council" has appeared to act on Lanza's best interests and not the share holders. If that is found to be true, "Corporate Council" is going to end up disbarred.

The only hostile is the one who still thinks they are running this company. And there is a track record on self interest and lack of fiduciary responsibility to the share holders.

The "take over" has not failed. It has only just begun.

Interesting message. Now we know who the mystery suitor is.

I passed this on to Lou and subsequently, the new board.

Lou responded that the new BOD will be contacting this entity to verify the claims and situation.

He also said that if everything checks out that the new BOD would be more than happy to put a merger into play for the benefit of the share holders.

That doesn't sound like a BOD that wants to hurt share holders. But you have to wonder why Lanza did not allow both groups to talk to each other. I can think of some reasons why, but I will let you all come to those conclusions for yourselves.

Hopefully, this checks out. If so, then we have quite a ride up in valuation coming and you will see the new BOD working on share holders' behalf.

If not, then the new BOD will continue to be rid of Lanza and reconstruct the company into a transparent, profitable enterprise. Either way, share holders win.

GLTA

Heh, that's a nice fantasy of yours and gave me a much needed laugh today.

I think some others would sell out for much less than that.

But, no, I will take my profits in share value or shut this bad boy down for SEC violations. There is no way I am going to walk away without either what I invested or justice. Preferably both.

Some people like to steal. Some people like to put bad guys where they belong. Both are extremes and not easy to understand by all. But, there it is...

Or...

Maybe as the RIGHTFUL BOD, they are tired of the misinformation coming from NON-COMPANY EMPLOYEES.

But I like this whole- "Man they are trying to mess us up!" angle.

Why?

Why would they be trying to hurt the share holders?

And for those who are just trying to run ponies here to get out at your dollar cost averaged down position- and screw all the other share holders, I guess you're still stuck in this ride for a bit longer. LOL!

I guess none of them could answer the question I posed;

Why, if such a huge deal is in the offering, would that entity not talk to the new BOD? Even, in a worst case scenario, to find out what they would do and how they would react to such a deal?

I find it hard to believe that the new BOD would not tell us about such a deal if it existed. Since they are share holders at much higher dollar cost averages, I just don't see how they would not benefit from a legitimate buyout offer if it were the right price.

And if I were getting a 100 million dollar loan and my rear end was on the line, I would would want to know about EVERY faction, legitimate, illegitimate, hot, cold, purple, or whatever!

I went through a 20 minute background check yesterday just to get some Claratin with pseudophedrine. That seems like more DD than has been done here with Lanza!

"...I then requested to speak with Mr. Neely. I was given his contact number. I was highly disturbed to learn how his daughter had been harassed and threatened by the New Board. As a parent and grandmother, I suggested to Mr. Neely that legal action should be taken. No credible, professional businessman calls a Director's residence and harasses a young woman. The New Board also left a message on Mr. Neely's answering machine with the same similar tactic. This message has been saved and turned over to Black Dragon's legal council."

I called Lou from the new BOD about this. He, in turn, talked directly to Mr. Neely.

Mr. Neely stated that a call of some sort was made to his daughter but that he does not believe that it was in any way made from, or instigated by any of the new board or elements thereof. Mr. Neely believes that it was possibly a disgruntled share holder.

But you all may call Mr. Neely yourselves or any of the new BOD if you want to confirm this independantly.

Also, I think we now know who posted this message...

Priceless. (Sound of applause).

I love the messages where people portray Lanza as a helpless victim. That's a good one. Also, these messages hit all the same points in the same order. You guys should try mixing it up a little bit!

Also, these messages are always posted by people who just came into existence on that very day.

So let's get back to reality:

Some share holders trying to sell you out from under and telling you that you should have averaged down like they did.

Lanza trying to railroad a new deal with ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF OF ANY KIND except his word.

Pumpers coming here and saying they called him and he told them everything was on the up and up.

Nebulous claims of misdeeds against the new BOD that have NOT ONCE BEEN VERIFIED WITH ANY DOCUMENTATION OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF PROOF.

All adds up to a disaster on January 17th (day after this purported vote).

"Spunky, to some it's just a game to others it's life savings."

I'm glad that you acknowledge the gravity of the situation for many share holders out there.

So, wouldn't you support a thorough investigation of this purported deal? Why do you say Lou and the new BOD would get in the way?

If someone is trying to work around them, then they are trying to work around a majority of the share holders (present 130 million newly issued shares under contention and subject to ratification notwithstanding). Plain and simple.

What is the hurry? If you really want a dollar/share, how far do you think this rally will go on smoke and mirrors?

My question to all is, again, how would you feel if the new BOD halted this transaction until a full investigation could be conducted?

Isn't that what we voted the new BOD in for- accountability?

Have they come out and said they would not support such a deal? NO! They have simply said nothing. This is disturbing, but there could be many legitimate reasons for this.

I would say, if we do not hear or see a response from them on this issue, then we should worry about their intentions or effectiveness. Let's not let the tail wag the dog or a few panicky share holders lead you all off the cliff like lemmings!

GLTA

My opinion only. Not to be considered or used as investment advice.

Just out of curiosity,

How would share holders feel if the new BOD stops this "deal" or at least the share holder vote trying to be railroaded through this next week until further investigation can reveal the nature and terms of this deal?

I mean, think about it;

If this deal was so legitimate, then why was the new BOD not consulted, much less contacted?

If you were going throw 100 million at something, wouldn't you want to talk to all the players? Just to make sure you had a legal leg to stand on, at the very least?

If Lanza was so confident about his postion in BDGR (which changes almost by the day), then why is he trying to rush this through?

So, if anyone is up to posting some feedback to a potential stop of the vote and rescheduling after the terms of the deal are presented clearly and fully to all? How would you take that kind of situation? Because I find it hard to believe that the new BOD is going to sit back and let Lanza get voted in.

Just my opinion. Not intended to be used as investment advice.

Looks to me like the combination of freshly minted illegal shares being dumped into the market and diluting the share price

PLUS

The selling into the rise by some of your fellow share holders who are telling you all not to whizz on the electric fence

EQUALS

The churning and bubbling of the stock around this level.

"Ask Lou if Bob has any more stock tips, you know what I am talking about.Sec"

No, I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are referring to here any more than I understand your unwillingness to now support the new BOD which YOU voted for.

Maybe you can explain that to me and all the other share holders here.

Well Yankee,

You and others will never give them the chance by attempting to take back your support at this critical juncture.

Funny how the people who say:

"All I care about is the share price" and

"Show me the money"

are the very people that are attempting to scuttle the new BOD's efforts and blow up the company.

59 minute hour, according to that logic.

I'll take that bet.

I bet your money, that you LOSE on this in the near and long term, unless you consider shorting the stock.

This company is one of the shell companies of Lanza. And assuming that you are not a pumper and maybe a day trader, there is much more downside to this stock than upside due to the contention of share holders fighting against Lanza right now. No audit, no discernible assets, and the potential of assets being slid into this shell from other Lanza entities.

SEC is watching as well as a horde of angry share holders from BDGR.

But, do you what you feel you must.

I'll take that bet.

I bet your money, that you LOSE on this in the near and long term, unless you consider shorting the stock.

This company is one of the shell companies of Lanza. And assuming that you are not a pumper and maybe a day trader, there is much more downside to this stock that upside. No audit, no discernible assets, and the potential of assets being slid into this shell from other Lanza entities.

SEC is watching as well as a horde of angry share holders from BDGR.

But, do you what you feel you must.

Now we all know who has switched sides.

Go ahead and ask these guys what THEIR plan is.

They have none.

Some share holders have sold all of you out after buying into some cock and bull story that someone fed them as they were panicing.

That is exactly what Lanza is counting on for the 16th. You vote him in, you lose everything.

I expected much more, but I see that there was much less to work with.

I'm working on it, Dragonman.

I can't promise I will be successful, but I have put 18 months of blood sweat and tears into this, and I will be made whole if at all possible and most certainly NOT at the expense of other honest share holders.

There is money, expertise, local people in Lousiana and a host of other good things waiting once Lanza is gone. And that is what I am working on every day, as a vested share holder in BDGR, doing my small part.

And any help to that effect would be welcome. And one way to do that is to work with the new BOD.

GLTA