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.
What did I tell you about calling someone a conartist?...
Bow to your master!
Let me address a few of these, Mongo...
1) Ongoing trading a few years back while the coporation was apparently administratively dissolved due to non-payment of fees to the SOS of Colorado.
You're clueless. The non-payment of fees does not dissolve a corporation. That is why they have late fees and interest tacked on to required state payments. Secondly, annual licenses and fees are required for 2 reasons; 1.) raise revenue for the state and 2.) protect the public. This one happens to be a revenue raiser.
4) The number of independent directors as defined in SEC/NASD/OTCBB requirements.
You can make a case for any corporation not having independent directors. It's a phallacy.
5) The removal of the 'going concern' statement in light of cash flow reqiurements demonstrated by years and years of filings.
Clueless here, too. Like I said b/4, the "going concern" opinion probably should have never been there in the first place. Accounting standards requirement is very strict regarding "going concern" opinions. There can be NO DOUBT about a company's ability to continue beyond 1 year. I think several years have passed since that opinion was released.
7) The terms and conditions appproved for loans, share conversion, and consulting agreements for CHROME and Offor that were approved by a BOD that OFFOR / CHROME appointed.
Since the man is the only reason this company exists today I doubt they will give you the time of day on this one. Also, as long as Offor says he will lend the company money to continue, the "going concern" opinion is inapproriate, period!!!
8) An 'oversight' at the one shareholder meeting when Ali 'forgot' to mention a 73 million share transaction that had already occured.
Since when is this required to be addressed at a s/h meeting?
9) The 'moderators'(with announced financial motivations) of this Board who delete factual information while leaving unfounded speculation up.
LOL, you're really a clown!!!!!!!!
10) Operators of Blogs who post blatantly untrue information. (I KNOW THIS IS A FACT, because it has been posted about me)
It's a blog, what the hell do you expect? If the man was an insider it would be a different story.
Understand one thing, Mongo...
ERHC has to come up with NO MONEY in any block except MAYBE block 2.
The rest of your post is just smoke and mirrors.
Mongo, looks like you realize this is...
the home stretch. You seem to be kicking you drivel up a notch or 2, LOL.
Mongo, you forgot one thing...
ERHC is not the operator in block 5.
Actually, the operators are required to accept 100%...
of the costs to 1st oil.
Look it up!
Plenty ya shyster...
If it's profitable to spend $2.7 billion on a field that will only produce 0.4 billion barrels of oil, how profitable do you think it will be to spend that kind of money on a field that is expected to produce 3.5 to 4 billion barrels of oil?
Y
Top Drive, Alsoer is definitely the most...
stupid, ignut arse out there.
Even Mongo can't act that stupid, LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Actually the successor, Balance.**
Yes, but on who...
and what relevance does it have?
xxmmax, no offense but you don't know...
what you're talking about. Auditors resigning are neither rare nor always bad.
Ask me why again in January, Mongo.**
I'm not concerned about their cash currently, Mongo.**
Top Drive, the buy-in (if it ever happens) price...
will be determined purely by negotiation and will not require any form of opinion from a CPA.
TFA, current accounting rules do not allow...
a successor auditor to accept an engagement if the predecessor auditor has not been paid, period.
Oilman, the accounting firm has ZERO liability...
to the shareholders. Under accounting principles you have to have absolute certainty that the company cannot pay it's bills over the next 12 months to issue a going concern opinion. ERHE has been operating over a year since the removal of that opinion from their financial statements.
You ever consider that they resigned...
so they could invest in the company?
I would venture a guess that you hadn't. You don't seem smart enough!
ERHC needs get Devon back in block 4...
They will get a larger piece of the pie now. Maybe it would be enough to satisfy them?
procon, I think XOM is out of block 4...
They did not exercise their preferential rights nor did they bid on block 4.
However, that does not preclude XOM buying-out APC after the under-the-table dealings are finished.
You should not be calling anybody...
a "conartist", Mongrel!!!
"Mon"goose, "Mon"keytrots and "Mon"grel...
See a pattern there?
It's a long-term play at least, bulldog.**
LOL, multi-billion $ project, Mongo?...
Yeah, that's an independent opinion, ROTFL.
That is one thing I've been consistently told...
There have been interested parties but noone willing to pony up what the big boys want. When the awards were formally announced and ERHC was awarded more than anybody expected, they were certain somebody was going to throw down some cash....didn't happen then and it's not expected currently.
Buy-in, buy-out ain't gonna happen!**
Pure speculation, magic.**
I'm wondering if Petrobras could be in a position...
to take Noble's place in block 4. If I remember correctly, they are trying to get into west african oil exploration.
We're just practicing for when there's an earthquake.**
Asks the man with no legs, LOL.**
No, Gig is not a basher at all...
that I know of. He was a moderator at one time, though. I just like to know everything so I can make the best decision with the info available.
I have no bad blood with Gig AT ALL!!!
Gig, if you know you tell us.**
I agree, oilman...
XOM is trying for one last push to get the block up for rebid in the next round.
That would definitely work for me, Balance...
The problem would be getting the officers to agree to it, LOL.
Noble could also be pissed that they are being...
asked to carry the interest of the indies also. It was said that some would have a hard time coming up with their share of the drilling costs.
nwtf, APC probably challenged the awarding...
of the block to the consortium even though APC had the highest bid. Allowing the consortium to match APC's bid to get operatorship was a no-no I felt. They should have given them the block at the lower bid instead of appeasing the STPers.
procon, if Noble bails on block 4...
I think it would put ERHC's interest in block 4 at risk. Yes, block 4 was signature bonus free but ERHC's interest in the exploration costs were being carried by Noble. With no Noble there is no free carry. ERHC has nowhere near the funds to pay for it's share of the exploration costs.
This would be a dreadful event for ERHC I'm afraid.
Damn, Balance...
I have some bad news. For Limited Partnerships, Partnerships, LLCs, LLPs and S-Corporations, members/owners/shareholders/partners pay tax on their distributive of the business income. Money received from these types of entities are called "distributions" for tax purposes. Whether or not you receive a distribution in any particular year, you must pay tax on your share of the income.
Example: Say you are a 10% owner of a limited partnership that makes $100,000 for 2005 and the L.P. does not make any distributions. You would have to report $10,000 of income on your personal tax return for 2005 and pay the tax even though you did not receive any money from the business.
Furthermore, that income is taxed as ordinary income and the tax rate on that income could be as high as 35% (i.e. the highest tax rate in effect for that year).
I wouldn't like that kind of deal at all. I want ERHC to be a straight C-Corporation and I'll take my chances on the dividends (Dividends are only received from C-Corporations) and capital gains on stock sales.
A couple of things, Balance...
I've never seen a Limited Partnership pay any kind of income taxes, federal or state. Some states require that they pay franchise taxes on debt and capital, though.
I got a call in to see what the "new deal" was across the pond. I'll let you know when I find out.
Mongo is an XOM employee.**
No sweat, doug.**