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.
techno, Im sorry, I dont remember my question. Im all over the map today. Sorry.
So we are down to 618,813,470 shares from 748,813,470.
Then my guess is there is not a rig running. But I am sure if there is one on site, MXXH would tell us before it even got there. :) lol.
Is Baker Hughes the only Drill Rig company in Texas? Or are there other companies in the state that drill?
BBake, actually if you look at it again, the arrow that states "Largest Accumulation of oil" points to Dewitt County. And the oil producing just SW of that is still Dewitt Count.
avarita, if you look at that map you posted, it shows the lower half of Dewitt County, Texas smack in the heart of the concentration of oil and gas.
The lower caption with the arrow that says "Largest Oil Accumulation" actually points to the northern part of Dewitt County.
jb, the problem with your statement is that you give too much credit to the posters like BB. BB made it clear that the $17,465 is the value of the lease. He did refer me back to the statements.
As per his request, I went back to the statement and the asset and accompanying liability is titled "defered work over costs"
Additionally, there is nothing in the financial statements that state that anything has been converted.
The value of the lease is not yet booked. This entry is purely the cost associated of the 25% of the workover by BNPD to get 1 or 4 wells re worked. Clearly they did not identify if $17,465 is for 1 or more of the 4 wells.
AVa, spot on!!!
AND? What is the the question? I dont get the point of the statement.
BB, any option, warrants, units, convertibles are always part of the fully diluted numbers. So I do not understand why you keep pressing this is hidden.
Can you enlighten me on why you keep mentioning fully diluted and conversions of warrants, options, convertible, etc.
It is not like conversions, options warrants, add to the fully diluted as they are not already part of it and add to make it even further.
BB, Where does it say they spent $17k for the 4 wells?
I do not see anything that spells out in the "notes to the financials" that $17k was spent on purchasing a lease.
Please look at the financial statements better, because I did not conclude that at all.
You have your right to your opinion. I respect that.
In 1991-1993 I shared an office with the Reorg dept at the corp. office of a brokerage firm. So I am saying, I am not making this up. I actually helped in the Reorg dept from time to time when I had free time.
I think the process is still intact and I think it still applies to companies like BNPD.
Absolutely. All the clearing firms and brokerage firms will have to plug in the new cusip in their software. It should only take a day. But some clearing firms and smaller brokers will be slower.
They will see:
-250,000 BNPD - OLD
+250,000 TXOM - NEW
Clearing firms and the compliance will say until this flattens out, no trading.
DTCC will not clear or transfer 250,000 BNPD old as the cusip will no longer work.
Some clearing firms will not have the new cusip effective in their software. So you cannot sell 250,000 BNPD and you cannot sell 250,000 TXOM.
And they wont let you buy shares of TXOM until the cusip is in the system
It will take a few days and I am sure Tom was informed and to plan this properly with his filings.
FINRA has nothing to do with this. This is DTCC, the TA and all the clearing firms.
It takes a few days. Someone has to plan on exactly when to do this.
Maybe they did not realize it until they were told about it. It is what I would call strategic planning.
Finra cannot stop a name change unless they a) do not have an effected amended articles filed with the SOS office of Nevada. Which it is on the SOS of Nevadas website. So we know that is not the case.
b) the company has not paid for and acquired a new cusip. They have a new cusip.
Finra in this case has no basis to deny, because they have to comply with State and corporate governance.
This tells me, they realized the reorg. process and are planning on this at the right time.
So I disagree.
They should have done the name change back when. But now they have to effect the name change while the company is in the middle of reorganization.
Paying $150 to S&P for a new cusip means filing out a form and paying $150. I'm sure they did that. Nothing to deny or refuse.
Texas Oil and BNPD, filed the amended articles with the State of Nevada. It is done, and the SOS of Nevada wont process it unless it is paid, and any past due taxes are due.
So that is done.
Finra has no right to accept or deny a name change, provided that cusip has been paid $150 and that Finra has received the certified copy from the SOS office in Nevada.
The only reason why it is not effective is because the Company is planning their reorganization period.
Once the name change goes effective, this stock will have hiccups at brokerage firms globally. The reorganization departments in clearing firms and brokerage firms just don't jump for pinksheet stocks to update within seconds because the company sent it in. It takes a few days and causes a mess.
Many people will see BNPD (OLD) and TOXM or whatever symbol (NEW) and brokers will see two positions and they will be locked up until reorg fixes it. Sometimes this takes a few days and it is up to the clearing firm.
Compliance will not let people buy or sell "old" versus "new" until they can flatten out the position.
If you are GM, you have high powered lawyers that call compliance and reorg and make sure this goes seamlessly. If you are BNPD, they put you on eternal hold.
I applaud Tom or BNPD or Texas Oil for understanding the methods and mechanisms to make this as about seamless as possible as to not stick it to the shareholder.
Could be a mm trying to flatten out.
Mr. Penny, that bid was there yesterday.
Good sign that the person did not change their mind overnight.
Goes to show you how people feel about the future of this new company.
big, I have to run. But ill look up this stuff.
Thanks for your insight.
Big, I will take what you have to say to heart about BEHL and BNPD prior relationship. It sounds that BEHL basically had a party in BNPD's house and left the mess and bill with BNPD.
Give me some time to research and get back to you.
Is that fair?
BB, even better for Texas Oil and Minerals if what you say is in fact more accurate than what others are posting.
If in fact BEHL received shares for no consideration; And, BEHL principals and "puppet masters" (as previously mentioned in other posts, i.e. Hayden)sold said shares in the public markets, then BEHL and "puppet masters" not only violated state law, but violated rules promulgated by the "securities act of 1933".
With that said, "puppet masters" and BEHL can and may have engaged in contracts that are not enforceable and if they have no severability clauses, they are not enforceable. If the severability exist, it can be challenged and tossed because they do not comply with NRS.
If "puppet masters" want to receive "illegally" issued shares for no consideration or by defaulting on consideration, said shares can be canceled.
Now if said "puppet masters" or principals at BEHL sold these shares in the markets, they are in violation of the act of 1933 and the selling shareholders can be sanctioned by the SEC. Including, but not limited to DnC orders and expulsion from being and officer, director, or affiliated shareholder of any public company in the future. The SEC can also sanction said selling shareholder from never owning shares in the future of any company, including IBM or AAPL.
Maybe "puppet master" will buy shares in his or her kids name in the future projects if said sanctions take place.
The company, BNPD can also pursue civil penalties in retrieving said shares based upon board approval.
If the "puppet master" wants to present his case in Carson City against said board action in front of a judge, said "puppet master" will have to disclose his cause, justification, and consideration for past issued, and future issued shares.
I think as a new investor in Texas Oil, that the old dealings with "puppet masters" and invalid contracts will soon fall to the side.
"Puppet master" debt is not BEHL debt, BEHL debt is not BNPD debt is not Texas Oil debt.
tolo, someone posted yesterday that they had knowledge that the debt is based on someone who paid to promote BEHL stock and billed it to BNPD.
Nevada Revised Statues under Chapter 78 does not provide this being consideration for shares, and any shares issued to a person or entity receiving shares for such transaction could and should be considered in default for consideration as provided under the NSR.
The Company cannot issues shares under Nevada law because this guy or some entity says so.
If the poster is accurate, then the shares cannot be converted circumventing the law. The Board of Directors do not have the authority to issue the shares in violation of the NRS, and if the shares are issued, they are issued invalidly and can be and will be immediately revoked for default. The debt holder can hire counsel and petition the court in Carson City and attempt to make an argument that the debt holder has a right to circumvent the law, but that will be determined ineffective.
What the debt holder has on the company, in the event there is an agreement, egregious as it may be, is that the Company be compelled to retire said debt in other consideration such as cash or other "legal" means.
In otherwords, I highly doubt that new management is going to violate NRS to pay some old agreement that violated the law. But new management will have to deal with the debt in a legal manner.
You will not see illegal shares issued from an agreement that violated State Laws to make him go away and generate egregious and ill-gotten gains.
llbo, that would be my guess too.
"mustspeaku"p, The company is domiciled in Nevada and it is even posted in the header of this board with a link to the Secretary of State's office of the state of Nevada.
Also, Fidelity Stock Transfer is not the transfer agent of record. If you went to otcmarkets.com (formerly pinksheets.com) you would find the current transfer agent.
It is strange that BEHL people are venturing over to this thread all of a sudden. Because someone desired purchasing this shell and is making an attempt to make something of it, versus purchasing BEHL does not allow people to become malicious.
I cannot help you that names that have been offered out today such as Pawson, Hayden, or Fisher have not been beneficial.
But for now, there appear to be good people trying to make a difference in this shell and progress appears to be made.
If Hayden paid for stock promotion for BEHL, I have no clue how that applies to BNPD. And the BoD of BNPD can justify lack of consideration and or default for such activity as described in the NRS.
If this Hayden paid for BEHL stock promotion, but is billing it to BNPD, Nevada can disallow it, and Hayden can appear and petition the court in Carson City to attempt to justify it. I would find it funny to see this Hayden appear before a judge in Carson City to tell him/her that he is specifically allowed to circumvent the NRS and that he is smarter than the legal staff of the SOS office and the legal staff of the states legislators who drafted the NRS. Hayden cannot just make up laws as he goes along. But if he says so.
It makes no sense for Hayden to pay stock promotions to BEHL and bill it to BNPD, an expense that is not valid consideration for shares under Nevada RS.
From Truth.....
"JD did not disclose that there are CD's to the new owners, in fact the CD holders hired an atty to attempt to get the SEC to halt. The TA has not even been paid. Big fraud going on by JD while him and family are selling."
Something people here do not know, but clearly you do, means you are a related or interested party. If you are an interested/related party, why are you posting non-public data here on a board?
If you are not a related party, how did you come about this information, and "some people are talking" is not that valid.
m, yes oil. I saw cable ask what if there is "NO OIL" (I don't understand the caps or shout out), but these are re-work wells that are already producing and I think this has already been pointed out. The point is to get them to produce more on a daily basis.
So smelling oil, well yes, oil is already there. And to ask what if there is "NO OIL" on 4 wells that are already producing, makes no sense.
If the faucet is on, and the liquid is flowing, why would you say, "What if it does not come out". I just dont get that statement at all.
As far as drilling a new well, yep, they will test along the fault they know already has oil based upon the other 4 wells.
I agree with you muscleshoals on BNPD.
Bid support is the size of the stocks 10 vol. avg. Good base here.
jaybot,
MRO signed a deal that provides to purchase $3.5 Billion in leases in the Eagle Ford Shale. But when you read the press release, it does not use the words LOI, it says, "plans to" and "will" all throughout the announcement.
MRO plans to close on the deal by the end of 2011 which is 7 months from now.
As you can see, this is an LOI and MRO has been in business for more than 3 years.
It is normal for any business of any size to engage in discussion to acquire assets or other businesses and they do go through a procedural phase.
jb,
Actually, when the preferred shares were authorized, at whatever point back in history, the Company was to provide the state of Nevada in which it is domiciled to file a Certificate of Designation on the Rights and Privileges of .....(specific series of preferred stock). This document is designed to spell out the conversion, voting, designation, amounts, dividends, distributions, restrictions, reacquired shares, liquidation, dissolution, and many other rights attached and/or assigned to this class of shares.
Under no circumstances, would the state of Nevada accept this filing with a conversion that would exceed the underlying shares representing the conversion into common.
This has no bearing that the Company can increase the A/S at a future date.
The statues prohibit this, and the clerk in the SOS office in Nevada is pretty good at catching these formulas.
In addition, since the increase in one class of shares severely impacts another class of shares, the increase in the A/S requires a board resolution by the majority of the BoD either held at a legal meeting or by written consent. On top of that, based on the two classes impacting each other, it requires a vote of the majority of the shareholders, either majority of a quorum at a valid meeting or by written consent.
Keep in mind, written consent must occur with only a few shareholders. Too many shareholders can be construed as soliciting proxies illegally, and be considered an invalid consent form for not providing at least 10 days and proper information to all shareholders as provided by the statues.
Thus, again, I suggest that the SOS of Nevada will prohibit 20 Billion Preferred shares to have a conversion ratio that will exceed 2.5 Billion common shares as of RIGHT NOW! Unless that is you think the clerks office at the SOS of NEV is incompetent.
Just an extra edit to add, any decent lawyer would write a section into the Cert. of Designation for Pref. stock that its rights and privileges cannot be changed to the certificate of Incorporation at any future date, as to protect these rights by any other class of shareholders or future board. So my guess is this preferred is not able to be amended and do not convert into shares that can cause the common shares to be issued higher than the current 2.5b authorized.
That being the case, the SOS of Nev will not have it, or accept it.
Convertible Preferred mean nothing with respect to surpassing the 2.5B in common and dilution. They cannot issue more than the 2.5 billion in common, no matter how many preferred shares there are. No ifs, and or but about it. If there are really 20B authorized, they must convert at a fraction of a share of common. AND, the company must take into consideration that these shares, if converted and issued be taken in consideration of the fully diluted number.
The preferred shares have preference on dissolution, and votes. But they cannot, nor will not impact converting into shares that will surpass the 2.5B common. Cannot, will not, impossible. Like it or not, but the Nevada revised statutes forbid it, cannot be done, will not be done, and the transfer agent will not do it. Transfer Agents get audited yearly, they get visited and spot checked. So unless the Transfer Agent wants to be out of business on its next audit, IT WILL NOT HAPPEN.
BB, can you point to BNPD or its predecessor's 15-12g filing. Also, if they filed a 15-12g filing, where are the current filings at that contemporaneous time period.
Thanks.
Okay, but like I said, I am not always around. I guess an assist, works.
i
Thanks for looking that up.
Okay,
Well, then we are literally approaching it.
I would, I just do not have the time to monitor boards every day. I travel a lot.
Salad, Last week, I could not really pinpoint where this stock may go, only the momentum play. That was why I was mad at people a while back for promoting this stock going to $2.50 and making a shell with no assets worth $1billion or so over night.
But I do like the press release yesterday. While it may not be complete yet, it does explain the value of the potential lease and how it impacts the future potential of this company.
I can say you have been mentioning $0.10 as a target. And the funny thing is that the numbers in the PR validates just that, in my mind anyway.
It appears they are going to spend 25% of the $350,000 to drill the new well, and pay $50,000 to purchase 25% of the lease. They clearly will have to spend 25% an undisclosed amount to re-work the existing 4 wells.
All in all, they expect payback in 4 months. But it will take about 30 days in my opinion to close on this deal, and the geologist will need 2 months to run 3d seismic.
I see payback and positive cashflow in 7 months from now with operational cash flow positive of $450,000 per year 12 months forward looking beginning 7 months from now.
I know it is not a lot, and as an explorer, the G&A should be minimal except for a cheap office and salaries to Tom Gouger. There will be costs associated with being a public company.
So I do expect them to announce additional properties and leases.
But forgetting other unknown potential leases, and including 106,000,000 converted shares, even though they may or may not be converted, the income statements have to reflect on a fully-diluted basis anyway
One can assume on a zealous 100 p/e that this can trade at $0.10 based on this data only and can trade there in advance of the numbers, about 12 months, can even get away with 18 months forward looking.
And this does not take into account any scuttlebutt about an Eagle Ford lease.
I do think that news of closing on this transaction and that the re-work is underway, could launch this stock to $0.10 and stay there.
It will take news of other leases to really keep it there of course, but I am sure Mr. Gouger has no plans to base this company on only 4 re-worked wells. So I anticipate additional targets.
One could argue further dilution for this acquisition, but there are ways to acquire leases with no out of pocket costs. Such as the person or entity who is selling the lease, may take a small royalty interest in exchange for consideration.
Royalty interests and Working Interests are two different things. Meaning the seller will give the lease to the buyer but the seller does not have to pay to re-work the well. The WI partners pay the bills, the NYI partners receive their respected percentage with no out of pocket or risks associated.
This is very possible on how some leases might find their way on the books.
What cannot be done this way is drilling costs. Not 100% true, some operators will take some percentages for RI against the WI partners. But there are still hard costs to drill. Such as employees, water, road prep, wood for roads, mud, wire line logs like Baker Huges who just do not care and only want cash.
But there are creative ways to reduce costs and dilution.
In the end Salad, I can believe $0.10 in about 30 days upon disclosure of a final agreement and re-working in the works.
I do recall, but cannot pinpoint it exactly, that when they announced the clovelly purchase...it took about a year before they drilled it. And that when the operator contracted greywolf, it took greywolf a while to get the rig in place.
I cannot remember exactly, and I could be wrong. But I really do not have the time to go research it and be accurate.
They announced this property late last year. so if history repeats itself, we should be nearing what could be its pattern.
Well, they did file an 8k update. Not all news services publish them. Some do.
Are you referring to horizontal drilling?
letme, I read the limited statements posted on otcmarkets and it said the convertible notes were consolidated.
This tells me that it is one note holder and it would behoove them to only convert up to approximately 30 million shares because if they own more, they would be over 10% and be considered affiliates and the shares would be re-restricted automatically and not available to sell in the market.
Something I tried to tell nxxi the other day, but she refused to listen.
owning 106million shares out of 400 million shares is 25% ownership and the shares become locked up by law.
No lawyer will draft an opinion to free up 25% of the outstanding, and no transfer agent will accept freeing up 25% of the outstanding as it violates the "act of 1933"
In the event a crooked lawyer did write an opinion letter, and in the event a Transfer Agent makes a mistake and lets it through, what Brokerage firm will risk their license, fines, and criminal charges for a few bucks in commission to sell restricted shares.
nxxi, refuses to accept the laws as promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 and that there are many checks and balances to prohibit this activity from happening.
Does, Grey have rigs sitting? As in we could get one now? Or is there a wait list as some here have mentioned? I do not know where to find that information. I guess I can go look on GW 10k.
Ill let you know if I find something.