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.
Thanks for the post. After reading through it, it is obvious that Barnett is finished and Lanza will probably own whatever there is in OMDA, which looks like zero. But the three other companies listed should provide some interesting research.
OK-just facts, confirmed production in Jan. & Feb. which was lousy is comparable to Lucas Energy at 2.65/share. Share dilution gives you .96/share comparable. And this does not take in to consideration that BDGR has many more wells and acreage than Lucas. This is what the companies looking at BDGR are seeing, buying a company at a discount realtive to the market. The ROI of BDGR based on these prices is a nobrainer based on production. Imagine someone doing it right.
News Out- 6700 barrels of oil produced in March. If it is half true, what is the value of BDGR in relation to a company lik Lucas.
CT, did you get a response from the SEC on the short posistion in BDGR?
CT, did you get a response from the SEC on the short posistion in BDGR?
Part Two, Lanza's problem(one of many), is that he is negotiating a deal with a stock price that is a detriment to him and the shareholders. That stock price seems to have fallen in the last six months with the aid of a now missing poster on this board. Granted Lanza and BDGR did not do many things that would help the stock but they seem to have had help with all of this downward price action in the stock. The possibility of a deal and the removal of the board was something that most of the shareholders wanted. We were told that we were heading there but I question the motives of the deal. No doubt, Joe L. is looking out for himself first, but what he does benefits shareholders also. Why did a certain poster and his second alias stop posting? And look up his original posting date and scroll through his methodology of posts. Make your own conclusions.
Look at one of the companies involved in talks with BDGR, Lucas Energy. Revenue is $1 million at present, $2 million in debt, 29 million shares outstanding. They know how to run a company because they do have a profit. Stock price is $2.65. They are interested in BDGR for the assets and nothing else. Even at the god awful Jan/Feb numbers, BDGR was producing more than LUCE and March will make that a larger discrepancy. They have been acquiring assets with stock. What do you think BDGR is worth based on LUCE's value. My number is much higher than .1650.
Hi Tbird, I agree Lanza is Lanza and he is only looking out for himself, but shareholders may benefit despite this. It has been confirmed by other sources besides Lanza on the other companies in negotiations. The interesting twist to this are the motives behind all of this.
TBird, consider this scenario. Original deal with a private company, merger, new expertise, combined value .70$/share +. Nice thought, somebody dragging their heals, possibly hoping for a "better" deal. All of a sudden, new deal, listed company, reporting, aquiring company, offering .40-.50$/share. Still somebody dragging their heals. Where's the audit that was suppose to be done by somebody? Whose name do we assume to be somebody, I do not know. But consider what lies underneath the first few layers. Add to this, where is badrguy,aquaman, or whatever he was calling himself? Personally, I think all of this makes a good book. Meanwhile, legitimate companies want to talk with BDGR. That says a lot. Take care.
OMDA is a fraud, look up their management and the lawsuits against them. That should remove any doubt about OMDA's viability.
Very true and for whatever it is worth, I think Lanza realizes this.
There is a rumored investment firm that holds over 20 million shares. Lanza supposedly has sold many of his shares, but he does control the preferred. The other insiders are ? and if anyone can help here, feel free. Part of the discussions for a merger, buyout, etc. are to bring in a seasoned and experienced management team. Will you expand on you RRC observation?
I think amicus or whatever he is today is back in. I just saw a buy trade for 121 shares.
Yankee, it is interesting that they are quiet, maybe they have been fired. DK is doing well also.
CT, there seems to be an effort to hold this at .16, lots of buys at that price and no movement yet by the market makers.
In general, you cannot use a prior conviction as evidence in a different case. Most judges will not allow it to be admissible. Especially where the prior conviction was not related to any type of securities violation. And unlike badrguy and some others, any case that I would want to pursue would be in the interest of shareholder value, not the destruction of it. Revenge doesn't make you rich, just bitter.
badrguy, thanks for the resume, send it to Barry, maybe he can use you on his next assignment.
I would not pursue Lanza under RICO but at least you are trying to make a case, although biased. Also, pursuing Lanza, if you were looking for the best possible outcome monetarily, Lanza would be better. And if you are hell bent on revenge(jail), a case against Lanza could produce that also. If one is an investor, that would be the best scenario. But very few cases are ever won on securities fraud.
Snowcrow, your last line speaks volumes to the present.
Lanza"s interests are not with BDGR but with what he can get for himself, but this is probably true in many business deals. If I was selling my company, I would be looking for the best deal for me, period. The circumstances involved in any dealing would probably involve Lanza's denial or pigheadedness about reality. My understanding is that Barry is stll around. RM absence is not that recent.
Spunky, he controls the company with the voting rights so any deals have to have his blessing. One would hope that he recognizes the reality of the situation.
Yankee, abat been running, DK looks good if it holds the gap, and take a look at DPTR. Its run a bit from where I liked it but the upside looks good and there are a lot of shorts. Take a look, just in case you have some extra cash in the next several weeks.
Getting him to do #7 would be the biggest problem.
What you know and how you interpret it is different for everyone. Half empty or half full. My case half baked. Good luck.
Tbird, curious, will reentry for you be based on price or circumstances, or something else?
Yankee, DK doing quite well, stopping around 18.5 after filling the gap short term? Take it easy on Tbird, I'm sure your day to really gloat will come.
Local, how does EPA and LA classify crude oil in regards to a spill. I deal in refined product so I do not have any exposure to that type of product, or that state. Also, if there is a spill, what are the notification & reporting requirements on crude spills?
Your own posts accuse you of lying. Do you understand the statement, or do we need to go to class. Keep posting BS and I'll keep reminding you of it. Now are you not late for class, your post reference, not mine.
Interesting observation, tchauncy disappeared quickly after some of the posts, but a crook like Barnett wouldn't know when to leave. Can he post from jail?
Once again, avoid your lies and statements you cannot defend. Now come back with your line, the audit, do you want me to write you some better material, dragon man can edit it for you. And I'm waiting for you to teach me something new, hope I live long enough.
In that case, you should have stated it that way. I will not disagree that Lanza has been a problem, I never have, I am looking at the best remedies, I feel that you are not interested in those. If you are a shareholder, you should not disagree with that. If you are not, then what is your purpose, and no pontification of trying to save myself and other shareholders, because if you are of that righteouness, then you would still want my original statement of remedies. If you are here just to bash, just state it factually.
Everytime you post you reveal more of your deficiencies, Sarbanes-Oxley is refered to as SOX. I figured SOX would be easier for you to spell. And once again, your last post reveals your desire not to address YOUR inaccuracies.
Is this post an admission of your purpose to drive BDGR into the ground, or are you just having more trouble with your words and thoughts.
Do not get upset because when confronted you can not answer your own statements. As I have stated in the past, Lanza has been a problem which needs to be corrected, I've also stated that I thought Barry had a chance to correct the past situation at BDGR. You deal in past time lines. Situations in business are always fluid and guess what, you and I are not on the list for every circumstance that occurs. Statements have been made by a poster this past weekend about rumors in the area and such. Think, if just for a minute, if you were interested in buying a company, what would be the first thing you would want. I'll answer this for you because obviously you cannot answer much of anything, the financials. You are too obsessed in your own negativity to see any of this, or choose not to. Did you at anytime do any DD on what Barry might do for a living, or were just too interested in trying to find a negative about him. I will admit, that I do not know if Barry will be successful, remember I said that I thought he had a chance based on my gut feeling about him, not the audit, not Lanza, not your redundent posts about the past. So, now I'll give you a treat, the answer to your own statement about SOX and Bdgr. If you knew the statement was wrong and were just afraid to admit it or you just have projectile vomitting with your inaccurate statements. SOX does not apply to a company such as BDGR. Now go dream up another lie.
You cannot explain your own statements, so your statements hold no truth.
badrguy, I gave you a clue in my statement on short selling last night. You still have failed to provide an answer to your own statement on SOX and BDGR. Does this suggest that you cannot substantiate you own statements, leading one to to question their validity?
I will not claim to be an expert on short selling, but here's what I know through experience and contacts. In general, individual brokerage houses make the rules on short sales following SEC regulation. I've known individuals at the same brokerage house with different rules on how and what they can short. I'm told that a lot depends on how deep the pockets are of the particular investor. This then would open up the trading desks, market makers,etc. to be the ruling force on short sales. I cannot believe that anyone would short a cheap stock, because to me, risk/reward is stacked against you based on simple math( 0 to ~), but I am told the cheap stocks are popular shorts. To take this further, with some reference to BDGR, a very active shorting area is the "pinkies". Part of this is due to lack of regulation protecting the stock and the investor. Many BB ot PK stocks are targets of "naked" shorts due to the same lack of regulation. The reasoning for shorting these kind of stocks is the fact that many of these stocks are destined to go to zero.(I'll probably here about that comment). There are also the cases where a huge short position is acquired(usually naked) and something triggers a reversal and a seemingly worthless stock can be worth a lot( at least for a short time). There's more, but I do not want to be too wordy, I hope this helps.
So sorry, by the way, I forgot to mention. Thanks for the BDGR post, I didn't have to go looking for it.
First problem for you, badrguy, is your assumptions, where does it say it is from Lanza? Second, Joe would probably know the answer to my question, why don't you call him and ask, you will not call any one else or answer my question. And while you are working on your lawsuits, look up libel, check with your legal department and then look in the mirror.
You made the statement, I asked you a question. Do you not understand the statements you make. Very simple, please explain it to me or does this mean that your statements have no substance? You see, I am trying to help you substantiate your position.