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.
Agreed. When I see a technical breakout, I don't overthink it. I jump in and ride it. The impressive thing about this breakout is the continually increasing volume, ever increasing accumulation, and the repeated closes at or near the HOD.
Based on the chart, after .04 there is some resistance in the .05 and .06 range but the next major resistance is .07. After .07 things get very interesting very quickly.
Actually, by any indicator available, the chart is screaming buy.
The funny thing is some people actually warned us profit taking would occur when we hit 2.5 cents. It ended up not even being a speed bump for TECO.
$TECO
I imagine if oil had been found at SJ#3, we would have seen the share price start rising rapidly and the trading volume steadily increasing. I suppose we should all keep our eyes peeled in case this starts happening.
Wow, up another 17.65% today on increasing volume!
Once again closed at the HOD- extremely bullish!
Everyday we hear warnings that the $TECO run is over but the chart says otherwise. Very impressive.
Huge move upwards for TECO over the last two months that began to accelerate last week. Let's see what this week has in store.
I suggest reading the TECO PRs from April 2013 to present so that you have current information and better understand the chart. We can all look at the chart and see the PPS declined throughout 2012 and into early 2013 based on lack of significant revenue, as you mentioned. The last 2 months have marked a different story for TECO and we will not see that reflected in the financials for quite awhile. The production from Mitchell #3 and #4 alone are more than all of the other wells TECO pre-June 2013. More wells are rumored to be coming online shortly. The Supreme Court of Belieze also made a favorable ruling for TECO on Friday and if SJ#3 is commercial, we will hear that in the next few weeks. This is why the PPS has rallied over 300% in 2 months.
I'm here to make money. I'm here to look at current production. I'm not here to hear about how someone's prediction from 2 years ago didn't come true. What bearing does that have on the current PPS? None. I don't even want to hear about estimated future production anymore. All I want to hear about is how much is TECO pumping daily now. When that number increases, I want to hear that. Period.
TECO needs to get the FY12 10-K and FY13Q1 10-Q filed. As we all know, it will not show much in the way of revenue since Mitchell production just started in the last month. It will not be until the FY13Q3 10-Q that you see a full Quarter of revenue from the Mitchell wells. There are some investors out there that will not invest in companies that are not up to date in filings though, so if nothing else, the filings may bring in some more investors who are currently sitting on the sideline.
That said, personally, I am more interested in this rumored 3rd well in West Texas and the details on that. I'd love to see a PR on that this week and maybe a PR about SJ#3 next week or the following week. It feels like TECO is building momentum and the rise in PPS certainly mirrors that.
Very positive Belize update for TECO shareholders!
TECO was 100% correct in their May 6th press release that they were not impacted by the April 16th ruling and could continue operations. Today the Chief Justice confirmed what TECO and the GOB have been saying for two months that the contract is still legal and valid.
Thanks, Belize Oilwatch.
Market down 2% today but TECO up 16%
The strength of the upward movement on TECO over the last few trading sessions has surprised me. Very little selling and there were a number of large blocks sitting on the Bid side today.
Great link!
0 insider sells in the last 5 years for TECO.
There have been a lot of shares registered over the years, but not a single share has been sold, even when it hit 13 cents. The insiders must believe it is going much higher. Thanks for the post!
I wish the PPS for more of my other positions would keep "inching up" 10-20% a day like TECO.
Is it true The Belize Times has a strong bias against the UDP (Barrow's political party) and the articles it publishes are often slanted by that bias? I heard they even have a section on their website titled "UDP Politics as usual".
FACT is ...
The news event you're referring to occurred on January 30, 2012.
The Authorized Share Count remained unchanged from January 28, 2011 until July 24,2012.
In the 7 months between November 8, 2011 and June 6, 2012, the Outstanding Share Count increased by only 2.35 million shares (from 744,099,069 to 746,449,069). The entire 2.35M increase is accounted for in two transactions (one of 2M shares, one of 235k shares) to relieve payments owed. Both of those share issuances are detailed in the SEC filings (page 44 of the FY11 10-K).
TECO actually sold 0 shares into the market at anytime close to that news event.
The proof.
Link to the FY11Q3 10-Q
Link to the FY11 10-K
You are focusing on the reason the PPS got to sub-penny. Obviously there were credibility issues which is why the PPS ended up there. However, if you look at the PRs and Facebook posts since mid-April, there is an ever growing credibility, as evidenced by the PPS appreciation. If TECO had no credibility, the PPS wouldn't have tripled since the last week of April.
FYI - you cannot "photoshop" a video. It is possible to edit videos using post-production software, but those edits are extremely easy to spot if not performed by a professional. Judging by the quality of the videos that I've seen, it's pretty safe the say that the videographer doesn't possess the necessary skills to doctor a video in that type of fashion.
At some point this should squeeze really hard. I know it's up several hundred percent in the last few weeks, but there's a LOT of shorting going on.
$WPNV
Here comes the squeeze
$WPNV
I see in the last week we went from debating the validity of a multi-million dollar bankruptcy petition to debating the validity of a $13k invoice. Zzzz
booooooooom
IMO there is a very good chance WPNV sets a new 52-week high today. Current 52-week high is .055, but that could soon be well in the rearview mirror.
Incorrect. The GOB is on record stating the contract is still valid and will be enforced.
Here is the proof:
"Legally, a judge can order the quashing of a decision, to order the quashing of a contract which is between two parties and based on contract law is a rather different thing. I argued before Justice Legall that he could not quash the contract, while there are some expressions in his judgment that might indicate that he does not or did not fully agree, he refused to quash the contract. Therefore the contract still exists; if the contract still exists because it is unquashed then it is enforceable as between the contract holder and the Government of Belize.” - Denys Barrow, Lead Council, Government of Belize, 6/11/2013
If you disagree with the GOB, you can write them an email, as I doubt Barrow is reading this message board, and convincing me is of no use as I do not hold law enforcement power in Belize.
Yes, I think many read it that way. Certainly OCEANA read it that way too. Looks like we were wrong. My assumption is the appeal ruling will provide further clarification on that, assuming the entire ruling isn't overturned. Looks like that ruling is expected next Thursday.
Yep, good luck Sniz. Hope you're doing well & have made some $ here.
Yes, I hear you; just pointing out as a caution. I have traded SNRY in the past. I was here 1.5 years ago when they did a R/S that put the O/S at 7M shares and the PPS at 25 cents. Back then, it was just pending the close of an acquisition on an internet marketing company, but that deal never closed. Since then, it's been diluted a ton, and at the current rate of dilution, they'll need to either increase the A/S or do another R/S within the next year. As you said, it's had many runs if you can play it right. Just have to be quick in & out and don't hold too long.
Careful on the share structure here. Here are the numbers straight out of the 10-Qs and 10-K ...
As of March 15, 2012 the Company had 7,021,860 shares of its common stock, par value per share $0.001, issued and outstanding.
As of May 31, 2012 the Company had 10,814,080 shares of its common stock, par value per share $0.001, issued and outstanding.
As of October 31, 2012, the Company had outstanding 69,725,740 shares of its common stock, par value $0.001.
As of November 21, 2012 the Company had 75,084,558 shares of its common stock, par value per share $0.001, issued and outstanding.
As of March 27, 2013, the Company had 171,786,988 shares of its common stock, par value per share $0.001, issued and outstanding.
As of June 13, 2013, the Company had 364,241,808 shares of its common stock, par value per share $0.001, issued and outstanding.
This is from the 10-Q filed today:
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
1. During the quarter ended April 30, 2013, we issued an aggregate of 244,550,057 shares of common stock upon conversions of various convertible notes.
That's incorrect. Go read the quote again. Barrow is stating he argued in the original case that the contract could not be quashed and thus Justice Legall did not quash them. The reason the GOB is in court now is to lift the injunction which they believe prevents the GOB from monitoring/supervising drilling operations. I understand others may read the original ruling differently, but to reiterate my previous post, the only interpretation of that ruling that matters is the opinion of the GOB since they are responsible for its enforcement. As far as the GOB is concerned, all of the contracts still exist. Barrow could not have stated that any more plainly.
Here it is again:
"Legally, a judge can order the quashing of a decision, to order the quashing of a contract which is between two parties and based on contract law is a rather different thing. I argued before Justice Legall that he could not quash the contract, while there are some expressions in his judgment that might indicate that he does not or did not fully agree, he refused to quash the contract. Therefore the contract still exists; if the contract still exists because it is unquashed then it is enforceable as between the contract holder and the Government of Belize.” - Denys Barrow, Lead Council, Government of Belize, 6/11/2013
It is the opinion of the Government of Belize that the contract still exists based on Justice Legall's ruling. You or I or anyone else on this board can disagree with that opinion, but, in reality, it is the only opinion that matters. Period. End of story.
"Legally, a judge can order the quashing of a decision, to order the quashing of a contract which is between two parties and based on contract law is a rather different thing. I argued before Justice Legall that he could not quash the contract, while there are some expressions in his judgment that might indicate that he does not or did not fully agree, he refused to quash the contract. Therefore the contract still exists; if the contract still exists because it is unquashed then it is enforceable as between the contract holder and the Government of Belize.” - Denys Barrow, Lead Council, Government of Belize, 6/11/2013
If you've ever run a small business, you would know the answer to your question. When you have a limited amount of capital and a limited number of resources, every item that requires your time and focus takes away time and focus that you otherwise could have applied to another area.
Looks like the petitioners didn't remotely have their ducks in a row.
I can't make this stuff up.
Slam dunk from the start
Looks like I was right.
You were correct on one thing.
This involuntary bankruptcy filing was different than almost all others because it never had any legal basis and was dismissed in record time.
The petitioning creditors must be held accountable for their actions. That includes all 6 creditors listed below plus those who committed libel through their posts on this and other message boards.
Thank you to TDbowieknife for providing the link for this publicly available information regarding the creditors in post 58868.
Petitioning Creditor
David A. Hallin
936 East Riverwalk Drive
Memphis, TN 38120-2608
Petitioning Creditor
Ronda Hyatt
310 N. Willis, #212
Abilene, TX 79603
Petitioning Creditor
Jefferey A. Morgan
2486 Freeman Road
North Pole, AK 99705
Petitioning Creditor
Alexander Rasbury
8519 State Highway 36W
Clyde, TX 79510
Petitioning Creditor
David McCourtney
614 E. Lakeshore Drive
Culver, OR 97734
Petitioning Creditor
Mack Maxcey
213 Redwire Street
Voss, TX 76888
As I tried explaining multiple times, it has no bearing on a bankruptcy petition.
Again, that is not how bankruptcy is determined.
Exactly! Treaty Management realized this as well. Here is the PR they put out on May 9th announcing their change in strategy moving forward:
May 9th Press Release
This is disaster scenario for shorts. Three days running on the Reg SHO list and WPNV releases pre-market news. Short covering could make this squeeze hard.
My post actually applies to any type of startup company. It was not limited to only oil & gas companies.