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.
"Are you stating that BDGR is 100% supporting two companies, one directly and another indirectly"
Four Star is Dragon's exclusive operating Co. Four Star is A privately owned Co, controlled by JL.
Petrol is Four Star's exclusive service Co. Petrol, a non-reporting public co is also majority controlled by JL.
"Thus, if BDGR consumed those two companies, at no cost to BDGR shareholders - directly or indirectly - then BDGR shareholders would benefit?"
not to be contrary but I disgree with the premis that BDGR could 'consume at no cost' ... 1st ... these companies are owned by JL ... he is unlikely to magnanamously give them to anyone ... 2nd ... as previously indicated, these co's are poorly run, inefficient and not very good at what they do, Dragon & its' shareholders might be better served to contract to a more effective operator but that is unlikely to happen for all the reasons outlined above and in previous posts related to the affiliations invloved with these companies.
What would your guess the value of BDGR/sh would be if the above is true and were to be accomplished?
too many if's, buts and maybe's ... without major overhaul of all co's not much change from today's close ... I know that's not the answer you were looking for but I'm not in the sunshine business ... my world deals with facts as they are not as you want them to be
"Is this a viable option, if/when considering a lot of statements previously made by various posters could be considered true/factual? In other words, could it ever be viewed as an option/trade off, if someone could have or may have done things that some have alledged?"
Not being evasive ... but I'm just not following the question here ... maybe you could take another shot at phrasing it for me
1. Apparently, Four Star is the operating Company, (correct me if my assumption is wrong) is there enough work in BDGR to work more wells?
Four star is the operator ... Petrol is the service Co whose sole customer is Four Star ... by last count (this data approx 3 mos old) Dragon had total potential for approx 960 wells ... in March 07 they had approx 360 active ... if we take Joe at his word that he is trying to bring on roughly 10 new wells/month, then they should be right around 400 today ... this # could be higher if they have brought new SWD's on line that would allow them to reactivate adjacent wells more quickly
2. And if so, is there enough work to justify recruiting a full-time operator or, better yet,
see above .. Four Star is a full time operator whose sole customer is Dragon ... the issue is how efficient/cost effective they are/are not. IMO Four Star (and Petrol) are poorly managed and grossly inefficient. To some extent the issue is the cash constraints that they are working under. This is a catch 22 for Joe. IMO, he desperately wants these operations to function cost effectively and efficiently but his historical neg cash flows are in large part feeding the inefficiency ... lack of credit forces cash pymts for mat'l, consequently, purchases are often as needed v. more economic advance buying. Mat'l shortages force on the spot buying (again not very cost effective)... poor mgmt and lack of control causes waste of materials or worse ... work assignments are made in a fire-fighting mode v systematically planned out ... you get the picture ...
3. Become our own operating company?
From Joe's standpoint Four Star is his own operating co ... not trying to be cute here but that is the reality of the situation.
4. Do you see BDGR as a company that can move beyond all of this BS and become transperant and a full reporting company?
in theory ... maybe but not in its' current form ... in practice ... IMO, slim chance and then only after a very, very long and uphill battle, the success of which again IMO, assumes major personnel, corp structural and operating changes take place from the top down and across the affiliated companies ...
"tell us the condition of the books, and are they up to date"
as of march 07, the Co had all the Financial info available to commence the audit through the end of 06 ... there remained a number of administrative/non-financial issues (ie: lease assignments) that had at that time, continued as outstanding ... what has happened since ... your guess is as good as mine
"Has there been any fudging or manipulation of the numbers ?"
not knowingly at any rate, by me ... that is not to say that an audit may not ID some issues or challenge certain assumptions
"Can a new manager take over without starting from scratch ?"
managing the records of BDGR, due to its' incestuous associations with other entities (four star, petrol etc)requires that you have a good grip on the reporting of those Co's as well. While there is a frustrating learning curve (the books of the affiliates while being worked on, were in even worse shape than Dragon's), this is not an impossible task.
"Was there ever an audit or just financials with the Ohio connection"
an audit was never started in Ohio ... preliminary documents and statements were sent to the audit firm but w/o the required pymt from Dragon, they never did any work on the project. Also, the info sent to M&B prior to my arrival was totally inaccurate & therefore useless.
"Was Joe manipulating the numbers from the field, in
your opinion? If so in which way?"
complicated answer ... example ... there seemed to be some difficulty (witting or otherwise) making the distinction between Gross Production (that is total production to all his entities)and Net Production (dragon's actual take after royalties, over rides and other interests). There was also a tendency to communicate the most positive spin ... in the macro sense what he wanted to communicate might be directionally correct ... but as it would relate specifically to Dragon's interests it may have been a stretch.
"Can you tell us what these notes were for?
and when?"
the convertible notes, valued at $6.2 mil in Dec 04, were issued as payment for a group of leases known as the "Wooldridge Leases". Between Dec 04 and Dec 06 these notes were converted at $0.10/share ... being fully converted the notes were extinguished in early 07(ref to 2/7/06 PR).
"for what dollar amount? ... How many shares are we talking about?"
Do the math
"Do you know what the share price was at the time?"
Higher than $0.10
"Are YOU and LOU saying that the O/S is more than 68 Mill"
Yes ... approx 85 mil ... and note ... of the difference between 68 mil and 85 mil, approx 8 mil shrs were legitimately owed to JL by my estimate
lou call me when you have a min
not really ... Lou said "...I have no idea what the total shares are at the moment, though I know that they are not still 68 mil. And they cannot be."
most of that stock was issued against JL notes
not much ....
If I were a shareholder however, I might have the following concerns:
why would a Director run at the mouth with potentially libelous comments in a public forum, exposing himself and more importantly the Co in an expensive litigation issue
how is it possible that a Director (in the position for > 30 days) states he has no idea how many shares are outstanding ... aren't Directors supposed to sign off on share issuance resolutions?
nice fairy tail ... that seems to be all you're capable of
mars, if you are referring to the outstanding shares ... I didn't join a monestary ... while I don't waste any time seeking it out, I do still hear from and talk to credible people ...
that having been said, I can't wait to see how long it takes before one of the twits on this board spins this statement into another 'Hostile Takeover' conspiracy theory .. you should all live so long ... you had your merger shot ... Joe took it away ... nobody else cares
had Joe listened to legal counsel and other good advice, this case would be over in a flash ... but as Joe continues to march to his own tune and set his own rules, it would not surprise me (although it will dissappoint me) if A. B.'s otherwise BS case goes badly for BDGR
JMHO
"You had ONE job" ... once again you are ill informed getting the audit was just one of them and I have the BOD resolutions to prove it ...
"You were the one who talked the prime movers out of a shareholder's derivative lawsuit"
All I did was communicate what was going on, which I dare say is better than any of you can expect today ... The 'prime movers' are all big boys, I did not hold any guns to their head ... the choice to wait and see was theirs to make
"Are you saying that you had gotten all the audit material together and Joe simply did not pay for it?"
Pretty much ... 2 years of financials were done when I left in March ... what was not done (and not my responsibility) was to file the appropriate lease assignments with the state (I don't believe this is done even today even though I gave all the necessary info to the Co. to file on at least 3 occasions)and oh yeah ... Joe would not send the check to the audit firm, even though he committed to do so way, way back in January.
"Are you also saying that you had nothing to do with Mark Neuhaus"
On the contrary ... and the fact remains and you can go back to my earlier posts for the details ... the proposal to combine Dragon with TXHG (now trading at or about $1/shr) and an additional company with honest to god oil/gas mgmt and assets similar in value to to Dragon's was a good option for the shareholders and was accepted by the legitimate vote of the then BOD ... Had this deal been allowed to go forward, with the legitimate buying support and investment committed as part of the deal, Dragon should easily be trading today in the $2 range ... it was Joe's self interest that blew that deal and the BOD away ...that and the 15 - 20 mil additional shares outstanding has you at $0.06 today ...
"On your "benign" watch, BDGR shares plummeted. How did you help us?"
When I first arrived on the scene there were already 58 mil shares outstanding ... before I was able to get a handle on what was going on the total had grown to 68 mil. What I did was pulled the plug on the printing press and held dilution in check. Since I've gone, someone has turned the press back on.
At the risk of repeating myself, I would be very happy to see dragon shares legitimately increase in value. I do not subscribe to however to the mindless, completely emotional drivel that passes for DD on this site. Nor will I be silent while others are unsupectingly sucked in by your misplaced and totally unfounded optimism and rumor mongoring.
I'm sure Lou or someone else is going to jump on my comments as those of a frustrated and angry man whose evil plans were thwarted by Joe's heroic actions ... whatever
Hostile Buyout ... and other than convenient speculation what PROOF do you have that there is such Hostile activity? Joe's comments? wow ... now there's a credible source.
With Joe having further diluted you to somewhere between 85 - 90 mil shares outstanding ... ask Lou if Joe re-instated his already oversubscribed notes ... what makes any of you think the PPS is not simply the mkt reaction to his dumping an extra 15 - 20 mil shares into the pipe?
But don't pay any attention to what I have to say ... since I'm not part of the 'run Joe run' crowd ... I must be harboring some evil agenda ... to quote a phrase ... frankly my dear, I don't give a damn ...
Lou
seems to me there is a bit of a difference in saying a co can no longer afford a person's services v. a statement that the person has been fired ... as I said ... if Joe told you this ... HE LIED ... as for the 8K ... had I wanted to file it I had every right to do so under SEC regs ... as I said ... doing so at the time would have served no purpose other than to further undermine the Co which is not and never was 'my thing'
good luck to all of you ... this entire soap opera is at least for me getting tiersome
"Not confronting someone when they lie ..."
Lou ... let me respond then to this your latest of fictions ...
1) I asked 57 not to post my resignation for the same reason I did not file an 8K (which BTW I had every right to file)... as BDGR was then and is still today a non-reporting company, delivery of my written resignation to the company fulfilled my obligations under SEC rules ... posting it or filing an 8K would just have served to further weaken support which, as you fully know although seem unwilling to now admit has never been my intention.
"... Oh and BTW, the board had fired Barry 3 weeks before he resigned"
2)If you got this from Joe, then you just caught him in a lie!
I resigned on 3/22/07 ... Joe sacked the BOD on or about 3/11/07. To that point there are no BOD resolutions calling for my removal ... have you asked to see copies of BOD minutes? ... (If they produce any, you may need to have handwriting analysis performed to insure the validity of the signatures)... As recently as 3/20/07 I was in Joe's office helping him retain BD's interest in the Hosston leases which were in question due to BD defaults ... Curious that Joe would have me there at all let alone working on sensitive issues (including audit prep)had I been fired 3 weeks prior.
"... Believe me I have been been working hard for BDGR"
3) I do not think anyone will argue that you are working hard to make the best of this situation. You are not the only one to have done so ... perhaps you will ultimately have better luck ... I honestly hope you do ... but ... as I have cautioned you before ... do not attempt to use me as a pawn to induce your salvation at the expense of others.
I guess the msg must be sinking in when the only response is to attack spelling errors ... and who said I'm an atty ... once again the fact checking on this board is mind boggling
Lou:
you need to check your facts ... but I am impressed that you think a call from me could create such volume ... I hope you have a better source than Joe Lanza ... as for the merger .... I never said there was cash involved ... what I said was that the combined companies would have been brought to market at a value of $1.50 per share. Given that the deal called for a 1 for 3 reverse of BD shares that would be an effective value of $0.50 for the BD shareholders ... I also find it interesting that you totally ignor the fact that there was a 3rd co included in the deal with verifiable assets in excess of BD's.
As for being angry ... do not confuse anger with the frustration of seeing a good oportunity for BD shareholders trashed by one selfinterested party. BTW ... I wish "my group" was making even a third of what you suggest ... As for the audit ... ask Joe why he refused on multiple occasions to pay the audit firm ... as for Joe selling the co to me ...first of all I wouldn't buy this POS with your money ... second no one in their right mind would pay Joe what he is demanding for "HIS" company ... and as for motive ... hell Joe still owes me money, I'd like to see this co do well just so I can get paid .... and my last bit of friendly advice ... the next time you accuse someone of blackmail, you better be prepared to back up the accusation with more to go on than Joe and his cronies
Lou ... get real ... everyone that's been on this board more than 6 mos knows that 'FASTB' is Barry McFarland (BTW I'm a charter member of IHub 'lest anyone even think about some BS claim of Bashing) ... the CFO that resigned rather than buy into Joe's BS and felonious actions
... I created the worksheet from which you have these past months valiantly but misguidedly tried to defend BDGR's profit potential
... I standby what it says for those who can understand it (Joe's recent BS PR's not withstanding)... and having lived at BDGR for over 6 mos, I think I'm in a little better positioned to understand exactly what is going on there
... I advised you not to go on the board for the very reasons I resigned ... you chose not to listen ... good luck ... I honestly hope you do not get burned but forgive me if do not buy into the blind hype you are trying to create around a lost cause to save your own stk position
... to those of you who have purchased this stock in good faith ... I feel bad for you ... next time do better research ... but I will not sit by and let my work be used to dupe others into this mess ...
make no mistake ... personally ... I like Joe ... he works very hard to make this deal a success ... but again make no mistake ... he is in the deal for himself and does not give a rats petute for shareholders whose last names are other than LANZA ... if he truely gave sxxx, he would not have quashed a board and shareholder approved deal 2 months ago that would have doubled the asset base of this company, brought in real oil/gas mgmt, mkt support and over $6 million in new working capital ... not to mention a stock that would have been trading on the BB at over $1.50/share ... yes BD shareholders would have taken a 1 for 3 reverse that would effectively have put them at $0.50/share at the outset ... but (and this is just my opinion) that seems marginally better than today's close ...
I truely understand that some of you are trying to recover from a bad decision but sometimes you have to just face reality ... the reality is that you made a mistake here. Its' time to recognize the error and move on (JMHO)...
the most vigorous defense ths company can muster will not win this case in TX (JMO)... Joe was given good advice on how to defeat OMDA ... so far, just as with previous good advise on how to look out for shareholder interest, he has elected to ignor it
Lou ... where does the definition say NRI is the same as WI? Unless you own 100% of the revenue interest, your NRI will ALWAYS be LESS THAN your WI ... they are not the same
lou ... you better check your notes ... I never said any such thing and have repeatedly told you that your calculations and assumptions were NOT on this subject correct ... the only confusion is being generated by you
Lou ... as Localoil has said ... it is the NRI that is important and drives profitability ... BTW BDGR's ave WI is no higher than 65% ... again suggesting otherwise is fantasy and a disservice to everyone
Lou ... let's put this discussion to rest ... LOCALOIL is correct ... you have the #'s and if you read the schedule properly you'd see that BDGR's ave NRI is no better than 61% ... to continue to insist otherwise is misleading fantasy/wishful thinking
you're about 10 mil (+/-)light
no disrespect to our newest board member but try Ireland
... It is operating revenue if the profit on caddo lake was from oil that was not credited to BDGR when pumped ... it wasn't! ... and the gain is a one time event ... see PR dated 1/16/07
need a quick refreser in acc't 101 ??? .... proceeds from sale of an asset (Caddo Lake Prop) are NOT included in revenue ... in case you're wondering ... it's non operating income shown on the P&L as 'Other Income' ...
"...alternatively, it sounds like u're saying BDGR suddenly woke-up to the fact that Lanza had already converted a $3.9 million note to common shares?"
badrguy ... impressive, you've actually hit on something accurately ... the operative words in the Co release were:
... in preparing for communication of financial data to its’ audit firm, the Company has determined ...
if it were determined that the notes were in fact fully converted, the 3.9 mil balance previously reported would therefore have to be ... EXTINGUISHED ... you can probably take to the bank that the choice of the term was not a semantical slip ...
good night folks! ... its's been a fairly long but reasonably positive day ... film at 11:00
no disrespect ... but the best interests of the company and the shareholders are not always served by what may be percieved as "good news" ... legal issues are often akin to chess games ... long term strategy sometimes means taking a short term hit
should a poker player reveal his hand prior to being called?
--- the judge in the case issued a summary judgement against the defendants in the case and ordered them to pay the plaintiff's legal fees.
you guys need to read more carefully ... don't be so quick to accept gossip and conjecture as fact just because someone posts on this board ... the above comment is NOT even close to what the judge actually said ... what the judge really said was ... that certain Series D Preferred shares were invalid ... oh BTW he did NOT say that the underlying notes were invalid and for those of you not really keen on what's going on here, that's sort of pertinent ... he also specifically DID NOT order payment of atty fees ... the ct order is a matter of public record ... don't take my word for it ... look it up!
for the record ... the DD on this board is really pitiful
gee ... what if lanza turns out not to be guilty in the OMDA issue ... do you really believe everything that comes from Adam Barnett? ... as usual you're quick to post on conjecture w/o real facts ...
oh ye of liitle faith beware
now your starting to get the picture
after all your whining these past months ... is that the best excuse you've got? wow ... you really are a joke ... we should all be real impressed with your comments from here on
trooper:
we all know the history of the Lanza's by now .. between you and baderbreath the world must be as familiar with it as yesterday's news ... let's talk about current issues for a change ... have you made any effort to determine what's going on today in this company vs what's happened in the past ... do you really care or like baderbreath would you prefer to deal with fuzzy history and abstract, unverifiable extrapolations of what might be happening ... get real my friend ... you're about to find you've bitten the wrong dog ... this one bites back!
fact ... those who buy BB stocks based on PR's w/o understanding the basic underlying fundamentals of the co deserve any losses they suffer, JMO ... don't look to me or anyone else for sympathy if you got sucked into something you were too greedy to understand ... or a position you were paid to promote, JMO ... don't ever make the mistake of thinking it's ok to baselessly trash the reputation of someone brought in to right a wrong ... regardless of who brought them in ...the adage ... "be careful what you ask for..." definitely applies where Barry is concerned ... once again, don't take my word for it ask Matt B. ... as with badrbreath ... call Barry if you dare ... he will call back ... the truth will set you free!
troooper:
the challenge laid down to Baderbeath applies to you too!
BTW ... I appreciate your feeble attempt at being cute ... let's be clear ... my listing on IHub goes to FEB 2001 ...when does your's start?
I for one have had it with the BS being spewed by yourself and your associates on this board.
When you actually have some constructive and factual information to bring then, we're all for it ...until then ...do everone a favor and put it where the sun dosn't shine!
badrbreath ... I've been following your mono themed posts with some bemusement ... for someone who claims to be all about DD you seem somewhat reticent to actually make an effort to contact Barry.
It seems that other legitimate investors in this company have been able to accomplish this feat, what's your problem? It really isn't that difficult, many it seems have done it. All it takes is a call. Leave a message, I'll bet he calls you back. He'll probably give you additional contact info if you ask too.
Could it be you'd rather just blissfully bash away?
BTW .. your BC alum buddy couldn't have looked very hard (unusually sloppy for a true BC grad ... are you sure he really went to BC?)....
Barry's BC, class of '73 sheepskin reads BS, Finance, Cum Laude from the Carroll School of Mgmt. He's actually one of 10 members of his immediate family who have graduated from said institution and they are occasionally known to party as do true Eagles. But then, if you had made a legitimate effort you'd perhaps already have known this. Don't just take my word for it ... maybe you should ask Matt B. if Barry is as independent as advertised. But then again ... it's so much easier to bash when you don't have to be concerned with pesky facts. BTW ... the rest of his creds aren't too shabby either. But you'll probably never know, as I have my doubts that you'll ever call.
One word of advice, if you actually have the stones to talk to him ... you might start with an apology ... I understand he does not react real well to libelous comments from people who don't have a clue. In my experience, that goes double when he is championing shareholder interests.
BTW ... just whose interests are you championing anyway? I've seen your claims that it is to protect unwitting investors ... one more word of advice ... the unwitting and feint of heart should, as a general rule stay away from BB and Pink sheet stocks. They tend to be volatile and prone to manipulation even with the best intentioned mgmt, JMO.
Oh ... the judgement in LA ... thanks, I'll remind Barry to pay the speeding tkt next time I see him.
OMT ... another poster was asking about the specific gravity of BDGR oil production ... having done a little digging ... I understand it varies between 26 and 44 with an overall average in the high 30's.