Live in the moment!!
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.
Yes, the 77,258,753 shares being replaced by the "77,258,753 shares as reimbursement for personal shares the affiliate used in various deals in Belize, Tennessee, Louisiana and Texas", is what I am wondering about.
TD: Who, in your best guess, do you think received the 77,000,000 affiliate shares that were later replaced in June 2011? Seems like a boat load of shares when there was only about 750,000,000 authorized at that time. My thought is someone in control at Princess Petroleum and that is why they did not come up about the truth of the oil strike claim...maybe they were selling some of their own that week after the "strike"? SmackDown
Didn't Princess and someone there get millions of shares of TECO stock in the Joint Venture agreements? That seems to be the norm for TECO ventures to offer shares of stock so that as the project becomes successful so does that participant. It would be interesting to know if any of those Princess people sold during the 2012 oil announcement or if they held those shares long.
So B.O. this supposed to be "big" and financially stable company called Princess Petroleum is owned 1/100th of 1 percent by one guy that you know and have met in Belize and 99.99 percent by a company that you cannot even find? Was the name Princess only picked up and used for this venture because of the Princess Hotel and Casino being very popular or is Princess Petroleum actually owned by Princess Hotel and Casino? Very confusing here but someone received 20,000,000 TECO shares of stock and there are many questions that come up about that.
I agree fmi81 that it was a good move to get rid of the theatre building at this point. The payment seemed to be like $30,000 per month with interest and penalities. Plus it would have been difficult to ever justify normal renovation costs for the amount of revenue that could have ever been generated by the building.
TD clarified it earlier in his post 75214:
"I found this in the filings... looks like 20 million shares."
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the previous reports, the Company had recorded its basis in its Belize joint venture with Princess Petroleum Limited as $100,000, which was recorded as having been paid by a principal shareholder. However, the Company has discovered that the principal shareholder sold 20,000,000 shares of his Treaty stock to the principals of Princess Petroleum, but that in connection with this transaction, the Company agreed to repay the principals of Princess Petroleum $100,000. The Company has also discovered that there is an additional promissory note for $100,000 entered into on the same date with principals of Princess Petroleum. As a result, the Company has concluded that it should adjust its basis in the Belize property to $200,000 to account for the additional promissory note.
So this appeared to public investors to be a $100,000.00 cash contribution from a "major" Treaty Shareholder, which made both Treaty and Princess look good as one or the other had $100,000 in liquid cash, when in reality it was just printed Treaty Stock certificates traded for a value of $0.005?
It seems that information would be more important to any investor rather than whether a poster here has made any money personally.
From what I am reading this morning there was a consideration of 20,000,000 shares of TECO stock valued at, apparently for the purpose of that agreement, $0.005 per share, to someone at Princess Petroleum and by someone that was a large stockholder at Treaty Energy.
With everything that has gone on at Belize, wouldn't it be nice to know just who the holder of those 20,000,000 shares is/was and if they still have them? And if they don't just when did they decide not to be a "long" and get rid of them?
bigdaddy21c: Do you know who got the 20,000,000 shares of Treaty stock at Princess Petroleum and who the private shareholder was that sold Princess Petroleum the shares? Also do you know if that party already sold them, or if they are holding "long"?
dloggold: My bet is the person to ask about the 20,000,000 Treaty shares of stock and who they actually went to, and when they were sold is Hamdi Karagozoglu, the person I think B.O. said made the agreement in Panama. Maybe you can send him an email.
Maybe B.O. can ask Princess Petroleum at his next meeting who in their company got the TECO stock and are they still holding it or possibly when did they sell it?
So the "$100,000 cash" was generated from selling 20,000,000 shares of TECO stock to Princess Petroleum for that $100,000? That would have made the TECO 20,000,000 shares worth $0.005 at that time. But when the stock went to $0.13 in early 2012 that same stock (now in the possession of Princess Petroleum) was then worth...$2,600,000.00? Can someone check my math? Hmmmmmmmmm
Does anyone know if Treaty stock was given as compensation to enter into the Princess Petroleum deal in Belize? If it was it seems that both Treaty and Princess would have benefitted from oil being found or a stock value increase.
At 10%/28%/38% of the revenue how much income does the 1700 barrels generate? What is 50% of the cost for those 1700 barrels? Overall drilling costs and then daily operations to get the oil sold?
Well, now we know who BASCO, LLC is in this chart:
http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/TECO/tab/8.2
Does anyone want to venture a guess at who this Bruce Lee, LLC is?
Does the Belize real estate deal still exist? Does anyone have any updated information on it?
Well lets see...That was 5 months ago which is about 150 days...x 2 million shares being sold per day...equals about 300,000,000 shares of total TECO shares sold since that authorization!!! How much did you say that increase was? Whether at $0.0078 or $0.022 this seems to be great cashflow. SmackDown
The only thing the GOB knows is that Treaty is doing the drilling for free!!! The GOB cannot lose.
You are correct TD it was a prior procedural mis-step that did not allow Mr. Laurent's motions to move forward or be argued. That is why the order says his motions were moot. I am sure the attorney is looking at those issues and deciding whether to refile immediately or to get others involved for whatever was missed. My bet is this is far from over. SmackDown
The bk was dismissed on a technicality that happened before the attorney could get the correct data in front of the court. Don't count out those technical issues from being fixed and this thing back in front of the court very soon. SmackDown
I think the P.M. read it that way also, that is why he is in court doing the "I argue" thingy!!!!!
Treaty may be able to drill, but even if they found oil they can't sell it!!! The oil belongs to Belize and with the injunction against the GOB not one drop of oil can be sold...moot point cause there is no oil!!! SmackDown
The key words from that P.M. quote are "I argued". See the GOB has an injunction against it and that injunction has not been lifted. They are on the outside looking in without any authority to drill and with an injunction prohibiting them from drilling and the contracts were voided. So it appears that the GOB knows currently the contracts are voided or they would not be in court doing the "I argued" thingy. Currently they are not stopping Treaty from doing free oil exploration for the country of Belize...why not get something for free from Treaty after all of their promises to the people of that little village San Juan. LMAO SmackDown
You are not getting the point. Provide a link showing that Treaty Energy Corporation has a valid contract in Belize for oil. Shell and BP did not make it so big by being stupid enough to add another person in a deal they want. They would just go to the GOB and make the agreement, but there is no commercial oil in Belize.
Neither of those companies would even speak to Treaty because Treaty does not have an agreement or contract in Belize with anyone. Shell or BP would just go to the GOB and get this concession if they wanted it!!!
I agree, this topic has been hammered out by both sides on multiple occasions and this is the perfect time for Treaty IR to step in and state the truth. Whatever that is. I will send a PM to him on it and we will see if we get a response. SmackDown
Have Treaty IR post the numbers here on the board to show where other statements are wrong or right. That is what I was commending him for as he came on the board and stating a corporate position in writing where two sides are heard from. Kinda like him getting out and rubbing elbows with us and exchanging comments. If Treaty really wants to turn public opinion about them around he could help if he states the truth and clears up what are thought to be incorrect statements either way. Negative positions can be looked at two ways: 1) Just a negative opinion and the guy is a moron; or 2) How can I use that negative comment and help the corporation in a positive way (just maybe the negative comment is correct); We seldom learn what our mistakes are from people just following us...we learn them from people that scrutinize what we say and do and they are not afraid to call us out on it. If Treaty really wants to change and do better they could learn here. Just like we can. These are my opinions. SmackDown
Yes, Treaty Energy Corporation is out of bankruptcy! I read back through the post of today and saw the ruling. SmackDown
Yes, Treaty Energy Corporation appears to be out of bankruptcy. I have not seen the ruling yet, but there seems to be enough reason to believe it. Especially with the IR of Treaty coming on this site to post that very thing today in writing. SmackDown
The federal court probably just dismissed it because the debts were subject to a dispute and the petitioners did not put enough information regarding the fake oil strike in the original petition for the judge to see it as an obvious scam from his perspective. Basically that means each claimant has to go back to their own local court and file a claim to get a judgment that is then without dispute. Once a judgment is obtained by one of the claimants they could refile with the bankruptcy court under a new petition. That is why I say it would be better for Treaty to settle while they have what looks like the upper hand. If Treaty has to fight this in multiple states, being required to get a new attorney every time since they are a corporation, it will be an ugly mess and very costly. These are my opinions and it will be good to see the court's final order with this group of petitioners. SmackDown
The only thing gone away is the bankruptcy as we knew it. The petitioners are now required to go to their own states and file civil proceedings against Treaty which is good and bad for Treaty. The good for Treaty is the bankruptcy is gone for now unless there is an appeal, the bad is that Treaty had all of these petitioners in New Orleans and now they could have to go to each state to fight each of the petitioners individual claims(meaning lots of legal cost by hiring a new attorney in each state where there is an action). If any of the petitioners obtain a judgment this will be right back into the bankruptcy court. Treaty should settle with the petiioners and get this behind them. SmackDown
The judge will give us an idea tomorrow what he thinks. He has already ruled before that Treaty was founded on Fraud and yesterday allowed the Petitioners complaint to move forward now to the next step in the morning.
Well he did not dismiss the case yesterday. Now it is a possibiliy that a trustee will be put in charge of Treaty as early as tomorrow to make sure assets are not liquidated outside of the authority of the federal court. This judge already ruled that Treaty Energy Corporation was founded on fraud and I am sure the judge will not want assets to get away. SmackDown
No the judge did not dismiss the case yesterday. He is listening to the petitioners motion for a section g in the morning.
Yeah, I guess they are idiots now according to you, but at one time most of them were promising investors to Treaty. The judge already knows how smart these petitioners actually are thats why he did not dismiss it yesterday like you stated earlier he would. Seems he really knows something. SmackDown
So how "pissed" was that judge yesterday? I guess not very much cause the case is moving forward now and section g motion tomorrow against Treaty Energy Corporation to see if the trustee will take over the company for liquidation.
As a public stock investor, what I like to see are statements in writing that can be scrutinized and properly evaluated before the money goes out. I think that is why the SEC was founded...and that was not on fraud. SmackDown
I think there was a page number out of sequence and that has been fixed now and court is on for tomorrow morning!!!! The judge did not throw out the case on Monday as was reported would be done, and the judge must not be upset with the petitioners because he allowed the new petitioners' attorney. The same attorney that worked with this judge before to determine Treaty Energy Corporation was founded on Fraud. Now my bet is the judge requires Treaty Energy Corporation to present evidence at a hearing to show why a trustee should not be put in charge of Treaty Energy to manage its affairs. If that is the order that comes down tomorrow...watch out!!! SmackDown
Since Treaty Energy Corporation is a publicly traded company and they benefit, enjoy and profit from stock being sold daily to the public, they are required by the laws to file proper and timely documents for the public to scrutinize. 10Qs, 8K, 10K's whatever...it is Treaty Energy Corporation and all other public corporation's responsibility to comply with these regulations and it should not take pressure from the public to cause the publicly traded company to provide those required documents. SmackDown
How about because the 10K is a legal document stating the specific fact about a public company and it is signed under various penalties? A telephone call to a specific investor is...just a telephone call whereby things can always be stated as mis-heard or misunderstood.