I didn't read reaper's post because I figure there is not anything interesting in it. IMO, everything reaper says is now irrelevant. Everything I have said has been backed up with evidence except for one slip that said there was no evidence they made a profit. Ironically, the evidence was soon disavowed by BECC making my statement true at a later date. reaper's posts are generally evidence free or are about some trivial irrelevance. If he had anything of interest he would have long ago provided an innovation BECC came up with. He would have pointed to the results of Crude's $2 million a year investment in research. Now that would be interesting.
Something that would be interesting would be evidence that:
1. BECC has made a profit.
2. BECC developed in-house any prospects where the well paid out and which wells those might be. (I am aware of one re-entry near Port Allen that was a good well in the sense that it looked like it made money. Breitling doesn't talk about it, perhaps for fear of focusing attention on track record.)
3. Proved producing reserves for YE 2014 were estimated.
4. BECC has found board members.
5. BECC has prepared and filed a 2014 annual report.]
6. Breitling has grown by the bit.
Some of these things go to credibility. One can dance around the question all one wants, but Breitling has consistently tried to convey the idea that they are experienced oil finders. If someone thinks they have not done that, I'm sure they will express that opinion, but I am beyond debating it.
Let me go back to what I originally said. There are a lot of red flags with BECC and I wondered why so many people seemed to be ignoring them. Now there are quite a few red flags and just about no one is ignoring them. If someone wants to go back and find where I said 8 years when they think 12 might be better, I am done with that. All public information suggests to me that BECC is done and so I am pretty much done, but I am curious as to how it will unfold. If someone manages to make money trading it, good for them.
