InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 10
Posts 1604
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/23/2006

Re: dfall post# 26454

Thursday, 08/09/2007 3:56:44 PM

Thursday, August 09, 2007 3:56:44 PM

Post# of 44857
dfall,

I initially thought that would include the 28.5k for the bond on the cache claims, however, looking at the check from the documents released by Berman. The checks are dated the 18th and and 24th of July. So this must be something else. I would expect some of this to be a down payment for the two geologists and could be covering some of their costs.

Also, this could include some of the equipment required for drilling however, that usually isn't seen on a P&L statement until it is invoiced to the contractor. This is how it is usually done in my experience in the oilpatch. The only exception to this rule is the status of the credit for the client requesting services. If they have dodgy credit, they would have to pay upfront. This could be the case here.






"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt