The former PGPM operated leases have all now been transferred to another company, and now, at least up until recently, with someone else running them, they've been producing a fair amount of oil... recently moving up to right around 600 barrels a month I think.
I'm not able to tell exactly what the deal made for them was that had them transfer the leases to a new operator... but it looks to me like there is a risk that the scam operated here was that the KNOWN to be tainted ACLY shell was bought... the leases were then transferred from Lariat and PGPM to ACLY... and then they were used as currency to address and settle the IMVS liabilities that they knew came paired with the ACLY shell... so, it looks like they KNOWINGLY moved the PGPM assets to ACLY on purpose, in order to enable transferring them to the former IMVS insiders. That is my best guess...
It is also possible that ACLY or PGPM have retained some percentage interest in those leases... it is even possible that they actually do still own them, and that the current operator is pumping them on a contract FOR the ACLY / PGPM owners. I've not yet been able to determine who actually does own them... as the RRC only shows who is responsible for operating them, not who owns the lease rights...
That leaves an open ended question about what values ACLY and IMVS had retained or still retain with the leases being transferred to be operated by the new operator... and what values, if any, were left to come back to PGPM in settling the $40 million note owed PGPM by ACLY.
No matter how you slice it, it looks to me like the PGPM shareholders were deliberately and knowingly robbed... which seems it would have to be true, unless ALL of the former ACLY / PGPM and Lariat leases are still owned by PGPM.
Noted in their recent "filings" that they never did satisfy an auditor... and the accounting work that was done was done by the same old insiders... while glossing over the issue of what happened to the missing $40 million. The claims of the accountant that they can't and don't verify any of the numbers or the work they show... when they are the insiders that controlled the deal ? Totally bogus, IMO. The CEO of ACLY did the CLYW financial statements... but doesn't vouch for the accuracy of the information related to the ACLY dealings ? LOL!!!
They pretty clearly (at least, clearly for PGPM) posted a PR noting a "mark down" of the note from $40 million to $10 million while hinting it had been settled... while the financial statements they issued show they still carry it on the books at a value of $40 million ?
Still, PGPM, Lariat and the related companies have so badly fouled their own nests that there isn't much potential left in them as independent operators, IMO... Not much they can do without there being someone else to own a majority controlling interest, and operate, any of the old or any new properties they do have an interest in.
As operators, they left the leases they'd held in such bad shape that the Texas RR Commission had to take action by themselves to force them to clean up the mess... so they lost all the bond $$$ (your $$$) that they'd posted as operators for that purpose. Given their repeated failures in following the rules, the RRC also took administrative action to permanently strip them of their operators licences. That result is a "death penalty" that imposes restrictions that follow the companies, AND the people... so that any company that RP (or the other principles in related companies) owns a controlling interest in... can't ever be an owner/operator in Texas.
When they talk "JV" participation ? Need to find out what they mean by that. If they are the "junior partners" with an interest in a JV project that is majority owned, controlled, and operated by others... that might still work. If they are telling you they are operating some project themselves, or they are trying to work on operating some properties themselves... if they are selling minority JV participation interests to other companies or selling working interests to investors, etc., it is likely that the RRC will shut them down... given that they aren't registered with the RRC now, and don't have and cannot get operators permits.
It Matt bought out RP... or if revenues from production have been used to buy out his shares... and someone else other than RP and RP associates now has a majority and controlling ownership position in PGPM... that might work. If RP still owns a majority interest in PGPM... this POS is probably dead on the hoof, since the RRC won't allow them to operate any properties, or posture as industry participants and deal makers in Texas, without being registered with the RRC.
The former PGPM wells that WERE or HAVE BEEN producing a fair amount of oil while being operated by the new operator, were until recently being operated and produced under STILL unmet orders from the RRC to fix up some of the problems that were left by PGPM... that set of problems that resulted in them being sanctioned and blackballed by the RRC with a "death penalty".
My understanding is that the RRC is addressing that problem now... so, those leases are likely going to be shut in, or, at least, the oil gathering and sales efforts will stop, until they DO actually get those problems fixed.
It seems likely that there MAY be some residual element of value left over from those former PGPM owned and operated leases that is still attached to PGPM. That might or could explain where the $$$ to bring this pig of a stock back to life is, or was, coming from.
Still have an wholly unmet need to know HOW MUCH of the former lease interests, if any, PGPM has retained... not least because, IF they are still owners of some or most of it... you need to know how much $$$ has been flowing, and where all the $$$ that has been flowing has been going.
It will be interesting to see how long it takes the new operator to fix the problems PGPM left and get the wells back in operation, or, back in compliance with the rules well enough that the RRC will allow collections and sale of oil to resume.
It will be interesting to see where the $$$ from that oil that has been produced came from, and where it has been going... and interesting to see who DOES own the leases they have been operating.
If PGPM actually DOESN'T still have an interest of some sort in the former leases... I think you can stick a fork in this... given they're not ever going to be allowed to participate as operators in anything that has them owning and controlling it.
That is probably the best possible outcome for shareholders... to have PGPM be prohibited from operating anything, so that anything they do will necessarily be as minority participants in projects that are owned, operated, and managed by others...
JMHO
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
.JPG)
