InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 14
Posts 489
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/22/2011

Re: thebuck7 post# 10093

Saturday, 01/28/2012 9:28:51 PM

Saturday, January 28, 2012 9:28:51 PM

Post# of 42929
Realistically, I don't see how it's possible. How could FOGC ever get the share price high enough to use the company's shares for what they are supposed to be used for; that is, to raise money. How much does it cost to take a mine from where they are now to production? $50 million minimum. How many shares would it take and would someone with $50 million to lend even be interested? Not a chance. How about increasing their oil production? Same problem; costs tens of millions to reach economic levels of production, if the reserves are even there. Selling one of the assets to raise some cash to put into the other is a waste of time because neither asset is worth enough to even talk about. That suggestion, in their latest P.R., was likely a smokescreen. If they do it, it's for some other reason.

Furthermore, the company has done some things that are improper at best. Some suggest FOGC was "hijacked" because MiniMart didn't follow proper procedures when taking over the company (and it isn't the first time). In addition, they issued a ton of shares using a FORM D exemption but that share issuance stinks.

Their most recent P.R. suggests certain actions they might be about to take but all require shareholder approval, which could account for the recent increase in daily volume. You see, if MiniMart owns 50% of FOGC shares, they don't need to seek outside shareholder approval to sell the company's assets, perform a reverse split (roll-back), etc., etc. They could also issue a bunch of shares to a friendy party, in order to avoid having to poll the shareholders. I think the P.R. mentioned issuing more shares. Yup, the Jan. 20, 2012 P.R. was designed to prepare us for "something" they have up their sleeve.