InvestorsHub Logo

TOB

Followers 162
Posts 5764
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 09/15/2010

TOB

Re: mz157 post# 259564

Thursday, 06/07/2012 7:13:37 PM

Thursday, June 07, 2012 7:13:37 PM

Post# of 361536
The other company's expenses are in line with ERHC.

It is a small US public company exploring deep-water assets off of West Africa, just like ERHC.

Its 2009 expenses of $6.0 million are comparable to ERHC's general operating expenses. At the time it was quite similar to ERHC. Just holding assets.

That it has increased to $8.77 million in 2010 and $11.28 in 2012 is because it has added staff to take on new roles.

I fully expect ERHC's general operating expenses to increase in a similar fashion as it adds staff and evolves into a more active role in Chad.

The other company added staff to try to become operator of their deep-water assets. That model failed with only 1 well drilled. It was a duster. They are now seeking to copy ERHC's model and bring in a JV partner.

As Buffalo Trader proved, the cost of being a public company is at minimum about $3.58 million. That is just for compliance, legal, accounting and other costs of being a public company. And that is for OTCBB companies like ERHC.

As ERHC had the added pressure of the SEC action, their compliance is critical to the company, and obviously they achieved this spending well below the estimated average.

It wasn’t the thinking that got me the BIG money, it was the sitting and waiting – Livermore