Buckeyeoil thanks for your post yesterday, I didn't have a chance to read it until this AM. Sorry you have issues with negative leaning posts, but I still believe caution is in order when we see limited reported data coming from the field. I still stand by my comments, if you see it another way thanks for sharing, you just might change my understanding and or opinions.
Just as a general rule for me “shop talk” is nice, but I do believe public and private companies might have a big issue with employee’s, contractors and or agents disclosing confidential information, in this case, production numbers and flow rates, to the general public and then seeing this information appear on message boards. Just me, but I would think this type of disclosure might warrant someone to lose their job. Today it is very easy to track back the source.
Maybe you can help me with a few things in your post, I am “old school”, does all caps still mean screaming, I am really not sure anymore?
You also reference “trustee”, maybe I missed something here but I don’t believe the court has assigned a “trustee”. In a court filing yesterday, notice of hearing on motion of the official committee of Unsecured credits, this group is trying to have the court assign a Trustee, along with trying to move the case to Chapter 7. What “trustee” might you be referencing in your post?
Your help would be greatly appreciated.
AI
