Replies to post #318059 on ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[mhslowly]

Here we see the rationale for PN and SO to continue drawing on their own ATM known to us as the shareholders of ERHE. And these shareholders will now be persuaded that it is in their interest to continue passing their money to PN SO. The shareholders will continue to guarantee Management's incomes for nothing more than a dream of the slimmest possibility of any income. Greed and stupidity are us.

[ssc]

If I were in Cepsa's shoes I'd play hardball and demand ERHC either pays all it owes including its share of all future exploration costs or forfeit its rights. Otherwise I'd be moving on.

But let's take the high road and assume Cepsa kindly gives ERHC a full carry and forgives what is owed for the first well in exchange for another 25% of the block. That would leave ERHC with 10%, half of which, I believe, would have to be given back to Kenya (correct me if I am wrong about that). So 5%, still better than what ERHC is facing now. The big question would be, to pay off the IRS, meet requirements in Chad, plus keep paying PN and SO until commercial oil would be found, how many 100's of millions of new toxic shares would need to be issued. Before anyone scoffs at the 100's of millions, consider the toxic conversion price has already fallen to .003 and ERHC would need to raise millions of dollars. (fyi @ .003, $1,000,000 = 333,333,333 new shares.

[midtieroil]

Why would CEPSA want to move forward with ERHC in tow? As far as we know ERHC has not paid for the last well, can't pay for the next well, doesn't have the cash to pay overhead while waiting for the next well and has an IRS lien on their assets. Why would any company want them as a partner?

CEPSA may want to move on. But I doubt they want to do it carrying ERHC every step of the way.

My guess is that the delay has more to do with how to get rid of ERHC than anything else. The other issues are clear cut. The ERHC issue is not.