News Focus
News Focus
icon url

t bone

09/03/06 3:51 AM

#2945 RE: BMiles #2944

Interesting. Keep me posted.

We'll know for sure soon enough either way.
icon url

t bone

09/04/06 12:07 PM

#2957 RE: BMiles #2944

I have to admit, I'm less confident with my opinion than I was a few days ago.

I wanted to make this clear before the trading day tomorrow, as I've been saying something many want to hear.

The reasons I doubt my own opinion are these:

No PR during the drilling of Buck Snag mentioned the 57% stake, or an outright holding of a Buck Snag stake.

The MXXR PRs mention a "partner" and an "operator," while Texhoma PRs make no mention of a partner.

The reasons I'm still leaning towards the opinion that MXXR increased its stake with the 42.5% (among other reasons stated before):

The PR stated that they acquired a 57% stake and released PRs as though they owned a stake of the project (and had already closed) as the well was drilled.

If Texhoma only acquired a total of 42% and then sold it to Matrixx, who owns the other 58%? (No other companies have been mentioned, but yet PRs were released within a week of each other stating that Matrixx got 57% and Texhoma got 42.5, adding to near 100%.)


With that said, I won't be suprised if we find out the answer is either of the two.

I'm holding either way.

Of course, all should trade as they see fit.

T