Replies to post #340380 on ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[Krombacher]

Yes, Erhc is not marketing to public investors.

No, it is only an assumption to say that Total isn't interested. Clearly it is interested in erhc's properties as the 400 page court document shows. And what easier way to get those properties than to buy out Erhc?

At a market valuation of barely 2 million, Total would surely buy erhc out for that price. But clearly any company interested in buying erhc will pay much more than that. Hence, selling out to the shorts is foolishness and no long term investor who understands this will.

Furthermore, if your hypothesis is that erhc no longer wants public investors then what is the exit strategy? If not public investors then that can only mean that erhc is marketing to private ones. You can't have it both ways. Either private or public. It can't be neither.

One also has to understand Nigerian culture. Disparaging public remarks and unwarranted criticism of management would cause any Nigerian to withhold information to prevent anymore fodder to those who gossip.

The strategy has worked since the only point of contention among critics of the company remains the share price, which everyone else knows undervalues the company.

The Company was not ignoring the "safe guards" of the SEC. The company was protecting its shareholders by diverting filing funds to litigation.

If the company were so averse to its shareholders then why bother protecting itself? Why not just go bankrupt?

It didn't.

Furthermore two court ordered gag orders prevented it from disseminating the most important information affecting the financials the most and that was its deal with Total. Hence, releasing any financials without exposing that information would've rendered the financials meaningless.

Shareholders are not stuck. The name of the game has always been for erhc to monetize its assets through partnering with large oil companies with an eventual buy out. It makes no difference whether the company is public or private.

Going private is also keeping with the Nigerian culture I spoke of. In a private version of erhc, erhc can communicate freely with its shareholders without reprisals due to the SEC's reg FD, without having critics besmirching its reputation because critics won't get to be in the information loop.

I'm glad you state that the Company will be run by Offor and friends. The only way that can happen is if Offor and friends are majority shareholders and if they are and since the small group owns 50+% of the shares, then that means short sellers in erhc exist. And there's your proof.

We already established that the bylaws do not require costly annual shareholders meetings.

Revocation land will be great. Nothing changes with the investment objectives whether private or public.

It's the shorts who are in a nightmare scenario that as dividends and buyouts occur, they will have to pay them into perpetuity or until TOT shares are delivered.

Krombacher

[Julius Erving]

A quote:

So why the fight over a block and for whom did they fight it? Simple. Offor and friends are trying to protect their investment but outsider shareholders won't be sharing. No news, no financials, just stuck and in the dark owners of 1/2 the erhe shares. Good luck in revocation land.

So my following question has been answered:

So the question is still open: why did ERHC go ahead with the fierce (lengthy, expensive and certainly time consuming) legal battle over just one ERHC EEZ block anyway? For WHOM did they do it, if they obviously (I agree on that) did not do it for 'retail investors'. They did do it for SOMEONE, common sense dictates that of course. Here is where true DD starts...

Well, I, and others, claimed the very same for a long time: that Offor and friends had an interest in ERHC to protect, but that claim was fiercly disputed by some... But common sense has always dictated this.

Common sense also dictates the following:

Now would "Offor and friends" have taken this complicated litigation road, if they only needed to protect a 10% part of ERHC, or let's say less than 50%? Certainly not very likely, when we realize that there were moments that "Offor and friends" could pick up hundreds of millions of shares for next to nothing...? Therefore it is of course more than likely that "Offor and friends" are majority-owners. Common sense dictates that they, at those moments, picked up every single share that became available.

If "Offor and friends" wanted to protect their investment, than they are also the ones that kept ERHC from going bankrupt for all those years, and had the clout to get a contract with Supermajor TOTAL S.A. regarding EEZ BLOCK 4.

Now we are talking 'true DD', instead of DD by 'just looking at the share price'.

I know what is coming now, but that will be addressed in a next post by me. One step at a time.

The Doc.