Replies to post #45991 on Hemi Energy Group Inc. (fka HMGP)

[kelseyf]

"kels, on what basis are you making the statement that the cost of maintaining a well is much lower than $10,285.24? They are KA's numbers."

I had a feeling that you jump on this!!!

So lets dig a bit deeper in assessment, did you factor in any possible Hemi costs due to the 1 in 500 yr flood, the costs were still on going as repairs were still being completed during the 1st half of 2008?

I see your point on the surface, but the issue is that one needs to dig below the surface, to get a clear understanding of the Hemi operation and that also includes revenue generated and expenses rendered.

And with that, since Hemi is close to the vest about releasing information, this requires a specific approach to the DD that one does on Hemi.

And so we do not get into another pissing contest on this type of approach..........I'll stop here.

Because a good number of us Hemi shareholders approach our DD much differently that others including as you know, and certainly you have the opportunity to do this as well, visit the Hemi operation for direct discussion and insights with the management of Hemi.

Kels

[bdahl385]

Don't try to confuse the optimists with cold hard economic facts and figures, it just doesn't resonate with them.

It's one thing to sell assets and redeploy them to get a better ROI using the proceeds to prove up reserves and or increase production. All I can see from the financial picture KA gave us is that the asset sale was needed to offset the $60k in fixed costs each month for salaries, rent, upkeep on the leases, etc.

I was hopeful that the Silvey horizontal might indeed be that type of "investment" and utilization of capital. Now it's on hold. FWIW, I believe CT had everything technical lined up and was chewing at the bit to get the well drilled. KA pulled in the reins as he is in charge of the company finances. Time will tell which one had the right plan.