Replies to post #215184 on ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[Krombacher]

SouthernMan,

You say, "Given the conflicting, political, half truths, incomplete, shallow drill reports"

When we discovered that EEL's report was not based on drill results, most of the conflict ended for me. All that was left was the Dana Gas report as the only remaining real data point other than what ERHC reported. With both reports (ERHC and Dana) as being negative, where's the conflict?

Now you can say that the JDA folks have also provided conflicting drill results. If I didn't question the JDA's motives, I would give more credibility to those reports...

...but then what about thermogenic gas and shallow depths? Yeah, I'll readily admit that there are still riddles that are still unsolved.

Krombacher

[petemantx]

I agree with you as to the quandry of just where ERHC stands at this point in time - at best we could be sitting in a fantastic position with the geology from the first drill program showing we have lots of probable assets and a lot of background activity is progressing between the major players for development of our blocks or, at the worst, we did have weak findings from the drill program and we will need more drilling to find the assets that are in the blocks.

To assume we are looking at a dry JDZ is beyond belief and illogical.

The main problem I see for ERHC stockholders is not whether we have assets (as I would place large reserves at a near certainty) but rather the timeframe we are looking at for those assets to be announced and stockholders to finally see the return on our investment. Some say prior to Sept, some say in the Fall 2010, and others projecting maybe years away. We keep progressing on as the old naval saying goes "time, tide, and formation wait for no man".