I post my opinion... and my opinion is that your opinions is overly selective and is therefore "misleading people with just my "singled out" facts and my interpretation of risks."
That I agree with you that there is a risk... simply doesn't mean that the one risk we agree exists is all that really matters. I think that risk is LESS important than others do... and think, even if I am wrong, that risk isn't close to being a valid reason to think shares are over-valued here... rather than still priced well below any future price that would justify the effort in implementing the "takedown".
Whatever I think of the potential "lost value" if I am wrong and that risk is realized... it still makes FECOF a very low risk holding that is still priced well below any reasonable or probable transaction price.
Otherwise, yours seems it quite fully depends on expecting both that no meaningful change has occurred in Philex' thinking, relative to the history, and that any change that is apparent really doesn't matter...
I disagree with both... seeing changes in Philex Petroleum, Pitkin, and, perhaps, an obvious shift or two in what it means having First Pacific as an owner...
"you keep mentioning that philex would be better off to,and is likely, letting fecof and fep continue as a stand alone company.that somehow this would be most beneficial to them.
I dont understand why you would assume that, over my assumption of philex wanting to consolidate both of them especially when theyve already made an outright bid in the past for fep at 48 pence."
First, I don't automatically accept your assumptions that nothing at all has changed in Philex's interest or motivations in the last few years. I see LOTS of evidence of change in Philex's focus... and have thought about that a lot. Even though that isn't anything you appear to consider meaningful... I think it is.
I also don't think it matters very much if I'm wrong... as it won't be an error of a sort that will tend to lead to making mistakes in investment decisions... while yours, even if correct, appears to be being used precisely as an inducement to making errors in investment decisions.
"As far as fecof being traded in the pinks and fep in london its simply because more investors like us are likely for better or worse buy these shares over there rather than to look for them in the philipines stock market. Philex didnt put them there. they existed before philex"
Not sure what points I should expect to take away from that above. "As far as fecof being traded in the pinks and fep in london its simply because more investors like us are likely for better or worse buy these shares over there rather than to look for them in the philipines stock market"... is a thing that is going to continue to be true... so, it looks like you've begun to come around to my view of things... ???
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
