Replies to post #243044 on ERHC Energy Inc (ERHE)

[Julius Erving]

Doc,

We disclosed what was discovered. Biogenic gas was found. If something else was discovered, we would have disclosed it, but it wasn’t so we didn’t. As I first explained well over a year ago, it would be highly uncommon for companies to detail all the things that were not discovered in exploratory drilling.

I believe Peter has explained that ERHC abides by its contractual and regulatory obligations to allow the operator to be the source of information about drilling. When we have made disclosures about drilling in our Blocks (which we have) we have done so with the authorization of the operators, as required. In your JDZ Block 1 example, the operator has consistently been the source of information about drilling as far as I know. Afren is not the first to disclose an oil discovery. And there is no reason to believe that Afren disclosed the information you cited without first gaining authorization to do so.

Another consideration that some fail to recognize is that ERHC has special incentive – currently valued in the tens of millions of dollars and potentially many times higher than that in the future -- to comply by the letter of the agreements it has in the JDZ: its costs are carried through to production. The Company’s priority has been to protect its assets and therefore, complying with contractual and regulatory requirements is the prudent course. Regardless, ERHC has disclosed drilling results in JDZ Blocks 2, 3 and 4 with the authorization of the operators to do so. We have consistently been the only source of information about drilling outcomes in our JDZ Blocks.

Sincerely,

Daniel Keeney, APR
DPK Public Relations

DFW: 214.432.7556
Houston: 832.467.2904
E-mail: [e-mail]
Web: www.dpkpr.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/dpkpr
Blog: http://www.danielkeeney.com

[badog]

No one has to prove that ERHE would lose it's rights.

IMHO it comes down to this:

Would you take the chance...would you disclose more info...if ERHE could lose it's rights?...or it's cash due to legal expenses?

Answer that question in a way that eliminates the possibility of serious consequenses and then we can talk.

I came back in to update this post because I just saw Doc's email response from Dan. This confirms everything I...and others...have been saying for quite a while now. If that is not good enough for some then at least everyone else should be able to interpet for themselves.

Badog

[RubyMartin]

Mid; I Think This Is Your Proof.
(Thanks To Julius Erving)
I believe Peter has explained that ERHC abides by its contractual and regulatory obligations to allow the operator to be the source of information about drilling. When we have made disclosures about drilling in our Blocks (which we have) we have done so with the authorization of the operators, as required. In your JDZ Block 1 example, the operator has consistently been the source of information about drilling as far as I know. Afren is not the first to disclose an oil discovery. And there is no reason to believe that Afren disclosed the information you cited without first gaining authorization to do so.

Another consideration that some fail to recognize is that ERHC has special incentive – currently valued in the tens of millions of dollars and potentially many times higher than that in the future -- to comply by the letter of the agreements it has in the JDZ: its costs are carried through to production. The Company’s priority has been to protect its assets and therefore, complying with contractual and regulatory requirements is the prudent course.