|
|
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|||
|
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
Boys and girls can we keep this simple?OK, with apologies to Peter Frampton, I am about to start the Ruthie Comes Alive Tour which begins today at the IV Board and will conclude on or about Nov. 20th in Houston ... Fellow Feecsters, we no longer have Sunshine to decipher, decode, and distill the various SEC filings and mixed messages from the FEECal Management. My call for some Sunshine intervention earlier this week went unheeded--and we are on our own. It is my hope that Sunshine is in a better place, and not being held captive on another stock message board. Ok, I know we've been back and forth about effectiveness, shelfs, CBMs, TCBs, TCFs, PCP and other stuff. Here is how I see it: Item: FEEC must complete farmout agreement with Arrow and get Chinese government approval, so the FEECSTERS can get their mitts on some much-needed funding from Arrow--and a big $10 m checklike 7-Eleven gives out on the Jerry Lewis Telethon. Deadline: Nov. 20th Possibilities: -- FEEC completes the farmout, gets its monies, has superstar driller Arrow on board, they get newfound visibility with the new possible gas and CBM belch discoveries, and stock moves above $1 sometime before the end of the year. -- FEEC fails to reach agreement with Arrow and China, and FEECal must go out and borrow more moohlah, using its CBM wells as collateral, or issuing more shares--sending the shares down to .20 range short-term, and betting that more peeps will buy the shares based again on the "potential" of this company. Stock then languishes for a while--until someone offers FEEC enough money for the company--say $3 a share--that satisfies management, hedge funds, and the World Bank. It would seem that if they sold for less, they'd get sued by some of those entities, although this is uneducated and unexpurgated Ruthie spew. -- Arrow or Shell offer FEEC a buyout for their CBM Fields Forever, and the FEECSTERS decide that the potential upside for this company will be so tough to achieve--given the state of the capital markets--they take less now--to let the big boys handle this much easier--and give shareholders some return. Is Ruthie scenile and missing something? Thoughts?
|
![]() |
return to message board, top of board |
| Msg # | Subject | Author | Recs | Date Posted |
| 1286 | Re: Boys and girls can we keep this simple? | sack_ed | 11/9/2009 2:03:08 AM | |


















