Ann: Beach in dispute with Icon regarding ATP855P, page-18

re: Ann: BPT: Beach in dispute with Icon rega... Good on you tthace, yes you ADE shareholders should also be concerned at what BPT is doing. You could end up being the meat in sandwich.
I just think that it is disappointing that BPT has taken this action. It seems typical of the new aggressive "style" that seems to have been introduced into BPT's management after years of being accused of being far too "boring" and slow by its own shareholders and the market in general. BPT has for years been considered to be an under achiever and is not one of the market's favourites in what is a "favoured" sector, oil, gas and shale, yet look at its market performance over the years!!

You would hope that common sense will prevail, as it is too valuable an asset for the three companies. RJ has announced that the impasse was caused by the thermal leases that are included in the 855 permit, quite separate from the shale prospects, and that BPT has not given a clear enough undertaking that their involvement in 855 would not hinder ICN's independent plans for the thermal leases. Nothing to do with financial considerations.

I would just like to see ICN come out with a statement ASAP to "balance" the situation for both lots of shareholders.
Nobody wants a legal dispute, no real winners come out of "forced" agreements.
Certainly not a time for a testosterone tussle.