michael west at it again..., page-16

This is what was subsequrntly added...

"EWC's claims have been greatly exaggerated and, although the company has been unable to deliver on its promises and properly inform the market, it is fair to point out that its claims to build an LNG facility in Indonesia are fair dinkum. For the benefit of EWC shareholders, here is an email received overnight from the chief financial officer of Chart Industries in the US:
I can confirm that Chart received a purchase order in June 2007 covering the LNG liquefaction process design together with the supply of proprietary equipment including Cold Boxes, Brazed Aluminum Heat Exchangers, Air Cooled Heat Exchangers and ancillary equipment for four (4) 500,000 tons/year LNG Liquefaction Trains to be installed by EWC in Southeast Asia. The purchase order value was in excess of USD $100 million. The equipment was delivered to EWC on various dates commencing November 2008 with the final piece of equipment delivered in early 2012.
Subsequent to receipt of the above purchase order, Chart and EWC signed a Strategic Alliance Agreement in August 2007 to jointly pursue additional LNG liquefaction projects that EWC will build, own and operate. This Agreement remains in place at this time.   
Chart has also provided a similar scope of equipment to EWC for a smaller 160 tons/dayLNG Liquefaction project to be installed by EWC in Australia. This equipment was delivered mid 2011."


Is it possible that charts email took 5 months to arrive? Or did he start doing the he professes to do?

God knows why he wrote to nt pwc however, EWC reckon their contract ended with EWC 6 years ago. His source about talisman seems to be another journalist in png called Blair Price.

http://www.pngindustrynews.net/storyview.asp?storyid=9637422

So we have a situation where a journalist assumes EWC has an interest in talismans acreage on the basis of some maps used in a presentation, but where talismans license are not mentioned or even marked on the maps. The journalist clearly has no idea about the separation of surface and subsurface rights.

Then mr investigative reporter, michael "tintin" west assumes the journalist has done his job and rereports it, but uses the lack of veracity to beat up EWC for something they have not said.



Also did anyone see this on 8 sept.


"IT'S a peculiar situation. This writer is subject to regular tirades on HotCopper, slandered with all sorts of nasty epithets and nefarious claims. We last unleashed the fury of the chat forum's faithful back in March, in the wake of a story on Energy World Corp, which preceded a halving in the share price.
Market manipulation, they cried. Attacking a stock for personal gain! Abusing his role as a reporter! There has been worse.
As if a newspaper report, untrue or unfair, could do lasting damage to a share price or a reputation, anyway"


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/its-a-dog-eat-blog-world-out-there-20120907-25jv1.html#ixzz27vKoEVhh


It is a peculiar situation.The thing was Michael, since you are reading this, we were trying to find a motivation why a journalist would file a report as seriously biased and uninvestigated as the reports you filed. Market manipulation, and self interest being some of the mooted motivations. Being a lazy fool is another.

And the point is that you were wrong. An ounce of journalism would have identified this before the assassination prices were published.

Perhaps In the long run a newspaper article may not harm a company. But In the short run a piece alleging fraud will and did. And a plummeting stock price will do very nasty things to a cfd account. So it is not the long term I am worried about.

Almost every investor on this board would acknowledge EWC has issues. The company shouldn't disclose schemes until they are more developed, they should discuss more fully the individual contracts between the company and slipform. (if you read the ey disclosures it is clear that EWC have novated the sengkang contract to slipform dispite the contract being almost complete, and the other contracts might still be pie in the sky. So there is little chance of slipform being in the front of the creditor queue)

and now given your track record, are you surprised that EWC won't talk to you, they probably have you marked as a dishonest (perhaps financially, definitely professionally dishonest) idiot.