HC Bombed on me the previous two attempts at replying to this...

HC Bombed on me the previous two attempts at replying to this post so I will have one last try!

I read Camerons item when it first came out and didn't think it added anythint to what I already knew. I did feel there may have been a bit of mea culpa in the report as from memory he has previously tipped MXO to go over $1.00. Anyway I will paraphrase what the article said:

'If the independant report on Langsa's reserves and production profile come back positive, then MXO will get the finance needed to restore Langsa to full production, and they will fund further development of their other resources, If the report is negative, then MXO are sunk. (and presumambly the new Directors role would be redundant!).'

That's not really rocket science. What I am saying is if I were as closely involved with MXO as Frank Silc is, and I had the slightest inkling that MXO was going to go under, there is no way I would be taking on a Directorship. So I am interpreting Frank Silc's appointment as a vote of confidence that MXO will indeed overcome the current problems.

What investors have to do is decide what price they think MXO will go to on a positive announcement, and later on when back in full production, versus the current price of about 8.5 cents and the risk of going under. Bearing in mind that it is not simply a 50/50 risk, as Langsa already has a track record of good flows prior to the leak.