suspended!, page-9

Morning jsbuser,

"I have no problems with any of the people who promoted the stock here and tried to keep us informed, Acreage in particular, and I thank them all for their efforts. By any set of due diligence you could do, and there was plenty of it, the play had perfectly sensible dynamics and should have played out successfully."


Yes there was plenty of Due Diligence done, more so on this company than any other I have been involved in. To this day I am still learning about the history of this company.

Let me just say this. You can't do any DD/research on what you don't know. You don't know because your not informed as we should have been.We were not informed because it was detrimental news for the future of the company. The company already had numerous items on the agenda which were a threat to the companies future. We were always told that GGP had an indemnity against any legals brought on by PP and the company were not concerned about the integrity of this indemnity. This was strongly supported by a director whom stated the legals in no way involved GGP up until September 2012.This was completely contradicted by SG some weeks later. ( from memory during discussions at the 2012 AGM in November ? ) but later in numerous coy ann's.

My own DD was lacking because events like the Chalk Sea legals against the company were not revealed/divulged to the shareholders. Finances were attempted to be raised by this company without divulging this news to it's shareholders for 12 month's when certain shareholders found out while doing their own DD. So if Chalk Sea was kept from GGP shareholders, this would have prevented the shareholders digging about more legals against the company and the raising they were doing at the time would of had a better chance of being filled.

My own DD was lacking because events like the Galindo well was not revealed to the market. Company finances were spent on this well because GGP were the operator. What was the total spent to fund the well ? What income was earned by operating this well ? The company stated they did not/do not make an income which has any "material effect" on the company. So why do it in the first place ? Maybe I did come down in the last shower?

My own DD was lacking because events like the Creditors for the SRH #5 well Trade Creditors owing $1.6mill when Steve Graves told the market numerous times that the company raised enough money and, had enough money in the kitty to have the well placed on production. This even aloud for the usual hiccups like pressures playing games, pump problems/changes,parafins etc etc. They were all accounted for by the company and these were all budgeted for. So where did the money go ? Because obviously the company stated they have creditors for SRH #5.

Share holders were told that the monies being raised were for SRH #5 D&C. Question is, why/ did the money go elsewhere if it was specifically raised for #5. If it didn't why were we $1.6mill short for 1 well ? I find that totally implausible.

I could go on jsbuser but I will leave it in the hands of the pro's.

So I agree. You can spend 24/7 doing due diligence on anything but, if your not made aware of certain events, well you just can't research them.

regards