acamuswhat is with all this Hardman is broke cr*p - as at July 1...

acamus

what is with all this Hardman is broke cr*p - as at July 1 - subject to audit - they had $270 million cash - and the albeit reduced Ching income. This is not a company on its uppers - like say British Leyland. If they want to slow their cash burn they can prioritize projects and sell down their interest where that is necessary,

The problem is not one of cash - but of B A L L S - specifically, Management B A L L S.

Potter, who has never run a public company before was spooked by the share price fall. The fact that his "glass half full" announcements fuelled a large part of the fall seems to have escaped him. For Potter, Hardman is just another entry on a management CV.

The more you post in this vein, the more I am convinced that you are a Tullow PR stooge - the timing of your posts starting fits perfectly. You stay precisely on the talking points Tullow would have in convincing wavering Hardman shareholders - and where you are forced to admit you are factually wrong - you withdraw - and then return on theme.

The only problem is that your thesis that Hardman is broke - is b*llsh*t.

Hardman management have a lack of t*esticl*s - and that is the only problem - ironic isn't it give the company's name.

I would not mind swapping them for Tullow's - they are good! BUT - not at a conversion rate of only 42% of my shares. That is for me too high a price to pay to get better management for Hardman's assets.