Ultra Petroleum (UPL) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Ultra Petroleum (UPL)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Gerald Atwater who wrote (4473)	10/25/1999 1:05:00 PM
From: LowtherAcademy	Read Replies (1) of 4851

Gerald, If I have it wrong, then you are perfectly correct in your criticism. One simple question? Does UP's explanation make sense? By the same reasoning, they never would have picked up land in the GRB. Frankly, if I were a shareholder of UP, I'd be more curious about the details of the reported $150 million texaco deal that UP walked away from and I'd be more concerned about pending law suits. I'd be asking questions about Watford's reputation in dealing with UPs partners. I freely admit that I don't think much of UP's business ethics. There is nothing I can do to change that. However, I do care that the small shareholders are viewed as cannon fodder by management. I hope you come out on the plus side, perhaps you already would have been there if the Texaco deal had gone through. I don't know the details of the deal, but if I were a shareholder, I'd ask Texaco rather than UP for the facts. Best of luck with your investment. Lew

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next