Just returned from a wonderful day in Banff, Alberta. Very relaxing up in the Rocky Mountains.
Before I "hit the sack" I want to reply to this post. I have already posted on SH, to try and quell any problems I may have inadvertently created. So here goes:
<<<Of course that summary was leaked to you (and many others) with the intent of getting it on the internet. And of course Busby isn't going to lose his job !!! But, I'll bet he does get a phone call or two over "the leak" !!>>
To be honest, it never occurred to me that it was a leak. I
received it in my Email and assumed it was being sent out as a press release.
<<Your two recent posts relate to several difficult issues,
for example:
-Provisions of JV agreements wrt release of information,
-The definition of info that needs to be released to
shareholders (i.e.what is "material"),
-Selective disclosure \ level playing fields, etc.,
-"Leaking" of info, and
-The reliability of "leaked" info.>>
Call me naive but I believe that ANY INFORMATION that affects the value of our shares is a "material change" and should be made public. I know we don't agree on this and so we agree to disagree.
<<I don't have the inclination to enter a lengthy debate on
these issues but I will try to stimulate your thinking about
them, perhaps from a slightly different viewpoint. I wish that I could offer clear, practical and universally satisfactory solutions to the issues, but unfortunately I can not.>>
It is never my intention to harm anyone and in this case I'm comfortable that this was given with the understanding that it would reach the threads.
<<I'm certain that you had\have NO intention of harming
anyone, dad. Neither did\do I. But, let me also tell you (from
my own experience on this very thread) you will likely hear
about it if down the road someone "thinks" that YOU have
harmed HIM by relating a fishing or drunken buddy story, or an opinion, here !!! <gg> >>>
ATTENTION STUPID POSTERS: (excluding myself :o) !!!
Fishing buddies, drunken buddies, and any other euphemism is
used for entertainment value only!! The information is
generally an OPINION or EXPLANATION unless it is very specific (eg: BKP#2 is back and drilling today. That is a fact!!) If ANYONE thinks grayhairs, S'n'P, or myself (the only time I will ever see me included in comparison to these two very knowledgeable gentlemen **ggg**) or ANY OTHER POSTER MAY HARM YOU, PLEASE GET THE HELL OFF SI and/or SH BEFORE THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR BRAIN EXPLODES!!!!!! There, I bet I've cleared that up! *gg*
<<There can be little doubt that Busby made "the summary"
available with an expectation that it would get wide
distribution and publication on internet chat boards. But dad, if there's really nothing "wrong" with releasing all this wonderful info, then why on earth didn't he just have it posted on the HTP (and\or EJ) websites ?? It would then have had greater credibility (sorry, no low blow intended) and it would have also stood as a more permanent record (i.e. chat line messages are quickly dated).>>
Man, do I feel used. *gg*
<<Might Busby have been concerned that some responsibility and accountability would flow back to him if it were posted on one of those sites ?? Why might he have such concern ??>>
I doubt it. Remember, like you, I sat in on his dog and pony
show in Calgary. Remember his NASDAQ statement and his
"opinion" of the value of HTP by June 1st.
If the JV are upset then, as an investor, I say to them "what the hell took you so long in getting this info to the investment community"!
<<Whoa now !!! What about the issues of competitive advantage and the value of the data ??>>
What competitive advantage? Exploration is NOT the only phase of a successful oil and gas discovery.
If the JV spent say $20MM to drill a deep well, complete it,
and test it, should any\all data therefrom be immediately
public ??
NO
<<If this data is deemed to be critical to you, as an
investor, might it not also have value to our competitors??>>
If it did have value, would that not be considered a material change?
<<If the data is valuable, then why should it be given away ?? Could we not get a bottomhole $$ contribution selling the data ??>>
If it is valuable then they should be selling it! They should also announce that they are selling it. What if there are "scouts", in the fields and on the web watching their every move...which I feel there are?
<<Could making this data public actually cost the JV somehow ??
Are we shooting ourselves in the foot by making it public ???
Should the corporation just give away its similar information
on all other properties ??>>
See above!
<<Is management not hired to, capable of, and charged with
running the business ??>>
Yes, and in my opinion and the opinion of many brokerage
houses the management isn't doing a very good job. Exploration people don't automatically make good management. Don't get me started!
**Note to Mr. Rose: Time to put your company ego away
and make peace with the brokerage community. 18 months is long enough. It doesn't matter who is right. You are hurting your investors, in my humble opinion, and the share value reflects that.
I WILL NOT discuss this further but anyone who has done DD on Berkley's history knows the story.
<<Then should shareholders even be provided this detail ?? If yes, then pray tell, Why ?? Do most shareholders even know what the data means, or equally important, what it does not mean ?? Are shareholders aware of the limitations,
assumptions, accuracy\inaccuracy and risks inherent with these types of estimates and interpretations ?? Might shareholders "hurt" themselves with this leaked information ?? Is there other data that should be provided the shareholders to facilitate their proper comprehension of the summary report (Eg. a complete suite of open hole logs, mud log, core data, RFT data, all daily drilling and completion reports, the flow test data, pressure data, all relevant seismic data, etc.)??>>
Only if the experts that post continue to explain to the
rest of us what it all means. That is why we read each and every post. To learn and to share. Am I being naive again?
<<Finally, if we shareholders deserve all this information,
then why do we only rate "summaries" of these valued reports
?? Why can't we get the complete reports .... the full meal
deal so to speak ?? Was Busby just trying to save us some time by issuing a summary ?? Maybe he just didn't want to bore us with the many important limitations \qualifications \cautions\assumptions\risks normally documented in these types of reports !!>>
Geez, take it easy. I'm on your side. Apparently you too have far to much HTP stock. Me too.
<<Are the summarized results credible ?? For example, with
respect to that hokey Petrel Robertson gas in place
calculation (363 BCF), why did they make the implicit
assumption that ELH gas will behave as an "ideal gas" (NOT
!!!) ?? Or, why did they not make a simple correction for
reservoir temperature (At 358 degrees F it's more than just a tad off standard temperature, 60 degrees F !!). You may think I'm nitpicking and over reacting here but these two "little oversights", if accounted for, would reduce that
incompetent\misleading gas in place estimate from 363 BCF to
slightly less than 125 BCF !!!>>
Yikes!!! I think perhaps we would all like to see how you are arriving at slightly less than 125 BCF!! Now I'm getting nervous.
<<Oh well, maybe there's no need to comment on that kind of
stuff in a summary. Just keep it brief, it's just a summary !! BTW, did the summary have any "USER BEWARE !!!" embedded in it anywhere ????>>
No.
<<Dad, does the investment community really deserve this kind of information ?? Does the rest of the JV have a right to be upset ?? And, what exactly should the other JV partners do about "the leak" now ??>>
Yes... Yes... and...... Offer to buy HTP out, at fair market value? **gg**
<<Fun stuff, hey ?? Sort of reminds me of a short while back
when a whole bunch of really "good chit" was being leaked on
Cal Canal !! Ouch !! My wallet is still hurting !!>>
Mine too!!!
Was the information I posted good or bad news?
<<Well, I think that overall, and subject to countless
assumptions, it was great news.>>
I certainly agree with you that regardless of ommissions it was, in fact great news, which begs the following questions.
Was it material type news and if issued at the height of
excitement over BKP#1, would it have brought much needed
"positive" attention to the partnership...after the Cal Canal and Bellevue fiascos? Would it have been more prudent of Mr. Rose to release this information rather than his pathetic responce to the "watered out" rumor? Good management? The world STILL BELIEVES BKP#1 has watered out. Good communication?
<<But I admit that, like Busby, I wear rose colored glasses on days that end in "y" !! <gg> >>
Try fuchsia..it's VERY CALMING **gg**
<<Dad, if I might quote my own dear father, "Be careful out
there, son. Things aren't always as they sometimes first
appear.">>
Very wise man, your father.
Are you, in any way, suggesting
that things are NOT as you saw them a year ago with regards to the chances of success? I am just asking.
<<As I said earlier, I do not have "solutions" to the real
issues. Perhaps you, or others, will.>>
Solutions? Hell, I don't even know what the problems are!
*ggg*
<<Have a really great day, and please do sleep tight!!<<g>>
Thanks, I think I will, now that I've thought things through.
Good night everybody (not you stupid posters.....see above
:o) )
<<P.S.-- Fishing should remain pretty good for the next few
weeks. I just hope we throw back the right ones !!! <gg> >>
After you fired all the above questions at me I think I'll
give up fishing for information and focus on
DUCK!!!!!!!................................hunting. **ggg**
As always,
GFTAELHI!
GHTAELHDRC! |
