Sergio, your post suggests that, unlike many, you are one who does his own due diligence and doesn't get into stocks for any reason that he has not verified himself. Well, I went back to the period when you were posting regularly and, to my surprise, discovered the following post in reaction to the July 10 announcement revising the potential of the Kazakstan License Area to 1.1 billion barrels:
To: Paul R (117 )
From: sergio heiber Jul 10 1997 9:37PM EST
Reply #119 of 742
Paul, I wasn't aware that there was any activity by AIPN in Kazahstan until this news release. I wonder as to what ability they have to actually pipe oil out. Financial as well as mechanical.
This company should change its name to something more stealth.
Alan, thanks for the copy of the letter regarding insider buying. Please post any response.
Sergio
So, on July 10 you were not "aware that there was any activity by AIPN in Kazahstan". Amazing!!! How is it that with all your due diligence you failed to notice that on May 12 AIPN issued the following:" American International Petroleum Corporation Purchases 70% Working Interest in 4.7 Million Acre Concession In Kazakstan"??? Sergio, what happened? You bought AIPN stock without knowing the company was involved in Kazakstan? Shame on you!!!
Another thing I noticed in reading your posts was that your attitude regarding AIPN was negative from the start and that negativity was based on readings of the company's 1996 10K and 1997 1Q both of which contained data exclusive of any data related to Kazakstan. Did it ever occur to you that they sold their South American properties because they needed to move quickly on a much greater opportunity...Kazakstan...that they felt would dwarf the potential of those SA fields? I wonder why they were so confidant and in such a hurry to secure their interest in the Kazak fields? But then, you wouldn't know about that since as late as July 9 your due diligence had failed to turn up any AIPN involvement in Kazakstan....even though it had been announced two months earlier.
<<The very best case scenario assuming that everything in the world works out to be in AIPN's favor would result in a top market value for the oil find in Kazahkstan at less than $2.50 a share and that is at today's oil prices. >>
My review of all the posts on this thread failed to uncover one single shread of evidence to support your claim which you yourself, interestingly enough, failed to substantiate as well. Would you care to share with us how you arrive at a best-case scenario of $2.50/share market cap, understanding of course that "best-case" means more than 1 billion barrels in the current field, probably the same, if not more, in the as yet untested field, and $25 million revenue from the asphalt refinery. I'm not saying I believe in the best-case scenario but you used the term not me.
<<Get to know what kind of company you are dealing with here and how ridiculous the situation is.>>
My suggestion to you, Sergio, is that you follow your own advice. If you hadn't been so busy bad-mouthing GaryS it might have occurred to you to ask him for an investor's package which would have included the SEC documents that you have read as well as about a year's worth of press releases. Had you done that, you would have known about Kazakstan prior to July 10. But, I guess requesting an Investor package isn't part of your "due diligence". If you ask me, what is "ridiculous" here is your willingness to trash a company without having done the basic research that you urge others to do. What are you? Yet another half-cocked altruist trying to save the innocent from slaughter?
<<I was contemplating going to Gary's party in NY on Monday, just for the fun of it>>
If you were truly serious about doing due diligence, which I think we've established you are not, you would want to attend Monday's meeting for reasons other than the "fun of it". I, for one, am attending the meeting as part of my effort to learn more about the company and I will be armed with serious questions not all of which will be welcomed by the company. Real "due diligence" can be fascinating but it is rarely "fun".
Finally, Sergio, the Monday meeting is not "Gary's party". If you had bothered to find out how the meeting came about and under what conditions Gary was attending, you would know that this is not his party. I'll give a hint...the answer has to do with "substance".
Cheers...Faris |
